Will You Do The Job You Have Today Without Money?


I am doing a little poll here.

It would be very interesting to see how many of you would do the work/study you do today even if you didn’t earn any money on it . Maybe you would do exactly the same job. Maybe you would do it with some modifications. Or maybe you wouldn’t do it at all.

I would like you to write a comment below and tell us the following:

  1. Write YES or NO or MAYBE to whether you would do your job/work without money.
  2. Describe your job and explain your answer.
  3. More elaboration if you like. Like, what would you do instead if you wouldn’t do the job you have today.

The premise for the above is of course that we have a resource based economy with no money, trading, barter or ownership, but with access to everything you need to live a good life. Society needs to go around, and some jobs would still be needed. Thus, the jobs we do must preferably be liked by the ones who do them.

Many jobs will be phased out by either it’s own nature (like banking) or by automation. In any case it would be enlightening to see if you have a job you hate or you love, or something in between. And whether your job is really contributing to society or if it can be phased out in a resource based economy, and what you would do instead.

Please share this with your friends also, so they can comment too.

PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTIONS AS THEY ARE NUMBERED. THANK YOU. 


A Conversation About The Venus Project with Jacque Fresco and Roxanne Meadows


YouTube Preview Image

In this interview, Jacque Fresco and Roxanne Meadows of The Venus Project answers some inquisitive questions about everything from design to decision making, with the interviewer playing ‘devils advocate’. The interview aims to get answers to questions not answered before by The Venus Project.

All images and designs in the video is attributed to The Venus Project and Jacque Fresco.

“The Venus Project advocates an alternative vision for a sustainable new world civilization unlike any socio-economic system that has gone before. It calls for a straightforward redesign of a culture, in which the age-old inadequacies of war, poverty, hunger, debt, and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but totally unacceptable.” – The Venus Project

You might also want to see this recording from their lecture in Stockholm 2010: http://www.theresourcebasedeconomy.com/2011/03/the-venus-project-stockholm-lecture-july-2010/

Experience more on their website: www.thevenusproject.com


The Awakening of Humanity


“How can we get a resource based moneyless economy without a global totalitarian dictatorial regime? Wouldn’t we have to kill off populations to preserve resources for others?” Someone asked this recently.

It’s a very good question, and one I’ve been asking myself several times. The only answer I can come up with to this is this:

  1. The global population in general has to have a ‘spiritual awakening’ where we see all people as One, as we see our close family and friends, wanting to share equally with them.
  2. In addition, the ‘no money’ paradigm has to be seen as more beneficial for everyone than the money paradigm we’re in now. People have to share more and more without money, and this praxis has to ‘take over’ from the trading praxis we have today with money.

I can see many evidences for both of these directions today. There is a huge global rising awareness about ‘who we are’, about consciousness, about how our thoughts influence the world, etc., both within and outside science, and there are more and more people doing things ‘for free’ all over the planet. I am thinking about everything from volunteers in, which you find millions of, in all kinds of projects and organizations, free software (like Linux, WordPress, etc. etc.), free information (Wikipedia, + + + + + + ), and free efforts in all kinds of places.

Throughout history, there has been several ‘paradigm shifts’, like when the earth turned from flat to round, or when the earth was not longer the center point of the universe, but actually circled around the sun.

We’ve been living in a ‘money paradigm’ for millennia, and I think we are on the tipping point today. On one hand, money has a bigger stronghold on the planet than ever before, with millions of people in need of money, not knowing about anything else. On the other hand, there’s a strong rising of people wanting to simply share and stop this whole ‘money charade’ and create a moneyless society.

In any case, most people on the earth are fed up today with the situation we are in, and something has to happen. Which way we will fall depends on the totality of the people on this planet. But the more people wake up and become aware of the ‘no money’ possibility, the bigger is the chance that we will get there.

So, I can not see any ‘totalitarian world regime’ controlled by machines. Far from it. What I see, IF we get a no-money-paradigm, is something completely different.

What we have to try to picture is HOW WILL PEOPLE ACT WHEN WE SIMPLY SHARE, RATHER THAN TRADE.

How will people act? And what will the world look like?

Of course, most greed has to be gone, most ego has to be gone. We have to realize that what we do for others we actually do for ourselves. And this can be illustrated well when one person makes an invention that will benefit both her AND society. When someone comes up with an idea to a betterment of something, one usually does that because it is something that one wants oneself. So, to realize this invention through the joint effort of others will of course a very exiting thing. It has got nothing to do with money. The same goes for art, or food, or basically everything you can imagine. Creating and sharing something and taking part in this is what it is all about. Not hoarding, competing and trading. This is a game we have played for so long. Now it is time to change.

People think that ‘we need money’. They live in this mindset and that is why everything is the way it is on this planet right now. The so-called ‘scarcity’ is money based. There is no real scarcity, and there definitely is no need to ‘kill off’ parts of our population to ‘save resources’. All of these thoughts are based in the old money mindset. There’s more than enough land, water, food and resources on this planet for everyone and then some. I have to say it again; ALL scarcity is money based. All scarcity is PERCEIVED. The system NEEDS us to feel this scarcity for the system to stay alive. If we were to wake up and realize that there’s abundance all around us, and that with our own minds, we can create more of this abundance, the system would simple cease to exist. And of course, the system doesn’t want that.

