Don't Look Up Was Dope

Though the goal here was clearly to extend comparison to current global crises, the instruments of rhetoric and satire were super entertaining and effective. It’s so common for a creator to lose their audience because their message is communicated poorly. People don’t like being told what to do, and the pushy tone of most forms of media can cause people to dig their heels in, and perpetuate ideological division.

The plot and purpose of this movie was no secret from the trailer, and was revealed within minutes of the opening scene. From then on, the development was establishing a framework to expose the current division, foolishness, and unneeded confusion surrounding climate change. This made most events in the movie predictable, but who cares. If enough people really do absorb what’s being portrayed here, I really feel like we can begin to establish much needed clarity to tackle what is a real crisis, according to scientists.

To truly clear thinkers, the gravity of climate change is not a question. Just like in the movie, there is clear consensus among scientists. If your initial reaction to that statement, was along the lines of “okay jackass” its probably worth reexamining why you think so. Objectively, the facts are out there, but all it takes is a little ‘socialization’ to get people away from them. Personally, the only positive socialization I needed was to take an environmental science class in high school. If I was successfully brainwashed by my teacher, well then I guess I wouldn’t be able to tell you, but the facts seems pretty straightforward. So I think it’s worth questioning why there still seems to be so much disagreement.

The only way that so many intelligent people can disagree is if they’re being intentionally confused. And there is a lot of vested interest in confusing people. Confusion is a profitable industry. Factually, the villain character’s solution wasn’t going to work, but he took the risk so he could get what he wanted. All he had to do in the mean time, was convince people not to look up and he could try to harness the comet’s economic benefit.

What sometimes happens is: someone is smart and works hard (on the right thing), then they get rewarded with a bunch of influence. Then they earn the right to manage more resources, which is dangerous, but they have proof-of-work to deserve it.

The downside being shown in the movie is: the rich villain guy uses his power poorly, and the world ends because he can’t solve the approaching meteor problem.

If the world was a perfect meritocracy, the person best suited to blow up comets, would be in charge, over the smart and powerful CEO. And if this could somehow always happen, we would have a much more efficacious world. Whether it’s a comet striking, or the slow encroachment of environmental disasters, the issue is that resources don’t always go to the people who are best at solving our problems.

But how are we supposed to know who actually deserves the power? Well currently, we all try to signal to others how deserving we are. But it’s hard to tell the real from the fake with this system.

If you were looking for me to offer some kind of solution, I can’t exactly deliver. But I do know first hand that prestige, education, certificates, and titles can be misleading and it’s certainly important to listen to those who can actually solve problems. So pretty much what I’m saying is, we should have listened to Leonardo DiCaprio and not Meryl Streep, and then we wouldn’t have gotten blown up by a comet!

(I know the allegory also applies to the reaction to Covid, but I felt like limiting the scope of this post to keep it short)

"Knowledge that doesn’t solve a problem is useless but knowledge that does solve a problem loses its relevance over time"

- yuval nova harari