Creating a New World

Chopper said:
Forgive my ignorance but....I see no hope for a new world as long as 4thD STS has the ability to time travel & "fix" any good done. :cool2:

4D STS sees only what it wants to see - the ultimate in wishful thinking. Thus, they are not capable of seeing all outcomes and possibilities, and that is their ultimate weakness. In other words, it ain't over till it's over - and even then, there's hope.
 
To create a new world in my mind money would need to be eliminated, as it serves only greed. Need would be allocated freely, wants would require involvement in the enterprize. The more one participates the more wants are allocated to the person. Higher learning would also require participation in the collective. All would have a say in public debate and everything would require a vote for it to be law or policy. It could work.
 
A few days before I found this thread, I read a long document about the Vanir, a group among the old norse gods. The Vanir are generally regarded as peaceful «fertility gods», and they practisioned «seid», which is regarded as the norse variant of shamanism.

The authors of the paper compares what is known about the Vanir with traditions in other areas. They states that the role of the shaman as a healer «is not a matter of manipulating isolated, monadic individuals for the sake of health, but understanding the individuals place in the cosmos as they relate and are related to the place where everything comes from, and intervening within that framework as is appropriate and necessary; physical healing is an aspect of this process.» They referes to Lincoln (1986) as stating: «It is not just a damaged body that one restores to wholeness and health, but the very universe itself» and «The full extent of such knowledge is not revealed in all its grandeur: the healer must understand and be prepared to manipulate nothing less than the full structure of the cosmos». (Source: http://www.vanadis.is/skrar/File/Writings/Vanirhealing.pdf, I was not able to copy parts of it.)

I would highly appreciate to have a good shaman around if a better new world should be created. Or even better, a group of them.

Psychopaths, as many have mentioned, is really a great challenge. As Laura pointed out, it is their joy to inflict pain in others. (I have listened to two of them comparing things they have done, laughing of how stupid other people are, laughing of how little other people understand. All of their «deeds» were shocking, and rather unbelievable. They do the things people think that nobody are doing. They have no limits. I spied on them, maybe five or six years old, it's a crazy world.)

It's very difficult to spot all of them, and I think a shaman, with the ability to «see the unseen» is needed. The psychopath might not step forward at all. He or she, or maybe more of them, can also hide behind, spread a negative word here, another there, about the leader or group of leaders, or about the shaman, or another they do not like. Split people.

What to do with them is another difficult problem. Maybe the different kinds of psychopaths should be treated differently. The worst, the classical or essential, are extremely dangerous.

I agree with those that proposed to try to «immunize» the community against them, as far as possible. Educate, spread the knowledge. Value creativity, abstract, balanced and complex thinking.

I also think that genes for psychopathy are spread thinly out in most of the population. Maybe careful partner choice can be useful. Also, be sure that pregnant women are well nutritioned.


The next is a bit off topic to the main theme, it's a reply to a statement earlier in the thread. In entry #340 it was stated that there are no cave paintings («artifacts») from the north part of Europe.

Actually, there are cave paintings in the northern part of Europe, in altogether twelve caves, from the same area in northern coastal Norway. Nine are real caves, three are more like shelters of stone that the locals regard as caves. They are different from the famous caves in France, and some of them are discovered not long ago. I do not know much about them, but I checked since I knew there were some.

The paintings are of humans, and they are thought to be between 2500 and 4000 years old. There are some intesting things with these paintings: In one cave, there are 33 dancing humans, one of them have a wand (this person is interpreted as a shaman).

In another, there are three humans, two adults with a child between them.

Some of the humans have horns. The paintings are mainly in the part of the cave where dark and light meet each other, or in the innermost part of the cave.

One of the human figures have horns, and five fingers on one hand, four fingers on the other. According to one of the web pages about the caves, http://www.mythic-lofoten.com/Symbolikk.html, four fingers might represent an alien. Thus the person in the painting might be a hybrid? The webpage compare the figure with four fingers in the Norwegian cave with the Nazca lines and the Tiahuanaca culture, and caves in an area in southern France, http://fun.chryzode.org/english/merveill.htm.