‘Famine’ is economically based, not environmentally. Today, we have the ability to change, design and help nature give us it’s best, and at the same time create sustainability. We can produce food for everyone, there’s no doubt about that. 50% of all food is thrown away today. And this is because of our economic system, the monetary based market system. It is because food needs to be sold to those who have money. If is was simply given away instead, based on who needed it, one could streamline the distribution 100% without waste. This is but one example of the wasteful system we have today.

The capitalistic system produces more waste than any other system on this planet. Which means that without this system, but RBE instead, the resources we HAVE will go a whole lot longer. That’s the point of RBE. It is resource based, not money based. There IS enough resources for everyone WHEN they are managed properly.

Instead of hundreds of TV and computer producers competing with each other, releasing hundreds of new models each year, each model doing almost exactly the same, and depleting resourced needed to produce these models, a resource based economy would never let that happen. In RBE, we would rather produce ONE model, the best. Or maybe 5 models, of say different sizes, to cater for some different needs. But we don’t need one model WITH USB, and one model without. ALL models would have USB, if you see what I mean. There are minuscule differences on different models of products today, only to give the manufacturers more to sell, and the consumers (it’s a shame we are called ‘consumers’) a so-called ‘choice’. In RBE, we would focus on producing the best, most efficient solutions for everything. We would focus on not producing any waste, and make lasting products for all people of the planet to enjoy for a much much longer time than today.

So, what will society be like when people wake up from this mindset? If people woke up, say, tomorrow, what would happen…?

Well, that is many things. With a ‘no money’, ‘no property’, mindset based on sharing, accessibility, compassion and real resources instead of trading, competition, ownership and fake money, we would:

  1. Close down all banks and other so-called ‘financial institutions’.
  2. Get rid of the so-called ‘government’ and develop a direct computer aided democracy instead, to take care of real needs, rather than fake ‘money needs’.
  3. Start to survey what we actually have in terms of resources on this planet. Both human, animalistic, plants and minerals. Both locally and globally.
  4. Start to make sure everyone has what they need in terms of food, housing, clothing, medicine, etc.
  5. Start to develop new more efficient and automated distribution systems.
  6. Start to develop and use new sustainable energy and materials.
  7. Start to respect each other more and more.
  8. See this planet as ONE HOME for everyone, and think in terms of all people on this planet, rather than ‘this country’ and ‘that country’.
  9. Get rid of all artificial borderlines.
  10. Get rid of all military.
  11. Start to organize ourselves based on need, want, skills and abilities, rather that ‘heritage, race, money and greed’.
  12. Educate everyone about real and important aspects of life.
  13. Not get too many children, knowing that we have to stay within the caring capacity of the planet.
  14. Not need to punish each other, but rather help each other reach our full potential and get well of any disease.
  15. Work together to develop the best technology for the planet and everyone.
  16. Still have ‘jobs’, some more desirable than others, which of course depends on your interests, but be able to change ‘job’ more often, and do tasks that are really fulfilling, because you will know that what you do is actually needed here on the planet.
  17. Utilize this planet and this world to work for everyone in every way, everywhere.

When we truly get out of our money mindset, this is all feasible. Not only feasible, but desirable and the best we can all experience. ‘When we all share, we all get more’. Instead of being limited to ‘one car each’, we could have automated cars (Google have developed that already) that we can simply order when we need it. Much fewer cars would be needed, and we would all have access to a whole lot more cars!

Access, rather than ownership would be the new value, when people really open their eyes. Instead of ‘owning land’, we could use land where and when we need it. We could travel anywhere we want. We could move to anywhere we want and live anywhere we want. We could basically DO anything we want, as long as we all live in this NEW MINDSET. As long as MOST PEOPLE live in this ego-, money- and propertyless mindset, this mindset of giving, sharing and collaboration, this world will change automagically based on this mindset.

This whole blog is about ‘what it will be like’ and ‘how society will work’. This blog is about visualizing this new society, keeping a steady focus on this until we get there, and then keep focussing and creating. Not focussing on what we don’t want. We have to constantly imagine, visualize and focus on what we want in order to get there.

These new times is not about ‘grabbing positions’, ‘running in the rat race’ or ‘competing for resources’. No, these new times is about realizing that every little thing I do, I do not only for myself, but for everyone. For everyone to benefit. Even if it is me making myself a better person in any way, this will also benefit others and the whole. When everyone benefits from what I do, I will benefit too. In a much much higher degree than ever before, because it will all be free. For everyone. Even the richest of today will be freer, since they too will benefit from this new society. A society where true collaboration and sharing is possible and where everyone can travel freely everywhere and contribute anywhere it is needed.

It is about doing things for the joy of doing them. Just like I do now. I write this because I enjoy using my mind to visualize this new world. Not for money. Not for any egotistical reasons. Not even to be credited, as I even do this anonymously. I write this because I believe this world will be a better world to live in. Both for me, and for everyone else. And everything written here I share freely for anyone to copy.

So, in answer to the question I would say that this new world will not work through any dictatorship of any kind. No, it will be created through the awakening of Humanity, and work through self governance, with people deciding over their own lives wherever they might live, or want to live. And it has to be based on the notion that ‘it is better to share and collaborate than to trade and compete’. This notion has to be the NEW BASIC VALUE, like money and trading is the basic value today.

It has to be like this: Instead of the majority of people thinking ‘what’s in it for me’, the majority has to start thinking ‘what’s in it for all of us, both locally and globally’. This mindset has to WIN, somehow.

