Creating a New World

pinkredpurple said:
Nomad said:
pinkredpurple said:
any ideas to take it from here?

well I don't want to go over old ground (it's discussed in the thread), but at its core:

so what do you mean by "old ground" in this context?

He is clearly talking about the context of this thread which you have yet to read, or if you did read, you did not understand very well, which is why you are introducing vast amounts of noise into this thread and forum. When you search for 'venus project' search the entire forum, not just this topic.

Here is a start and there are several other threads if you will please use the search function.

I'll suggest to you again to please get up to speed on these topics before posting further.

As far as this comment:

prp said:
wow, really nice how you killed this one.

This is not helpful, nor is it accurate. Please read the forum guidelines in their entirety if you are sincere about remaining on this forum and participating.
 
Hi Pinkredpurple,
I'd like to point out to you how much energy you have invested in this thread, particularly trying to find a way to make the Venus Project fit.

I've noticed not only have you misunderstood some of the comments in response to yours (assuming that someone actually said the VP takes care of psychopaths, for example), you have expressed frustration and anger at the lack of traction you are getting, using sarcasm in a disrespectful manner (ex. "<Snip>...but no one here was willing to engage in it. so people instead prefer to hold onto their fixed opinions. so much for truth seeking.").

I think it would do you a great deal of good to step back and take a breath and perhaps reread other people's comments with fresh eyes, dropping your notion that the VP is something with which to work, and consider maybe you are wrong but can't yet see it. Just consider that and reread.

Psychopaths would have a field day in such an environment. There can be no equality when psychopaths continue to roam and eventually rule. If you understood psychopaths, and there is a lot to understand, available on this forum and throughout the Cass web site, you would see that it is a primary impediment to any system that is built in ignorance, denial or support of their effect.

For Jacques Fresco to dedicate so much time and intellect into building such a system, I am left wondering why the obvious psychopath issue is not dealt with. I can only assume it is by design unless evidence to the contrary becomes available. I believe this is a prudent course.

Gonzo
 
pinkredpurple said:
when you mention venus project on this forum, people shout "psychopathy!"
Specifically, the VP does not address psychopathy, because they don't recognize it as a valid topic. Don't you find that interesting?

[quote author=pinkredpurple]
someone who was willing to explore whether the VP really does not offer a solution with psychopathy suggested a thought experiment. but no one here was willing to engage in it. so people instead prefer to hold onto their fixed opinions. so much for truth seeking.
[/quote]
To be clear, I meant the thought experiment for you specifically, not for other people (and it seems that was understood by everyone except you). You are the one with a sacred cow, so you need to look at it with more open eyes. Others already have, or so it seems.
 
pinkredpurple said:
i keep just hearing from you "it's impossible it's impossible it's impossible". how many people on the other side keep saying the same thing if confronted with UFO reality, government corruption or the notion of the immortality of the spirit?

Note that we are not saying that building a new world is impossible. If you wish to further understand the discussion on the Venus Project, then follow the link I gave earlier, where it has it's own thread. It is separate from this one for a reason.


pinkredpurple said:
you seem to be so sure that your opinion is the truth. you're not even willing to take up a thought experiment. why?

You misunderstand the situation - these things have been discussed at length. See below.


pinkredpurple said:
wow, really nice how you killed this one.

that is not helpful. See anart's reply, and please refrain from any language which adds noise to the discussion.

-

If you sincerely wish to understand and to discuss these subjects without adding more noise, there is much work to be done before posting further. Rather than just state that everyone here has 'fixed opinions', I would suggest as a basic minimum courtesy towards everyone else who has done so, and also towards yourself, you would benefit greatly from reading some necessary background material with the following as a useful starter:

The Wave & Adventures series, Political Ponerology - Lobaczewski, Snakes In Suits - Hare/Babkiak, Without Conscience - Hare, The Sociopath Next Door - Stout, Mask of Sanity - Cleckley, Myth of Sanity - Stout, Controversy of Zion - Reed, Shock Doctrine - Klein, The Secret Team - Prouty, The Lost Gospel - Mack, In Search of the Miraculous - Ouspensky, Operation Trojan Horse- Keel, Unholy Hungers - Hort, Narcissistic Family - Pressman, Trapped in the Mirror - Golomb, Gods of Eden - Bramley.

