Commentary on Dr. Shawn Humphrey's "Sidekick Manifesto"

 

Disclaimer 1:  I took a class with Dr. Humphrey at UMW (game theory), and asked him to be a reference for me when I applied to graduate school in math in 2019 or so.


Disclaimer 2:  I haven't read Dr. Humphrey's Sidekick Manifesto, but I think I get the basic idea.



Shawn Humphrey's "Sidekick Manifesto" argues that it is inappropriate for outsiders to a culture to claim credit for having helped that group of people.  He argues, the correct frame is, the disadvantaged person fighting poverty is a hero, and you are just the sidekick.

I disagree with the idea that I should have to follow the Sidekick Manifesto, or that anyone should.  That said, I think that the Sidekick Manifesto is a defensible, positive political philosophy that some people have every right to pledge to adhere to--a little bit like feminism, although I see feminism as relying on a certain entry point to equality and what I see as liberalism.  To me, feminism is "accurate" if you accept a few basic assumptions that I personally prefer not to focus on that much.  The Sidekick Manifesto ought to be more of a "club" or "coalition" of people that choose to accept the precepts of Humphrey's idea could "join," like a magnet school with a particular focus and set of principles/traditions.

I think it is desirable to have a "Sidekick Manifesto Club" in the world, and within the United States.  The problem with a ubiquitous Sidekick Manifesto Club is that it would de-incentivize valuable actions that people can take and get credit for that aid people who are impoverished.  Right now, empirically, the terrain of the intercontinental philanthropy movement is fairly barren, desert-like, and empty of humanity.  There are a few controversial billionaires who do a little bit to help Africa and beyond.  There are non-profits that do their best to help, but there aren't that many of them.  There are academic researchers--and that is what I would like to be--who help people who are impoverished globally, too.  Would Dr. Humphrey contend that the best and brightest economists who can save Honduras, Africa, and others should not receive a Nobel Prize for their work??

Truly, the main thing that the Sidekick Manifesto should inspire is a reaction to that idea--the reaction that, instead of the Sidekick Manifesto catching on in a huge way, there should be a "Chess-Club-ification" of the human rights and anti-poverty movement globally.  There should be a way to keep track of the biggest stars and contenders who want to fix problems globally, and there should be mild incentives--mainly related to something cheap, like credit, a legitimate place in history, or maybe even trophies--assigned to people who shine brightly as intercontinental aid stars.

This idea isn't as absurd as Dr. Justin Simeone's idea that math should be stricken from all academic publications that deal with human rights (I think I remembered that idea correctly--the rebuttal is, "hire mathematicians to write clearer 'demystification' versions of your papers; lawyers can get jobs easily and mathematicians can't, why don't you exploit that?"), but it would truly be absurd, like socialism, to promote the idea that the Sidekick Manifesto should govern more than just one small sect of the global anti-poverty, pro-human-rights, pro-development-and-prosperity movement.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Math Update: My P != NP Proof Might Be Correct!!!!! -- (update, no it's not, see the note at the beginning and the updates near the bottom)

EDIT:  No, this proof is not correct.  See the updates at the bottom for details on why (based on Dr. Zelinsky's comment).  Fortunately, my GLL proof and MSR proofs still appear to be correct. It could be that Joshua Zelinsky's comment actually helps me to complete the proof. The GLL proof appears to be correct, AFAIK. The thing is, the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent --> P != NP" within PA and the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent" as a theorem of ZFC just shows that P != NP is a theorem of PA.  That isn't a contradiction, it's just another step in the proof. I think the striking idea is, P != NP is a theorem of PA, but not of ZFC.  That is what I worked to prove.  AFAIK it is possible for a proposition to be a theorem of PA but not of ZFC.  In particular, PA can be proved consistent from ZFC, so we would think it s possible and even likely that there are some non-theorems of ZFC that are theorems of PA. So this is great!  It l...
Read more

Hello, Texas - A Quick Monopoly Lesson

  So today, I thought I saw some people running around blurting code gestures at me.  One of the codes seemed to say, "Riot for a[buse] v[ictim] time -M".  Oh, M?  M as in Monolith, or M as in Monopoly fan who doesn't get it? Here, Houstonian code-talkers...let me teach you how to play Monopoly, since you are so hungry for free knowledge:  - Make deals with other players that benefit you.  - Offer deals to difficult players that are somewhat beneficial to them, knowing that they might reject.  - Watch which deals other players reject, and identify what *deal types* they are not likely to accept from you or anyone else.  - Be very very careful about your own deals--and behavior--lest you get figured out by your opponents and backed into a corner, with good, beneficial deals being made without you by cunning adversaries who know your every move. There's a poker lesson in there, too, but I don't want to get too educational right now.
Read more

Flash Non-Fiction: James Bond and Masculinity

  This was going to be a longer essay, but I decided to just blurt out my point rather than trying to write well. Basically, I think James Bond movies are good, and the songs are high-quality too, but it sends semi-dangerous messages to men in particular about what it means to be a man.  The Bond character is intransigent, aggressive, violent, and absolutely sure of himself in all cases.  He is portrayed as a big winner--able to date and have sex with beautiful women, almost impossible to kill, and lethal and elite at both armed and unarmed combat. I'm concerned that some men, including my estranged father ASW, have had their sense of morality warped by Bond movies.  They think that this dramatically presented way to be masculine is the only way.  I think that's unhealthy, and when people get the not-so-original idea to "try to be more Bond-like" in their personal lives, that leads to catastrophic conflicts with and major potential for deep pain for people that ...
Read more