Many people think this way already today, working ‘for free’ on projects, but they haven’t realized that it might be possible to build a world totally with this mindset. Even those people; volunteers, developers of free software, artists, doctors that work for free, etc. etc. think that ‘yes, I suppose we need money to build roads, hospitals and schools and to pay for resources, teachers, doctors and nurses’ and so on. Actually, most people don’t even think this. Most people think of money and ownership as AIR: It is something that’s always been here, that always will be here, and that we can’t live without. Most people doesn’t really think about the possibility that we can live without money. It doesn’t occur to them. It didn’t occur to me either, until I heard about TVP and TZM a couple of years ago.

Now I see these ideas are spreading like an unstoppable wildfire. Projects are popping up everywhere. New thoughts are emerging. More resources are shared. More people are collaborating.

As you can see, the new ‘no money’ mindset will change this world so drastically in itself, that it is difficult to imagine exactly what it will look like in praxis. But if you imagine a world where the emphasis lies on global cooperation, rather than competition, global sharing, rather than hoarding, free travel, rather than restricted, a focus on fast development of new efficient technology, rather than sticking with old outdated models, global and local direct democracy, rather than fake politics, and compassion rather than cynicism, well, then you’ve come a long way in picturing this world.

And if you’ve read this far, you’ll probably be interested in seeing this:

YouTube Preview Image

 


What is a Resource Based Economy?


Resource Based Economy
–noun
1. An economic system or theory of social organization that advocates a system of commodity distribution without the use of capital, credits, energy certificates, barter or any other artificial medium which denotes value.
2. A school of thought in Natural Resource Economics
3. Any of two theories of systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is not centrally planned by humans.

4. (In Directivist Theory) The Resource Based Economy is built on the model of National Consumer Cooperative run by Direct Proportional Voting. With all maintenance and development aspects of the systems of social sustainability carried out by Technical Teams who are Directly and Proportionally Elected by the people.

5. (In Mechnocratic Theory) The Resource Based Economy is centrally manage by Cybernated systems. All maintenance and development aspects of the systems of social sustainability are carried out by Technical Teams who are appointed through Cybernated Appointment.
*Quick FYI Promethean Workers Association (PWA) is the originators of The Directivist model of a Resource Based Economy while The Venus Project and Zeitgeist Movement are the originators of The Mechnocratic model of a Resource Based Economy.
Resource Based Economy in detail; A comparison and contrast of the similarities and differences between Directivism and Mechnocracy.

SIMILARITIES

Both Directivist and Mechnocratic theories advocate ending the monetary (money) system, banking, and private ownership of resources.

Both theories would create a new economic system which would be divided into Resource Management Centers, Production Centers, and Drstribution Centers.

Both theories see rampant greed, and comsumerism as the main cause of a society that lacks social sustainability.

DIFFERENCES

Mechnocracy supports total 100% cybernation of all systems of social sustainability. Directivists support an Equilibrium or balance a 50|50 so as to keep cybernated systems from becoming a cybernated bureacracy.

Mechnocracy relies on Unelected Cybernated Central Planning to completely manage the economy. Directivism relies on a combination of Democratically Elected Technical Teams working with some level of cybernation to manage the economy.

Mechnocracy is based on The Modern Scientific Method developed less then 500 Years ago. Directivism is based on The Ancient Scientific Method Developed 10,000+ years ago and used by the many great ancient civilizations of the ancient world.

Mechnocracy see’s most Metaphysical ideas and notions as backwards and outdated. Directivism believes that many ancient notions discovered by mystics have merit and should be investigated by modern mainstream science.

Directivists believe that any notion or idea of the absoluteness of physical reality beyond all doubt is unscientific and denies the fact that quantum physics proves there is more to reality then what can be observed. Mechnocrats believe in the absoluteness of physical matter and the physical universe beyond all reasonable doubt and unscientifically deny any possibility its not absolute.

Directivists believe in supporting the betterment and personal development of individuals as part of the ground work needed to create a social enlightenment required for a Resource Based Economy. Mechnocrats strictly believe that genetic improvement is the only sort of individual improvement and betterment needed.

Directivists believe that either society will collapse into chaos or that a revolution carried out by the people can bring about a Resource Based Economy. Mechnocrats rely completely on the idea that society will simply and iminently collapse in on itself.

For More Information on the differences between both systems visit: TheResourceBasedEconomy.ORG


What is Directivism?


DIRECTIVISM

-NOUN
1. A theory or system of social organization that advocates the elimination of all forms of currency as well as advocating the Direct and Proportional Democratic management of resources as common heritage of all children of mother earth; creating abundant automated distribution of all commodities and services to all people equally.
2. The creation of a resource based economic system built around the model of a national consumer cooperative.
3. (in Directivist theory) The Dharmic stage of society following the Capitalist and Communist Monetary societies that dominated The Age of Pisces. Directivism is a transition from Monetarism towards The Dharmic, Enlightened, Ascended, and Transcended Societies.

DIRECTIVIST

-NOUN
1. An advocate of Directivism.
2. A Directivist is a member of a group that advocates Directivism.

-ADJECTIVE
3. Of, promoting, or practicing Directivism.
4. Directivist Of, belonging to, or constituting a Directivist group.