This will give you an essential and much broader context - without which you will be, as you already said: 'going round in circles'. Each of these is pertinent to the current problem, and brings a particular perspective.
 
pinkredpurple: read the entire thread. You are embarrassing yourself.
 
I may sound narcissistic, but I think that there is no point arguing with pinkredpurple. She/he is in a denial and too confrontational. TO me it is obvious the person does not want to know the truth. Or maybe I am wrong. I have been wrong many times before. You are welcome to correct me, but lately I noticed that when I meet someone like that I just feel like walking away and not bothering to get my point across when the individual's mind seems sooo empty. In the past I would do everything possible to help the person understand, but I have been meeting so many empty people who are least concerned about the fate our world is in. It is terrible how fast downhill this world is going. I wait for that miracle every day that would awaken the humanity, but everyday it does not happen, and it probably never will.

But, I am glad I am here. :)
 
Mona said:
I may sound narcissistic, but I think that there is no point arguing with pinkredpurple. She/he is in a denial and too confrontational. TO me it is obvious the person does not want to know the truth. Or maybe I am wrong. I have been wrong many times before. You are welcome to correct me, but lately I noticed that when I meet someone like that I just feel like walking away and not bothering to get my point across when the individual's mind seems sooo empty. In the past I would do everything possible to help the person understand, but I have been meeting so many empty people who are least concerned about the fate our world is in. It is terrible how fast downhill this world is going. I wait for that miracle every day that would awaken the humanity, but everyday it does not happen, and it probably never will.

But, I am glad I am here. :)


Well we never know, do we?

The sufis have lots of histories expressing how knowledge and willingness to help others without self concern and self serving purposes have the power to bring down the curtain of lies.
Now, it needs to be felt.


THE DREAM said:
A visitor came to a Chishti pir. This visitor wanted to demonstrate his own knowledge of the Qur’an and intended to overpower the Chishti pir in a debate. When he entered, the Chishti pir took the initiative however and mentioned Yusuf and the dreams he has had according to the Qur’an. He then suddenly turned to his visitor and asked him if he could tell him about a dream, so that the visitor may give his interpretation thereof. After receiving permission the Sufi told that he has had a dream and both of them were in it. The Chishti pir then went on by describing the following dream event: “I saw your hand immersed in a jar of honey, while my hand was immersed in the latrine”.

The visitor hastened to interpret: “It is quite obvious! You are immersed in wrong pursuits whereas I am leading a righteous life”.

“But’, the Sufi said, “there is more to the dream”. The visitor asked him to continue. The Chishti pir then went on by telling this: “You were licking my hand and I was licking yours”.
 
What you say can be true if the discussion is just between two people, but we also have to take into account everyone else who is reading as well.

Mona said:
I may sound narcissistic, but I think that there is no point arguing with pinkredpurple. She/he is in a denial and too confrontational. TO me it is obvious the person does not want to know the truth. Or maybe I am wrong. I have been wrong many times before. You are welcome to correct me, but lately I noticed that when I meet someone like that I just feel like walking away and not bothering to get my point across when the individual's mind seems sooo empty. In the past I would do everything possible to help the person understand, but I have been meeting so many empty people who are least concerned about the fate our world is in. It is terrible how fast downhill this world is going. I wait for that miracle every day that would awaken the humanity, but everyday it does not happen, and it probably never will.

But, I am glad I am here. :)
 
Mona said:
I wait for that miracle every day that would awaken the humanity, but everyday it does not happen, and it probably never will.

In order for humanity to awaken, we must each begin with ourselves. When we begin to realize how asleep we once were and can feel compassion towards ourselves for our past mistakes, if we choose to, we can also start to feel compassion for others. From there the impossible can become possible.
 