The information I found is not in English, the sources are: http://www.riksantikvaren.no/filestore/bergkunsthandb_korr.PDF and http://nrk.no/nyheter/distrikt/nordland/1.6193854.

The area where the caves are present are in the interaction zone between the norse population and the Sami people, at least later on, in the Viking age where more information are available.
 
I think because the planet is overrun by psychopaths and their embedded effects on OPs and conscience people that turmoil is inevitable. Earth cataclysms needed to shake people out of their cocoons of illusion. When the vast majority of people start really suffering not a good time for psychopaths. For I too believe that for a new world psychopaths need to be gotten rid of.
But then you need people who have access that are willing to go and hunt out the movers and shakers (Psychopaths in power) in order to place the world back into human hands. Kinda of like “V” but this is 3rd density thinking so :v:
 
I’ve been thinking about this topic for quite awhile, off and on. During the past 2 years, I’ve come across Jacque Fresco who is quite interesting and inventive. He has some very good nuts and bolts ideas. Also, the Zeitgeist movie has some very good information. Basically, I’ve concluded from observing our “current” system the following ideas need to be scraped and totally replaced: hierarchical systems, systems based on currency or money, ownership of land/earth. I see choosing “leaders” of groups as a system that requires more thought; a lot of pitfalls there not to mention the slippery slope sliding back into a negative hierarchy system. Psychopathy is important, but removing the systems mentioned basically removes situations where they tend to thrive.
 
IMHO i feel it all starts with education.
both how parents are 'taught' to raise their children and the school systems themselves that children later enter into.

obviously the issue of how people raise their children is a very complex one.

in regards to the school system on the other hand;
i've always felt that the current grading system for written tests, can create in some youngsters a competitive mentality of 'me vs. everyone else', or at least can cause in certain cases the habit of constantly measuring oneself in regards to others.

the grading is based in many occasions on material for exams which is intended to be 'memorized' for the tests, and does not necessarily encourage creative thinking.

instead of handing out grades from A+ to F, maybe children should be encouraged to think more for themselves and more creatively. there could be many incentive based solutions to this. i am not an educator, so this is all an opinion.

i'm sure many people have thought of this before, and to me, it seems very important seeing that school is a place in which children learn complex social skills.
if they leave school thinking 'me against everyone else' or 'how do i compare' excessively, then those modes of thought are likely to carry on into post-school life.
 
transientP said:
IMHO i feel it all starts with education.
both how parents are 'taught' to raise their children and the school systems themselves that children later enter into.

obviously the issue of how people raise their children is a very complex one.

in regards to the school system on the other hand;
i've always felt that the current grading system for written tests, can create in some youngsters a competitive mentality of 'me vs. everyone else', or at least can cause in certain cases the habit of constantly measuring oneself in regards to others.

the grading is based in many occasions on material for exams which is intended to be 'memorized' for the tests, and does not necessarily encourage creative thinking.

instead of handing out grades from A+ to F, maybe children should be encouraged to think more for themselves and more creatively. there could be many incentive based solutions to this. i am not an educator, so this is all an opinion.

i'm sure many people have thought of this before, and to me, it seems very important seeing that school is a place in which children learn complex social skills.
if they leave school thinking 'me against everyone else' or 'how do i compare' excessively, then those modes of thought are likely to carry on into post-school life.

Not 100% sure where to start here, but I stick my neck out a bit:

Young children learn very simply by trial and error, our job (as parents) is to make sure the errors are not fatal.

Schools have a remit to make the children jump through hoops to achieve a "standard".

In this density our children are the 'next generation' and we have two choices:

1. Let them learn as they will with some governing protection
2. Protect them at all costs

Too many parents go for option 2, and wonder why they end up with helpless brats.

Too many times I hear "Don't do that you will make a mess" "Wait a minute, I'll do that, you can't"

Surely the objective here is to train the little animals we give berth to, to become people?