Directivism in detail; Directivism as stated is a new theory that favors an end to Material Obsession and Attachment. In the current Aeon of Pisces we see a sickness that has over taken humanity. This sickness is materialism, and the symptoms are attachment to things that are temporary and not long lasting. In this Aeon people are more concerned with obtaining material things and temporary material satisfaction then developing their consciousness. Further this rampant materialism symbolized by money and banking has cut us off from our natural connection to each other and to mother earth. Directivists believe that we are all one people who are children of a great mother the earth. We believe the earth has given us many gifts which have been stolen from us by politicians and sold to individuals who horde them for personal gain. For example food is constantly being horded, supermarkets are filled with food yet there is still people who go hungry. When food goes unsold it is simply thrown away, it doesn’t go to feed the hungry because they don’t have a piece of paper called money in hand to get it. Directivists believe as long as money exists things like Homelessness and Hunger will always exist. For Directivists the solution is to simply eliminate the banks, corporations, financial institutions, and money and create an economic system based on the DIRECT and INTELLIGENT management of RESOURCES.

Under a Resource Based Economic model such as Directivism all the resources of Mother Earth shall be managed in a Direct and Proportionally Democratic manner. Meaning that all production would occur in relation to the actual demand of what is wanted. All citizens would hold Direct Democratic Authority over the means of production. Production itself would be automated in a way that’s in harmony with the earth and facilitation committees would act as the ultimate oversight to keep automation and cybernated systems under control. All Input, Output, Distribution, and Recycling process of production would become automated with machines crunching the numbers with human oversight. With society as a whole oriented towards a state of harmony with one another a new set of social priorities would set in. Humanity would once again be free to pursue Higher Knowledge and Quest for Enlightened Consciousness an eternal search that has always been the characteristic of humanity as a whole. Our nature is curiosity and it is modern day materialist society telling us to shop, Shop, Shop that has convinced us that we don’t need to seek higher knowledge. A Directivist advocates this pursuit of knowledge and self betterment over a consumer mentality. A Directivist seeks answers beyond just what things like the Scientific Method can provide. For Directivists The Scientific Method can only provide answers based on what we can see. For The Directivist the Intuitive Method of actual and direct experience leads to Rationalization, Understanding, and Conclusion. Just as the Scientific Method of Observation, Theory, Evidence, also leads to Conclusion its probably for this reason that in India The Intuitive Method was used to discover Gravity centuries before it was discovered by The Observed (Scientific) Method. For the Directivist the ideal future is an enlightened one that is free of all the monetary ideas such as Monarchy, Capitalism, Mercantilism, Communism, Socialism, Fascism, etc. which governed The Age of Pisces. For The Directivist dreams of the next Aeon of Aquarius being the Age of a Dharmic Directivist society which can give rise to an Enlightened and Ascended Age of humanity unified and seeking Global Transcendence. The Directivist believes Money creates Hate, Fear and Envy, while the ideal Directivist Society creates Loving Compassion. The Directivist seeks to nurture the positive emotions of humanity and divorce all the negative emotions which are characteristic of this Aeon. If this sounds like you then perhaps you’re a Directivist!

www.TheResourceBasedEconomy.org


Spirituality, Technology, and Sustainability


Spirituality, Technology, and Sustainability
(Open Response to The Zeitgeist Movement)

What follows here is a response to three of the six understandings of The Zeitgeist Movement as they appeared on November 28th of 2009. Our purpose here is to facilitate an open dialogue, discussion, and reach an understanding of sorts on the three topics choosen. We are not against the idea of a Resource Based Economy by any means. We find the development of this form of Natural Resource Economics to be quite a progressive step forward however as with an economic system there’s more then one way to apply it. Further we’d note that not all followers of The Zeitgeist Movement adhere to “The Party Line” in regards to these three topics. Further we will show how its not necessary either to Dogmatically hold up The Modern Scientific Method as infallible gospel. In fact as we point out in “A Science of Intuition by Sidney Martinez” the Modern Scientific Method and Ancient Scientific Method are two different things. We will of course delve into these things in detail through the course of the following polemical work. We will quote the original text and respond to each point made with our analysis.

Spirituality

{Spirituality has a different meaning to each of us, it seems. A standard definition would be: “A sense of meaning and purpose; a sense of self and of a relationship with ‘that which is greater than self”.}

It would actually be more accurate to say Spiritualism is a sense of “Ultimate Reality” and a persons place or relationship in that sort of ultimate reality. To pigeon hole all spiritualism as “that which is greater then self” is to imply that all Spiritual systems have a divine conception similar to that of Orthodox Judeo-Christian Religions. To those belief systems they see the Divine as something separate from the self or the individual. To them God is a separate consciousness and masculine patriarch sitting on a throne and judging all of our actions. However for Gnostic’s, Buddhists, Hindu’s, Shinto’s, and most Shamanic and Natural belief systems there is no such thing as “that which is greater then self”. The Self and Greater Self are not regarded as two separate or distinct things but rather one unified whole. So in conclusion your opening assertion is a quite fallacious broad generalization.

{Currently, Religion and Mysticism seem to have the monopoly on Spirituality. Theistic religion often regards a ‘relationship with god’ or divine creator, as a spiritual relationship, while Mystics will often find a relationship to a ‘supernatural’ force or power.}

Again we see a broad sweeping generalization which seems to be born of ignorance of what Natural Religions, Spiritualists, and Animists actually believe. While it is true that Orthodox-Abrahamic and all Literalistic based Religions promote a relationship with The Demi-Urge as something spiritual. Fact is mystics don’t seek a relationship with anything that exists outside of themselves or beyond themselves. In fact mystics will generally look for a God or Goddesses inside themselves and only use those terms externally as a name for a particular process. Heck modern astronomers do it to how many stars do you think are named after someone’s significant other or perhaps another loved one? This supernatural force or power of which you speak is really just subtle energy produced by the bodies varied emotional states. We know emotions effect us in both positive or negative ways and we know those same emotions effect people around us, animals, plants, and even water. This subtle energy of course is caused by certain unseen chemicals and particles that the intuitive mind knows are there. Yet the intuitive mind can’t see them physically so they are given the label of Subtle Energy. The problem is mainstream science has yet to bring these unseen particles into the realm of the observable so its written off as a bunch of Pseudo-Science. One fact we can both agree on for sure is that we only perceive a fraction of what actually exists in the universe with our eye’s the rest can’t be physically observed yet. Of course mystics are just trying to explain through Scientific Intuition what takes up the rest of the universe we can’t see observably and can’t test with The Modern Scientific Method.