Also, Mona, waiting for a miracle is the best way to ensure it won't happen. What if we assume that it is OUR job to wake humanity? Then there is no waiting, just a lot of work to be done.

truth seeker said:
Mona said:
I wait for that miracle every day that would awaken the humanity, but everyday it does not happen, and it probably never will.

In order for humanity to awaken, we must each begin with ourselves. When we begin to realize how asleep we once were and can feel compassion towards ourselves for our past mistakes, if we choose to, we can also start to feel compassion for others. From there the impossible can become possible.
 
Hi everybody

First of all i want to apologize because i haven't read this entire thread and according to this there are some points that probably had been discussed (i don't know now if i have the time to do it but i want to share my thoughts), but i'll read it ASAP. I think it's a very interesting subject that excites me and i have been thinking about it for years. The real question IMHO is if all this subject is susceptible to be applied in this pathocratic world, because i guess we have to "get rid of a set of weights" before to arrive to an initial situation that allows us carry it out.

To create a STO society IMO it's fundamental end hierarchies in all aspects and areas, and nothing must be done without the knowledge and support of all citizens if that's possible.

I believe that there are two ways to consider, the individual and the group and there must be a feedback in the sense that the individual must be useful to the group and vice versa.

Well following these ideas one probability could be a double flow from the particularity to the generality and vice versa, i'm going to explain it in the following way:

A basic concept is that everybody must feel comfortable with their respective task and at the same time be responsible, the common good must be the priority.

Speaking in terms of a country, state, community or every individuals group, the organization in this double flow could be:

1- From individuals to group: Imagine a building, every dwelling and every member in this dwelling. The key is the information flow. In every dwelling the members have to share all their thoughts according to their individuality to show different points of view and look for solutions to their "concerns" in agreement, and to have a representative member (this representative member is chosen by the members and has the responsibility to look for the common good in the dwelling as a way to serve others) that will share the dwelling's thoughts in the building meetings. These building meetings are useful to share all the thoughts in the respective dwellings and look for solutions to their "concerns" in agreement, and the meetings (and what happen during its course) must be reported to the others dwellings members by their respective representative, at the same time these dwellings representatives have to choose a building representative according to the commitment and responsibility shown in the meetings and how this commitment and responsibility has been implemented in facts. At this point the buildings' representatives have a neighbourhood meeting where the process is the same, then could be local meetings, state meetings, country meetings and global meetings. At this point i guess you understand the idea. When the amount of people represented is very high there could be several representatives (as many as needed) instead of one, i guess in a neighbourhood, local, state, country and global level. In this sense only the people that has demonstrate their commitment and responsibility in the meetings and facts in all previous levels could be candidate to be a representative in the following level. By the other hand these representatives can be revoked in the same moment that they don't fulfil their role.

I think that's a good way to get the real "concerns" in a worldwide scale, and according to the nature of the "concerns" they can be solved in different levels, the good thing is that as the information flow is the most important aspect in all levels and between all levels the solutions created in a place to solve a matter can be quickly translated to another location, it seems to me a natural and coherent way to work as a society.

2-From group to individuals: There are two ways to understand the group concept i'm speaking about, the group as a whole, and the group as a compendium of different groups of individuals that have a particular common ground.

The representatives in the different levels i spoke in the point 1, have to provide solutions to the society so they have to expose the matters to qualified people to look for an answer.

In this moment is when the group comes into play, in first instance to solve a concrete matter the ideal procedure could be to ask to qualified groups in which common ground can be related the matter, and they have to provide a solution or redirect the question to other group that would provide it. In the case that things remain unsolved. They must be redirected to the entire group as a whole in order to look for the best way to supply it or take the necessary ways to develop a solution in the future.

The group's role don't finish with this, every group expert in one area (science, education, agriculture...etc) has the responsibility to develop their area, improve the things and to propose to the whole group different progress ways, looking for the feedback in the rest of the individuals and operating according to the common good and the will of all. There is no one in-charge, there are different groups with different knowledge that is offered to develop different possibilities and the entire population have to decide which ones are going to be focused and developed and which ones are going to be refused.

In that way there isn't a thing that is going to be done without the support of the whole.