My belief is that you can only EVER do that by encouragement, and further, that starts at 18 months, not 5 years..
At 18 months, most children can feed themselves; messy though it may look :-)

To lay some background to this, I am the farther of 5 children, and have always had arguments with their mother(s) that I let them do too much.. My eldest is now nearly 25 and youngest is nearly 10.

My advice to create a New World is let them learn faster, which I know means more effort, but the results are well worth it :-)

John
 
Just my quick thoughts about children and education...

When born they are "here" with us on the STS world. They are STS, as we are. A baby needs to be held, talked to, feel love/security. The parents is/are the main characters in the play. The baby is a sponge. Soaking up ALL that is seen, heard, felt and experienced. The baby will emulate the environment it has experienced. This baby is a person in process, not an object. By the time the child reaches perhaps 10-12 years of age, their personality is pretty much set.

So... A child starts school at what? 5 or 6 years of age? There is that time, prior to school, where the child can have foundation laid for preparation of the reality that is to come. I bet some out there may be saying "Mmmkay" or "Sure, right". I've seen written that children are told not to underestimate parents. I say do not underestimate a child's potential...

Oh & BTW, yes, I agree that formal school as it now stands is merely a tool used by TPTB for control purposes. TPTB don't give a plug nickle about the betterment of this BBM. A child needs the tools of basic self-knowledge, independent thinking, and consideration. If given the tools, at 10-12 years of age, then it is up to them to chose and we become elder counselors.
osit, fwiw...
 
Al Today said:
Just my quick thoughts about children and education...

When born they are "here" with us on the STS world. They are STS, as we are. A baby needs to be held, talked to, feel love/security. The parents is/are the main characters in the play. The baby is a sponge. Soaking up ALL that is seen, heard, felt and experienced. The baby will emulate the environment it has experienced. This baby is a person in process, not an object. By the time the child reaches perhaps 10-12 years of age, their personality is pretty much set.

So... A child starts school at what? 5 or 6 years of age? There is that time, prior to school, where the child can have foundation laid for preparation of the reality that is to come. I bet some out there may be saying "Mmmkay" or "Sure, right". I've seen written that children are told not to underestimate parents. I say do not underestimate a child's potential...

Oh & BTW, yes, I agree that formal school as it now stands is merely a tool used by TPTB for control purposes. TPTB don't give a plug nickle about the betterment of this BBM. A child needs the tools of basic self-knowledge, independent thinking, and consideration. If given the tools, at 10-12 years of age, then it is up to them to chose and we become elder counselors.
osit, fwiw...

Totally agree except they learn much faster than you would think...
 
The first big thing that comes to mind to me is to make sure essential psychopaths are identified as early as possible and are prevented from seeking or gaining positions of power or influence.

I prefer this idea as the 'beginnings'.

And what IF we base the WHOLE of it upon "MAN-HOURS"? So to speak? I.E. The "Time-it-takes" to accomplish certain endeavors VS. the "Time-it-takes" to accomplish others?

It's ONLY a thought. I would hope that such a society would be TOTALLY in Service to Others and NOT predicated upon the idea of getting something for self...

MUTUAL EXCHANGE?...Like Time that was Expended and the 'other's' Time Expended or something like that? EFFORT FOR EFFORT, Maybe is a better way to say what my idea is here? Equal effort for Equal return? All get 'fed' by one another in such a way? I'm just 'thinking out loud' at this time.
 
Our science and technology have come a long way since our current societal model came into existence. We haven't changed in all that time but we could quite easily.

We bandy the word "Democracy" around all the time but I can't think of a single government where real democracy occurs. It exists in the Koi culture and probably in a few societies in the deepest, darkest parts of the Amazon. I'm talking about a democracy where every vote is heard, counted and applied.