{The bottom line is that, almost universally, spirituality has to do with a ‘relationship’ on one level or another. In most perspectives, it is associated with a person’s ‘place’ or ‘meaning’ in life… whatever that may be.}

No in only a very few perspectives which only account for about less then 30% of the religions that actually exist or have existed in the world is this relationship with an external divinity or force the standard of dogma. In Gnostic notions the focus tends to be on unifying one’s consciousness with their higher self, that self that has been separated from them by society’s material notions. In fact the general view is that the spiritual world exists inside of every individual at deeper levels then the physical world. Some even see it as a cosmic Word or Logos which is like a vibration or sound that originated with the big bang and continues to vibrant and animate all matter across the entire universe. Not so mystical when one speaks of what was the first sound in the universe and would it even have been audible?

{As subjective as these things can be, we begin to recognize changes in these notions, for social progress tends to carve a path for understandings that stand the test of time. In the modern age, we have the ability to look far in our past and examine what our ancestors used to consider ‘real’, and then compare those ideas to what we understand today. Many “spiritual practices” which have existed in the past, no longer exist due the understandings that have come about in regard to natural phenomenon.}

First off many “spiritual practices” which have existed in the past were wiped out by religion. Anyone who didn’t practice the spiritual practices deemed holy by the church was burned at the stake. However many should be curious what these spiritual practices, that are no longer relevant your referring too are. Meditation and variations of it such as Tai-Chi, Yoga, and Qi Gong all have been making a come back. It has been proven that people who use these methods attain better focus, health, clearer minds, negative emotions are also expelled. In fact the people who developed these things all knew one cold hard fact, which is that if you want to change the world you must start by teaching individuals to improve themselves. Other practices of the ancient spiritualists included the development of a theory of gravity in India 2000 years earlier then Sir Isaac Newton. An ancient Egyptian Steam Engine used to open temple doors, ancient batteries such as the Baghdad Battery, Sanitation, Medicine, Automatons, Accurate Clocks, and various other primitive spiritual practices as you call them. A fact you can’t deny is that all these things were invented by the so-called spiritual practices you keep trying to write off and pigeon hole as primitive. Further they had both an Intuitive and Material understanding of Observable and Unobservable Natural phenomenon. Unlike you they could see it from both sides and not based on some Dogmatic Materialist Scientific Method. Quite frankly the Ancient Scientific Method was much more advanced then the Modern Scientific Method you tout as the great salvation of all mankind. Whats more is this view point of labeling the ancient societies backwards and primitive well that notion was cooked up by the church. It was used as social propaganda on the people so they wouldn’t know that people used to have sanitation, or any sort of technology which made their lives better. They wanted the people of Dark Ages and Middle Ages to think things had been worse before the church and religious domination. These notions your expanding about ancient societies quite frankly are just a rehashing of dark ages church propaganda. Quite odd for a movement that believes religion produces nothing but false hope and social propaganda.

{As a base example, early religions often ‘sacrificed’ animals for certain purposes… this rarely happens today, as the relevance of such an act has proven pointless in its desired effect. Likewise, rarely do people perform ‘rain dances’ in order to influence the weather… today we understand how weather patterns are created, and ritual practices have no provable effect.}

For your information the religions that sacrificed animals tended to be semitic. Native Americans on the other hand usually thanked the earth for providing them the animal and thanked the animals spirit for giving them nourishment. While you may sit there and say this is bogus outdated spiritualism truth is they were simply embracing and being thankful every day to life, to the earth, and to each other for what they had. This is something any society which treasurers the resources of the earth as our common heritage would do. As for the animal sacrifices themselves those actually stopped because the ruling priestly caste of the Hyksos no longer found it to be a useful social control mechanism.

As for “Rain Dances” they were more of a festival and celebration native people’s held as a way of keeping up good morale during droughts. A way of saying gosh darn remember when it used to rain? Sometimes it rained afterwards and sometimes it didn’t and when it didn’t everyone understood that it just wasn’t meant to happen. Its obvious your completely ignorant of Native American culture and have no clue of native practices and rituals and what they mean. This interpretation of what a Rain Dance is seems to be coming from Hollywood and not any Native American elders you’ve actually gone and spoken too at the reservation. Further have you proven beyond a reasonable doubt that ritual practices have no effect? How many experiments have you run on the subject? How many rituals and subjects taking part in ritual did you study? Where’s the data proving this assertion? If your going to tout The Modern Scientific Method so highly why not use it to prove your assertions? we’re not saying Rain Dances can change the weather here what’s being said is you can’t make such a claim as Rain Dances have no effect until you can prove that beyond a reasonable doubt.

{Similarly, the idea of ‘praying’ to a god for a particular request, has also statistically proven to have little effect on an outcome,}

How is praying to a god the same as a ritual/ celebration?