I know that there can be situations in which scientists (ie) could feel frustrated because the population choose a way that isn't the best according to their knowledge (and the scientists can be right), but if something isn't going to be developed may be that it isn't the moment, and the experts have to be humble, serve to others working towards the common good according to the will and choice of the whole, and going on proposing what they think waiting for the time it would be developed.

The information flow must be redirected towards all directions /levels/groups, and received from all directions/levels/groups.

---------------------------------

As we are speaking about a STO society i guess that pathocracy and its puppets are out the equation, but i have to remark that if an individual or group of individuals is/are considered pernicious to the whole and don't collaborate as the rest of the people, they must be separated according to the common good to avoid people that don't work towards the common good.

---------------------------------
Some implications about this point of view:

Institutions as we know today aren't necessary ( the expert groups are self-sufficient to work by their selves according to the common good and will without external interference).

Government as we know today isn't necessary ( the representatives which only task is to serve the society haven't power or control over anything, they are mediators between different individuals and groups to facilitate the information flow).

Laws as we know today aren't necessary ( there can be agreements accepted by all that can evolve, disappear, or keep according to the common good and the society will, being adapted and/or changing like an living entity according the context)

As everybody work towards the common good, providing to the whole with their particular task, all the members are considerated in the same way understanding that all the task have the same importance to the whole population.

Every individual have to be considered with equity according to the particular idiosyncrasy, in all aspects (educational, professional ... etc)

There aren't individual problems, they are all problems to the whole, so everyone will help everyone.

The money, in my particular opinion i think that is obsolete and i feel a certain rejection about it as i'm sure that isn't necessary as we have been driven to believe and for sure we can look for a better way to exchange everything, but it can be used in a correct way for example making all salary in the same amount because as i told before all the task have the same importance to the whole population, and must be considered and rewarded in the same way.

Every group of experts have to look for new paradigms in their respective field, this is an urgent aspect even today because dramatically pathocratic thinking can be found easily in all areas.

Obviously working towards the common good shows that military or weapons aren't necessary.

So this society i propose would have by one side the experts in different fields that work solving the problems suggested by the people, and proposing alternative forms of development and research, by other side the people that really is actually involved in decision-making and exhibition of concerns and by the other side the representatives of all the groups: civilian, scientist….. that are the mediators and allow the information flow in all context

Important note: The actual society must be always present as how the things should not be done.

PS I guess I can elaborate this and write more about it but i’m really tired (i’m writing for 4 hours this post and i’m dull),
 
Hi pirataloko,

While noble in thought, I would like to offer a humble critique, in the hopes of providing inspiration and not discouragement.

You will find benefit from investing time in reading this large thread as it could save you from wasting time either saying what has already been said or going down already-discovered dead ends.

How do we remove pathologicals from the equation? This has been the stumbling block of every plan advanced. Because it is too hard to figure out, most societal models just flatly ignore the problem.

And even if pathological deviants could be removed from the equation, what remains is a range of individuals from slightly STO to considerably STO.

Those who are slightly STO are therefore considerably STS and will, therefore vie for whatever power they can achieve to advance a particular goal. This includes heavy lobbying whenever the time comes to vote on a given solution. According to game theory, those who act out of self interest will always beat the rest as the will be able to bend the rules to their liking, while the rest play by the rules.

What you are proposing is a form of representational democracy. You say there would be no need for government and yet, you suggest elected delegates from local group, to state to national and finally international levels, using a feed up and feed down information and vote flow. What you have, in reality, if I understand you correctly, is a government or parliament for each level.

Now, there will always be jobs that nobody wants to do and other jobs that are extremely demanding. Without some form of compensation for such sacrifice, these positions would remain vacant.
You suggest there would be no laws, and yet you have created a framework that requires equal participation. How would this be enforced is some members didn't feel like participating.

Any effective model needs to acknowledge the pathological deviance in some, the varying levels of skill, knowledge, energy, ability, honesty, selfishness, selflessness and a few things I can't imagine at the moment.

