![\"istvan\"](\"http:\/\/ciresblogs.colorado.edu\/prometheus\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/36\/2016\/08\/istvan.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
IEEE Spectrum<\/em><\/a> Zoltan Istvan, who represents the Transhumanist Party<\/a> and bills himself as \u201cthe science candidate\u201d in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, has garnered more media coverage than many third party candidates, with recent mentions in Vocativ,<\/a><\/em> The Verge<\/em><\/a>, USA Today<\/em><\/a>, and Pacific Standard<\/em><\/a>. He also writes regularly for Motherboard<\/a> <\/em>and The Huffington Post.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n Istvan\u2019s popularity is likely due to a combination of his quirky campaign style (he drives around in a bus painted to resemble a coffin with \u201cScience vs. The Coffin\u201d written above the bumper) and an unconventional platform<\/a> that pushes for gene editing, human life extension, and morphological freedom (the right to do anything to your body so long as it doesn\u2019t harm others). As a broader movement, transhumanism<\/a> focuses on leveraging science and technology toward the ultimate goal of overcoming death, largely through as-yet-unproven methods such as mind uploading<\/a>, in which a person\u2019s entire consciousness would be transferred to a digital system or machine.<\/p>\n Istvan\u2019s main goal in the election, he has told IEEE Spectrum<\/em>, is not to win but to use the candidacy to popularize science and push for increased funding for scientific and technological research. While on the campaign trail, Istvan<\/a> also advocates for a Universal Basic Income to prepare for the coming age of robotic workers, which he estimates could arrive within 30 years, and a \u201cpartial direct digital democracy\u201d through which citizens could approve or reject specific policies with a virtual vote. He also supports providing free public education, expanding the U.S. space program, and spreading a \u201cpro-science\u201d culture.<\/p>\n Cast your votes<\/strong><\/p>\n One of Istvan\u2019s core platforms is creating a digital mechanism for citizens to vote directly on federal policies and spending proposals instead of relying only on elected officials to speak for them. In response to a viewer question, Istvan said he believes this approach will help to more equitably distribute power within government and lead to better decisions.<\/p>\n But Steve Vanderheiden<\/a>, a political scientist specializing in environmental studies with the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research<\/a> at the University of Colorado-Boulder, has concerns about that proposal. In an email, Vanderheiden called it both \u201cintriguing and worrying.\u201d He said though it potentially offers citizens an opportunity to be more involved in the decision-making process, there is still a digital divide in the U.S. that could limit the participation of certain types of people.<\/p>\n He also pointed out that Istvan\u2019s proposal subtly shifts the weight of a democracy from a \u201ctrustee model\u201d in which leaders are elected and afforded a certain degree of autonomy from the constant swirl of public opinion, to a \u201cdelegate model\u201d in which they are continuously beholden to all forms of public opinion. He cautioned a digital democracy could therefore evolve to include, \u201cthe kind of knee jerk and anonymous reaction that makes other forms of digital communication uncivil and polarized.\u201d Read more …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" IEEE Spectrum August 10, 2016 Zoltan Istvan, who represents the Transhumanist Party and bills himself as \u201cthe science candidate\u201d in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, has garnered more media coverage than many third party candidates, with recent mentions in Vocativ, … Continue reading
\nAugust 10, 2016<\/p>\n