{not to mention the evidence to support a personified creator doesn’t exist in any scientific way…rather it is often derived from ancient historical literary speculation and tradition.}

Well the idea of a personified creator is only as old as the church and it developed out of a literalistic view of scripture. Ancient Gods and Goddesses were Effigies related to Astronomical bodies and the stories associated with each were stories of people who may have existed at one point. Those actual people were thought to have the traits of the particular Gods or Goddesses they were associated with. The Avatars were just people who did things that inspired stories. So in fact the ancient historical literary speculation and tradition you speak of is again another assertion that ancient societies were more backwards then dark age societies.

{Establishment Religion, in many ways, seems to be rooted in a perceptual misunderstanding about life’s processes. For instance, it presents a world view which often puts the human on a different level than other elements of nature. This ‘spiritual ego’ has led to dramatic conflicts for generations, not only between human beings, but inadvertently between us and the environment itself.}

Again this statement seems to pigeon hole all spiritualism together into the same boat. Just one of the many hasty generalizations to be found throughout The Zeitgeist Movements what should be labeled “Misunderstandings” rather then Understandings. An understanding is usually what takes place when a person has thoroughly researched a topic and has studied it. So far there doesn’t seem to be any actual understanding of spirituality just a bunch of fallacious logic.

Also to reiterate the point not all spiritualism has created conflicts between us and the environment itself. If you were talking about Literalistic-Based-Abrahamic-Faiths then your claim would be accurate, however since your making no distinctions here the statement is incorrect. Further it begs the question of how has Buddhism, Shinto, Shamanism, Hinduism, Wicca, Taoism, etc. caused conflict between us and the environment itself?

{However, as time has moved forward, Science has shown how human beings are subject to the exact same forces of nature as everything else. We have learned that we all share the same atomic substructure as trees, birds and all other forms of life.}

Atoms were first discovered by The Greeks a bunch of mystics and pagans who had knowledge of mechanical engineering. So a more accurate statement then what you made would be that a bunch of Dogmatic tooters of The Modern Scientific rediscovered Atoms. In fact who knows just how far along The Greeks were in their studies of Atomic Structures, most of the knowledge of the ancient world was burned at the library of Alexandria. Yet what has survived of the ancient knowledge tells us that many of the Pagan societies of the past believe we shared the same energy as all other forms of life. Now you may call that mystic but fact is Atom’s are energetic hence (E=MC2) meaning everything is made up of energy. So anyone in the ancient world could conclude that we are all made up of the same universal force or energy. Because this mystical force as you called it earlier just means energy a force is like a current and energy is a current.

{We have learned that we cannot live without nature’s elements… we need clean air to breathe, food to eat, energy from the sun, etc. When we understand this Symbiotic relationship of life, we begin to see that as far as ‘relationships’ are concerned, our relationship to the planet is the most profound and important.}

So when did we learn this exactly according to you? It would seem your implying we didn’t learn this till the 1900’s. Pagan societies, Native American societies, and all Natural Religions around the world learned these facts about 10,000 – 8,000 years ago. In the west those facts were suppressed by the Literalistic Church so that Merchant Corpus’s (Corporations) and Equestrian Consortium’s (Banks) could keep the common people ignorant while they generated great amounts of capital. This is why Gnostic Christians, and Pagans were slaughtered by the early Literalistic Christians. So the Literalists could become the dominating faction of Christianity and create the church according to their patriarchal ambitions.

{The medium by which this is expressed, is Science, for the Scientific Method has allowed us insight into these natural processes, so we can better understand how we ‘fit’ into this life system as a whole.
This could be called a ‘spiritual’ awakening.}

Long before The Modern Scientific Method came around there was an Ancient Scientific Method used by Ancient Scientists whom you call “Mystics”. The Modern Scientific Method your Dogmatically pushing should more accurately be called The Observed Method since it relies solely on what can be seen. It was created on the assumption that the physical/ observable world is all that exists and nothing beyond it can exist. Yet what were finding more and more in Quantum Physics is that things beyond the physical and observable world do in fact exist. Right now you’d be on a very slippery slope saying that Physical Matter is all that exists and nothing can exist beyond it. Which if you do believe that we challenge you to create an experiment proving that the physical world beyond a reasonable doubt is all that exists. After all if your going to tout this observed method as absolute your going to need to develop an experiment to first prove the physical world, in which your conducting your experiments is actually here. Further your going to need to prove that the data developed from these experiments isn’t going to be biased by the eyes or the brain that interprets what the eyes are seeing. In fact any data you generate is already technically in the past there is no such thing as a “Real Time” experiment. Quite frankly how you can call this any sort of awakening is absurd a true awakening is reaching the skeptical viewpoint that nothing is absolute. In fact not even the physical world should be taken as absolute. After all a true skeptical scientist knows physical matter is not to be regarded in an absolute sense. A skeptical person maybe spiritual or maybe simply like Albert Einstein and regard the question of god as too complicated of a question for the human mind to ever fathom or comprehend. Of course this would mean that no book written by any human can ever answer those questions at best all they can do is offer different views on the subject. No one book or philosophy should ever be taken as absolute or the answer all book or notion including Scientific Materialism should be taken absolutely.

Albert Einstein himself was very fond of Eastern Mysticism such as Buddhism and Hinduism its obvious Einstein used the Ancient Scientific Method to make the discoveries he did. His method was both Intuition and Observation on the side of Intuition his proofing worked with Experienced Phenomenon, Understanding, Rationalization, and Conclusion and from that he worked at the Observable Level; which you call The Scientific Method. Fact is The Modern Scientific Method would be more complete and better equipped to solve social problems if it embraced Intuition as part of itself. To this end the truly Scientific Method would be “The Einstein Method” the perfect marriage of Intuition and Observation.