Hierarchies may be unavoidable, since there are always levels in mankind, therefore people will always fall within certain levels at any given time in their development. When we require those most knowledgeable in a certain field to give advice, have we not acknowledged a hierarchy: those who know more than the rest?

Any system has to be measured by how a pathological opportunist would see it. This is quite difficult for those of us with strong STO leanings and requires to think in more childish ways, along the lines of wanting something so bad that one would do virtually anything to get it.

This exercise has been quite revealing in many ways. We are programmed to not be able to work out a successful model because we cannot think like those who control us.

If we were to envision a perfectly STO world, it would most likely find its own optimum system naturally. It is a good exercise to envision what that might be as one track of thinking, which really requires thinking beyond our programming - a true egalitarian society that recognizes and honours individual differences and is built upon helping the self by helping others.

At the same time, we could be considering models that work in this 3rd density STS existence, that acknowledges pathological types and is yet as egalitarian as possible without giving opportunity for pathocrats to take advantage of it or its citizens.

Tough exercise, eh?
Keep refining. Each draft will always be better than the last.

Gonzo
 
Gonzo said:
Hi pirataloko,

While noble in thought, I would like to offer a humble critique, in the hopes of providing inspiration and not discouragement.

You will find benefit from investing time in reading this large thread as it could save you from wasting time either saying what has already been said or going down already-discovered dead ends.

Hi Gonzo

You're right ;) i was excited when discovered this thread and i wanted to share my thoughts, i had read only the first page before posting :-[ and i have been reading after posting. There are some similar ideas.

I have to apologize one more time if someone had been reading my reply and wasting the time.

I'll go on with the reading and i hope to answer your request in the following days (it will take a time to read and to write in english :/), with more accurate data, as i told i have been thinking among the years about this subject and my first post is only a little about this.
 
During a conversation about economics and alterantive social systems somebody pointed me to the Worgel Experiment. Worgel was a small town in Austria that in the 1930´s applied the economic ideas of Sylvio Gesell. The basic thought of Gesells ideas was to make money having a expiration date, just like any other commodity. If money expires, like a apple becomes non eadable after a while, it will, like the apple be used before it expires. Money does not increases in value any longer over time, but decreases in value, until it has become worthless. Therefore it will be used directly and made to work for the community. The system that was used in worgel was to issue money at a certain date and over several periods the money issues on that date was devalued, until it become worthless to have. As result everybody in Worgel started to invest in the town and while the rest of Austria spiraled into a deep crisis, the town of Worgel was booming. when other towns and villages in Austria started to be interested in the Worgel experiment and made plans to join the expirement it was stopped forcebly by the PTB of Austria at that time.


from: http://www-2.net/y23.stock.pictures/The_Spirit_of_Money/

Austria's Tyrolean community of Worgel launched a scheme based on [Gesell's] theories, in 1932, reputed to have slashed unemployment at the height of the Depression. It was watched by Keynes and Irving Fisher, who saw a fast-depreciating currency as a possible answer to the 1930s "liquidity trap".

In 1891 Silvio Gesell (1862-1930) a German-born entrepreneur living in Buenos Aires published a short booklet entitled Die Reformation im Mnzwesen als Brcke zum sozialen Staat (Currency Reform as a Bridge to the Social State), the first of a series of pamphlets presenting a critical examination of the monetary system. It laid the foundation for an extensive body of writing inquiring into the causes of social problems and suggesting practical reform measures. His experiences during an economic crisis at that time in Argentina led Gesell to a viewpoint substantially at odds with the Marxist analysis of the social question: the exploitation of human labour does not have its origins in the private ownership of the means of production, but rather occurs primarily in the sphere of distribution due to structural defects in the monetary system.

Like the ancient Greek philosopher Aristoteles, Gesell recognised money's contradictory dual role as a medium of exchange for facilitating economic activity on the one hand and as an instrument of power capable of dominating the market on the other hand. The starting point for Gesell's investigations was the following question: How could money's characteristics as a usurious instrument of power be overcome, without eliminating its positive qualities as a neutral medium of exchange ?