The best way to do this is by turning the hierarchical pyramid so that the point sticks in the ground. At the top we now have all the citizens and they, through discussion (and probably a lot of argument) decide what they want. This can be done block by block, growing to street by street, becoming suburb by suburb and so on. A block will decide what they want/need and take it to the street. The street will decide what is best for it from the wishes of the blocks that make up the street. This will then be taken to the next level and so on until all the decisions reach the bottom, ie, the government.

The government are functionaries of the people and may make no decisions other than how best to implement the wishes of the people. The President of the country could then be the cutest 6 year old who can only pass on the decisions of the people to other Presidents when they discuss international relations.

All the systems relating to everything will be discussed and voted on by the people after all information and ideas have been made available.

Once we get to a real democracy it becomes obvious that money is no longer necessary. All resources are directed to fulfill the needs of everyone on a needier-come-first basis and our science and technology have made this entirely possible. We have all the communication tools we need and the transport of all types, to distribute anything, in time, to anywhere on the planet. No one need go hungry or be deprived of anything.

Economy

A short discussion on money.

Our current money is Fiat - that is - by agreement. It is backed by nothing more than the supposed credit of a nation. There are two basic groups in money discussions. Those who agree that fiat money works and those who want money to have value backed by commodities like gold. All these people are vociferous in the arguments and often sound quite violent!

The thing is, money is always controllable. If it is fiat money, as it is now, private banks create the money, as was Rothschild's wish. The bankers control the flow and scarcity of money at their whim. It is born of debt and through the mechanism of interest is entirely unstable.

Money backed by commodities, whether it be gold, tomatoes, or energy will always be manipulated by those who manage to gain control of the gold, tomatoes, or energy.

The problem is control and there will always be those who seek to dominate and control everyone else. This is the flaw in the two viewpoints expressed above, in each of them the value of the money is controlled by a few people.

There are two things from which real value can be obtained. Land and Labour. Without land we are nothing. We have no place to live, no place to grow food, we cannot survive without land. Labour belongs to each of us individually and is the only thing we have to extract value from the land. A monetary system based on publicly owned land and a set hourly wage for labour, no matter the type of labour, is really the only truly democratic solution. Now try and sell that to the psychos!

This brings us back to the question Laura posed. The best, fairest, most just systems are all based on co-operation rather than competition. Something women find easier to understand than men. Real democracy is co-operation.

In a nutshell then. An ideal society would not have, money, property rights or the profit motive. Can you imagine what would be achievable if there was no "cost" apart from labour? We could build mag-level trains to every town on the planet, go on holidays to the moon. Whatever you can imagine could be achieved, because..........it's free!
 
513 said:
Equal effort for Equal return?

How about this: 'fair' rather than 'equal'. Everything being always in balance probably wouldn't leave enough imbalance anywhere to invite in further efforts to improve anything, OSIT. 'Fair' would be determined by the parties involved who are also considering their shared context. From this perspective, actual 'overages' and 'shortages' in transactions involving 'effort' or 'payback' would naturally distribute throughout the system to ensure overall balance as long as everyone who is participating in the system, stays in the system and everyone who is in the system, participates. When everyone experiences the felt effects of both efficiency and lack thereof, everyone is genuinely involved!
 
I also think education is key.

When it comes to shools, here in Germany (and I'm sure elsewhere as well) there are certain "model schools" (alternative schools) that experiment with interesting concepts such as classrooms with open doors, letting the children arrange their tables in the classroom themselves, allowing them to just stand up and do something else during class if they choose to, teaching and learning in the forest etc. - there are whole books about this. And they clearly show that these concepts are far better than the traditional "swallow that or I beat you!" approach of the other schools - even under today's difficult circumstances.

My point is: There is already some experience we could study and learn from in terms of better approaches to schooling.

Similar to other posters here I feel an "ideal education system" would be a place in a smaller community where children are allowed to learn completely at their own speed, deciding what they are interested in learning in interaction with "elders" or one or more "mentors" - that may be their parents, neighbors, friends - that the child naturally chooses along his path. In short: Allow the child to express his free will!
 
Back
Top Bottom