Marx and the Seldon paradox

 From David Brin, the SF author

[...] There is another, related concept – the Seldon Paradox, named after Hari Seldon, the lead character in Isaac Asimov’s Foundation universe, who develops mathematical models of human behavior that are sagaciously predictive across future centuries. In that science fictional series, Seldon’s methods are kept secret from the galaxy’s vast human population – on twenty-five million inhabited worlds – because the models will fail, if everyone knows about them and uses them.

This effect is well-known by militaries, of course. It is also why so many supposed tricks to predict or game the Stock Market – even if they work at first – collapse as soon as they are widely known. 

But the Seldon Paradox goes further. A good model that stops working, because of widespread awareness, might later-on start to work again, once that failure becomes assumed by everyone.

One example would be what happened in my parents’ generation, that of the Depression and the Second World War. At the time, everyone read Karl Marx. And I do mean almost everyone. Even the most vociferous anti-Marxists could quote whole passages, putting effort into understanding their enemy. 

You can see this embedded in many works of the time, from nonfiction to novels to movies. All the way to Ayn Rand, whose entire scenario can be decrypted as deeply Marxist! Though heretically-so, because she cut his sequence off at the penultimate stage, and called the truncated version good.

Indeed, Asimov’s Hari Seldon was clearly (if partially) based upon Marx.

Particularly transfixing to my parents' generation were Marx’s depictions of class war, as power and wealth grew ever more concentrated in a few families, leading – his followers assumed – to inevitable revolt by the working classes. So persuasive was the script that, in much of the wealthy American caste, there arose a determination to cancel their own demise with social innovations!

One, innovation, in particular, the Marxists never expected was named Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whose game plan to save his own class was to fork over much of the wealth and power by investing heavily to uplift the workers into a prosperous, educated and confident Middle Class. One that would then be unmotivated to enact Karl's scenario.

Or, as Joe Kennedy was said to have said: "I'd rather have half my fortune taken to make the workers happy than lose it all, and my head, in revolution." (Or something to that effect.)

== It worked, SO well that eventually... ==

Whether or not you agree with my appraisal here, the results were beyond dispute. The GI Bill generation built vast infrastructure, supported science, chipped away at prejudice, and flocked to new universities, where the egalitarian trend doubled and redoubled, as their children stepped forth to confidently compete with the scions of aristocracy. And thusly brought a flawed but genuinely vibrant version of Adam Smith's flat-fair-open-competitive miracle to life! That is, until…

…until all recollection of Karl Marx and his persuasive scenarios seemed dusty, irrelevant, and mostly forgotten. Until the driving force behind Rooseveltism – to cancel out communism through concentrated egalitarian opportunity – became a distant memory. 

At which point, lo and behold, conditions of wealth and power began shifting back into patterns that fit into Old Karl’s models with perfect snugness! With competition-destroying cartels and cabals. With aristocracies greedily and insatiably vampiring the system that had given them everything. (Ayn Rand's elite 'looters.") With the working classes fleeced, like sheep. And then (so far figuratively) eaten.

At which point the writings of Marx – consigned for 80 years into the dustbin – have regained interest from disgusted, formerly upward-mobile classes. Books that are now flying off the shelves, all over the world, pored-over eagerly… 

...but not by those who need awareness the most. Surrounded by sycophants and flatterers, they will deem themselves to be demigods, until the tumbrels come for them. Or until another FDR rescues them, in the nick of time. (Don't count on it.)

Because of the Seldon Paradox. 

== And yes, the anti-vax movement is another example ==

There are reasons why the Greatest Generation adored FDR above all other living humans. And the next American so-beloved? His name was Jonas Salk. The Man Who Gave Kids Back Their Summer....

...because until the miracle of his vaccine, parents terrified of polio kept their children away from public parks and swimming pools... and I barely remember parent-talk of their joy and relief, letting me stroll the neighborhood and nearby streets in safety.

How does this relate? Childhood vaccinations worked so well that most citizens forgot how much people suffered from two dozen lethal and "non lethal" diseases such as measles, mumps, etc. And they forgot the horrors of polio and diphtheria and tetanus (reputed to be the very worst way to die.)  And yeah. The Anti-Vax movement well resembles phase one of the Seldon Paradox. 

And woefully we are already seeing signs of phase two. 

[....]