He attributed this market-dominating power to two fundamental characteristics of conventional money: Firstly, money as a medium of demand is capable of being hoarded in contrast to human labor or goods and services on the supply side of the economic equation. It can be temporarily withheld from the market for speculative purposes without its holder being exposed to significant losses.

Secondly, money enjoys the advantage of superior liquidity to goods and services. In other words, it can be put into use at almost any time or place and so enjoys a flexibility of deployment similar to that of a joker in a card game. These two characteristics of money give its holders a privileged position over the suppliers of goods and services. This is especially true for those who hold or control large amounts of money.

They can disrupt the dynamic flow of economic activity, of purchases and sales, savings and investment. This power enables the holders of money to demand the payment of interest as a reward for agreeing to refrain from speculative hoarding thereby allowing money to circulate in the economy.

This intrinsic power of money is not dependent on its actual hoarding, but rather on its potential to disrupt economic activity which enables it to extract a tribute in the form of interest in return for allowing the "metabolic exchange" of goods and services in the "social organism". The "return on capital" is accorded priority over broader economic considerations and production becomes attuned more to the monetary interest rate than to the real needs of human beings.

Long-term positive interest rates of interest disturb the balance of profit and loss necessary for the decentralized self-regulation of markets. Gesell was of the opinion that this led to a dysfunction of the social system exhibiting very complex symptoms: the non-neutrality of interest-bearing money results in an inequitable distribution of income which no longer reflects actual differences in productivity. This in turn leads to a concentration of monetary as well as of non-monetary capital and therefore to the predominance of monopolistic structures in the economy.

Since it is the holders of money who ultimately decide whether it circulates or stands still, money can't flow "automatically" like blood in the human body. The circulation and the correct dosage of the monetary supply can't be brought under effective public control; deflationary and inflationary fluctuations of the general price level are inevitable. In the course of the business cycle when declining interest rates cause large amounts of money to be withheld from the market until the outlook for profitable investments improves, the result is economic stagnation and unemployment.


http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi/noframes/read/7680

Another of Gesell's experiments occured in the year 1932 in a town called Worgel in the Austriam Tyrol. Conditions were at the time deplorable. The town's Mayor was a supporter of the Gesell School of Economics,-who believed the towns economic problems could be solved if the townspeople would agree to
a financial experiment on Gesellian lines. Accordingly on JUly 5th. 1932, he submitted am Emergency Recovery Plan to the Relief Committee proposing "to
substitute for the national money within the community, a medium of exchange which because of its nature was bound to remain a medium of exchange & alleviate want, give work & bread" the plan was accepted.

The relief money paid each month by the Austrian Government was then deposited on Savings Acccount in the local bank. In its place, yellow, blue & red work certificates were issued in denominations of one, five & ten schillings. The townspeople were asked to buy these Work Certificates from the Relief Committee' & to make all payments within the community with them, excepting the Post Office & Railways. These work Certificates became valid at full face value. To
enable purchases outside the Town, it was possible to exchange them for legal tender at a 2 percent discount. The tax of 1 percent per month, discouraged needles conversion into legal tender, was used to provide relief for invalids & the aged. Work Certificates met with immediate & extraordinary success. the first wage payment made by the council in work Certificates was back in the Treasury within a week. with this money, the Council paid its own local debts. Soon the
Work Certificates were back again.

Beginning with an issue of 1,80 Schillings, the work Certificates circulated from the Town Treasury to the workers, from the workers to the merchants, from tenents to landlord, from savers to the savings bank & back into circulation again. Using the payments of back taxes, relief money from the Government, & the proceeds of demurriage tax, the Mayor of Worgel embasrked on a Public work Program. Thirty thousand schillings were on road improvements between July 11th. & Oct. 29th. 1932. Forty thousand schillings were spent in the mainenance & extension of city streets. A concrete bridge was built. /Street lights were installed. Unemployment was abolished. All these enterprises were carried out with work certificates with a circulation which never exceeded 12,000 schillings.

Financial authorities were opposed to this, as no interest payments were made, & it was closed down and to make the story short, with a return to
poverty for all.
 
Back
Top Bottom