{This realization, which has been proven by science, is that humans are no different from any other form of nature, while our integrity is only as good as the integrity of our environment, to which we are a part. This understanding presents an entirely different ‘spiritual’ world view, for it forces the idea of interdependence and connection, at its core.}

This realization was also the reality of ancient cultures. Its just that as monetarism became the new dominating factor the old Spiritualism was phased out.

{The interconnection of the whole of life is undeniable in the most basic sense, and it is this perpetual ‘relationship’ of total interconnectivity that is not fully realized by society overall. Thus, our modes of conduct and perception are largely out of line with nature itself… and hence destructive.
Nature itself is our teacher, and our social institutions and philosophies should be derived from this foundational and, invariably, ‘spiritual’ understanding.
The faster this spiritual awakening spreads, the more sane, peaceful and productive society will become.}

What you speak of is not a spiritual awakening but a dominance of your dogmatic view overtaking everything else. It is true that everything is interconnected but every single assertion you’ve made throughout your so called understanding of Spiritualism was spawned by ignorance of spiritualism. Why don’t you actually speak to experts on these other viewpoints before you go around creating such obvious Straw men, Hasty Generalizations, and Pigeon Holes.

Technology and Sustainability

In this section we’re going to focus on the most blatant Mis Understandings as well as some points of agreement. Mainly because this document is getting much longer then was intended. So to keep it simple we’re going to selectively take text and respond to it. Anyone who gets a copy of this in booklet form is welcomed to go read for themselves the complete text itself mainly so nothing is taken out context. You can of course find it on Zeitgeist Movement’s homepage under Understandings. If that section is updated for whatever reason and specific lines changed we’ll keep an on line archive of it as it appeared on November 28th 2009 at www.thenewaeon.org and now on to the business of analysis.

{As time has moved forward, human beings have become more and more aware of nature, its processes, and thus have been able to derive inference about how to imitate nature in all its creative glory.
The result has been Technology, which is what separates us humans from the other species as far as functionality.}

On the one hand this seems obvious but here’s a question few consider. Some maybe familiar with experiments which allow wireless communications between a persons mind and a computer. Now tell me what aspect of nature is that mirroring exactly? Perhaps something the brain can already naturally do on its own? I suppose more study would be required to determine that beyond a reasonable doubt one way or the other. Either way it until its studied it would be illogical to draw absolute conclusions on the subject one way or the other.

{At the beginning of the Industrial Age, a great majority of people worked in factories. Today, automation comprises 90% of nearly all factories. This has displaced humans and created a large, artificial “service” industry in order to keep humans in employment for money.}

Absolutely true in fact money is in truth beginning to hold back scientific advances and development. Only the centralization of the ability to produce currency and the centralization of the ownership of debt built on the creation of money has been able to keep things moving forward. In East Asia for example the need to centralize debt and money in to the hands of fewer banking entities has created a surge of productivity. In the West the manufacturing base has all but disappeared and War seems to be the only thing able to stimulate economic growth.

{This pattern is very revealing. The implication is that machine automation is constantly challenging the role of general human labor. This doesn’t mean that humans will have “nothing to do” as time moves on. Quite the contrary… this implication denotes the freeing of humanity from jobs which humans do not care to engage in, so they will have time to pursue what they choose to.}

Again this is also true technology has the capacity to free us from the dictatorship that are workplaces.

{if human beings were not “required” to do something, they would just sit around, be lazy, and do nothing. This is absurd propaganda.

The notion of “leisure” is a monetary invention, created because of the oppressive, fascist basis of the employment institution itself. Laziness is, in fact, a form of rejection of the system.}

Once again we are on the same page here productivity does not need to be synonymous with being a wage slave. One can be just as productive painting, or creating philosophy just because a persons labor does not generate excess exploitable value i.e. profits doesn’t make them unproductive.

{In a true society, there would be no such thing as the separation of “work and “leisure”, for humans should be allowed to pursue whatever they feel is relevant.}

Which goes to that old saying of doing what you enjoy doing. If you enjoy your job then its not really work now is it? In an ideal society everyone could have a chance to learn advanced sciences. Not just in a boring lecture with books and memorization either. The world would be the classroom and everyone could learn on the job as an apprentice to whatever it is they liked. Practical learning through application coupled with centers of Socratic Learning where critical thought and analysis is how students learn.

{To put it a different way, consider the curiosity and interest of a child. He or she doesn’t even know what money is…Do they need to be motivated by money to go out and explore/create? No. They have a personal interest and they pursue it without reward.}

Exactly this underlines the most basic point of all which is “The Motor Force of History is Curiosity” or simply put the pursuit of knowledge drives human society forward. Which means humans are not driven to develop because of the need to produce more material things but rather because they are curious and want more time to nurture that curiosity. Productive forces are only developed to get the basic needs out of the way and create more time to explore and create. The Ideal society nurtures curiosity and creativity and develops the individual into a more enlightened person through natural means such as Meditation rather then through genetic manipulation or something equally unnatural. Of course this isn’t to say genetic engineering shouldn’t be used to eradicate disease, rather whats being said is that technology goes to far when it tries to make test tube babes that are superior to humans made the natural way. Further it would be going too far to create cybernated nurseries as Jacques Fresco has suggested in his book “Looking Forward” . Even though no one would be forced to give up reproducing the natural way you’d still have a new caste system of Meta Humans at the top and Natural Born Humans as second class citizens. Such a system would have a new social division not based on the divisions of the past which were monetary or hereditary based. It would now be on the basis of genetic coding and who has superior code genetic discrimination would tear the society apart.