Some other pieces I have written on this subject:

People try to help one another 

Most political unrest caused by soaring inequality

Big scary radical left agenda

The richest Americans get even richer

In the US, they think we're communists

Where Adam Smith went wrong

Why "baseload" is so antiquated

Hazelwood big battery. Source: Engie

Back in the 50s, electric grids everywhere had coal power stations backed up with peaking gas. Since coal power stations couldn't ramp up quickly (or economically) they tended to provide what was called "baseload". This was designed to provide a fixed supply of electricity to the grid, the level set at the point of lowest demand. The fluctuations in demand above that tended to be provided by gas, which can ramp up or down quickly.

Then along came wind and solar. Their output is driven by the weather. Peaks in supply didn't necessarily coincide with peaks in demand, although in hot places, the surge in demand because of a heatwave is now routinely met by a surge in output from solar. This required changes in how we run our grids. Most likely, we will end up with some over-capacity in wind and solar (estimates vary, but, say, around 20%) along with 4 to 6 hours of grid-wide storage.

Many still hanker for the old simplicities. The "Liberal"/National Party Coalition in Australia is very keen on nuclear. It doesn't matter that it's at least 50% more expensive even than new coal; or that new nuclear power stations in Australia won't start operating for, probably, at least another 15 years, which is a bit of a problem given that aging coal power stations will have closed down by then; or that even with 8 hours of storage with batteries (at current prices), wind and solar are 1/4 the cost of nuclear. But there is another problem with nuclear. It's even harder to ramp up or down than coal. And given the penetration of rooftop solar, the net demand on the grid (i.e., after rooftop solar) in east coast Australia now falls so low at midday that there simply is no space for GW-level baseload. (A situation already driving coal power stations to bankruptcy).

From Renew Economy

On Monday at around 5 pm (AEST), Victoria posted a new high for operational demand for the state’s grid of 9,581 megawatts (MW) in the midst of a record-breaking December heatwave.

Despite having two of its coal generation units off line, the state had little trouble dealing with the surge in demand because renewables were also delivering a record level of output.

Within 24 hours, however, the Australian Energy Market Operator, having spent much of the day issuing lack of reserve warnings for NSW and elsewhere, was back on line issuing a market notice of a different kind: warning not of a lack of reserve but of a lack of demand (minimum system load) for Victoria for Saturday, December 21.

The sudden switch from nearly too much demand to nearly too little demand is symptomatic of the dramatic changes that are occurring on the grid, and one of the fundamental reasons why most energy experts thing the idea of shoe-horning gigawatts of inflexible nuclear power capacity into the grid would be nuts.

The best to deal with such fluctuations, the experts say, is with flexibility – both in demand and supply – and most of that can be delivered by providing incentives to change the times when electricity is consumed, and ensuring fast reaction and flexible power sources, such as big batteries, can be deployed.

The warning for minimum system load cited potentially insufficient demand for Victoria at around 1pm on Saturday, with sunny conditions, high rooftop solar output, mild temperatures and the lack of business activity contributing to low operational demand.

The MSL notices are issued so that the markets can prepare a response. There are various options, but at the last resort AEMO can issue instructions to big batteries in that state (like the Hazelwood battery pictured above) to stand by on empty and get ready to charge – i.e. creating demand – if conditions warrant.

If that fails, there is a solar switch off mechanism, although that has limited application and is not popular, with either households or politicians and is seen as very much a last resort.

The MSL notice from AEMO – like another that was issued in early December – cited a forecast minimum demand of around 1,643 MW. The one issued for December 8 expected minimum load of around 1,250 MW.

This fits in with Tesla’s observations, in a submission to the federal nuclear inquiry, that most states in Australia, including Victoria, would struggle to support even 1 GW of baseload, or “always on” power because of the growing impact of renewables, and rooftop solar in particular.

It has warned that the federal Coalition’s nuclear power plan would result in “severe” constraints on rooftop solar – not just the occasional partial switch off in events like those cited above, but almost on a daily basis to accommodate nuclear power that does not like to ramp up and down.

“Given Australia’s world-leading solar and wind resources, and leading rates of rooftop solar PV, the power system’s minimum operating demand threshold becomes an upper ceiling for baseload supply to operate the power system in a secure and reliable state,” Tesla wrote in its submission.

“Increasing renewable penetration at these times further displaces baseload generation, reducing capacity factors and increasing the cost of supplying energy to consumers.

“The practical sizing of baseload generation is now significantly less than the minimum operating load.”

We live in capitalism ....

 ... its power seems inescapable.  But so did the divine right of kings.

                                                        Ursula K. Le Guin

(I don't know who designed this marvellous graphic.  If you do, let me know in the comments or on Mastodon)