{In fact, the greatest contributors to our society, such as Einstein, Newton or Galileo, pursued what they did without any regard to money. They did it because they wanted to. The act of doing and contributing was their reward.}

Its funny you should mention Einstein and Newton especially since both of them had what you might call mystical leanings. Albert Einstein we discussed earlier in this document, so we’ll just talk about Sir Isaac Newton. Newton was an Alchemist, which is basically a Scientist who uses The Ancient Scientific Method aka Einstein Method. Both him and Einstein made the contributions they did because they were skeptical of the material world and saw no reason to be attached to Materialist Conceptions such as Money, which is the most vulgar of all Materialist notions. Of course The Modern Scientific Method as you Dogmatically apply it is another form of Materialism its just not as vulgar as Monetarism is.

{if one steps back far enough, it becomes clear that Technological development is the most important institution we have and the pursuit of socially helpful technology(not weapons) should be the highest priority of the culture.}

Of course Technological development goes all the way back to The Greeks and Chinese. As far as weapons are concerned many of them were never intended to be used as such. The first weapons axes were used to gather fire wood to keep warm, it was quickly discovered that those same tools could be used in hunting and self defense. Spears was another weapon developed and used by early humans to hunt just like the bow and arrow. Each one of these was a tool at first and then later a weapon. Even swords could be used to hunt even if thats not the reason for their development. Its only in the hands of those with power that they become weapons of warfare. Even the Chinese who invented gun powder didn’t create it as a weapon at first.

Guns which were developed as weapons, yet Guns can also be used for hunting which means they could have just easily been developed for hunting. Again we see that not all weapons are simply weapons some are also tools. Now cannons we can obviously agree that such a weapon has no practical or socially beneficial use value. You can’t even argue that a cannon is for self defense its nothing but a weapon of war same thing as Nuclear Arms again these have no social use value unless converted into power plants. In the future laser guns could still have use value even though in the wrong hands they could be weapons of war. In the right hands they would make excavations, quarrying, and many other jobs all that much easier.

{what the public fails to understand is that science is not just a tool… it is a near universal functionality which can be applied to society in ways many would not think about.}

Here’s a perfect example of where you get Dogmatic with The Modern Scientific Method. If Dogma like this is going to be the basis of your movement how can you ever expect to create an ideal society. Its almost as if your trying to create a Scientific Materialist Theocracy.

{It seems obvious that technology improves our lives and serves as the greatest liberator of human life in the material realm… so why aren’t its methods applied to society as a whole?}

Well Scientific Materialism is not the basis of society as a whole at the moment Religious Materialist still control many aspects of society. So at the moment it seems Religious Materialists control the past and Scientific Materialists are striving to control the future. I’m sure a good religious slogan for your new Dogma of Scientific Materialism could be something like “Science Be Praised!” or “Praise Almighty Science!” or even “Science is great!”. All of those could be useful in building a religion around Scientific Materialism.

{Obviously, the scientific method is used constantly for isolated systems, but it has never been truly considered in the broadest ways. This is largely due to age old superstitions which battle the logic of science in favor of a dogmatic, outdated and highly romanticized world view.}

Likewise The Einstein Method aka Ancient Scientific Method has never been considered in the broadest ways either. This is largely due to 2000 year old Religious Materialism and 200 year old Scientific Materialism both are of course forms of Materialist philosophy and notions.

{Obviously, we cannot build a society from scratch but the point is clear. It is time we stop thinking about monetary concerns and limitations, and begin to think about the possibilities we have here on earth in the broadest sense.

It is this interest that has created the concept of a ‘Resource Based Economy’.}

No we cannot build a new society from scratch we must utilize the resources we have. Again it is true that we must move beyond monetary concerns and limitations. However what your claiming here is that Resource Based Economics emerged from Scientific Materialism and that it is attached to Scientific Materialism at the hip. The fact of the matter is that Resource Based Economics is an extension or school of Natural Resource Economics. Nowhere do you mention that its derived from Natural Resource Economics you claim Jacques Fresco invented it out of thin air one day. Which is really on par with the fact that Al Gore invented the Internet both claims are equally absurd.

{The Venus project has been working on this concept for a long time and its foundation is very simple.}

Yes they have been however The Resource Based Economy itself is only one component of the ideology of The Venus Project.
{We survey, preserve and maximize our use of planetary resources in conjunction with open information and technological development.}
Which on the surface is good its just the technological part that your not fully explaining. Sure machines can crunch numbers for us on resources and monitor them as well. However they don’t need to be artificially intelligent or left to make complex decisions regarding resources. Rather their should always be humans involved in decision making regarding the resources not a cybernated mechanical bureaucracy.
{In this view, little is left to subjective interpretation, for it is a scientifically derived strategy for social construction at the very core.}
It would be more accurate to say that yours which is Venus Projects interpretation of it is based on Scientific Materialism. What The Venus Project ends up with is a model for a Resource Based Economy that has been merged with a Mechnocracy. A system in which everyone is eventually submitted to a Cybernated Bureaucracy. Sure states that are human run would disappear but in their place your talking about creating self aware machines that learn and adapt to take their place. Further your saying these machines will be in charge of selecting teams to maintain and repair them. First off who in the world elected the Cybernated Bureaucracy as Dictators for life? Its not machines were against here its Artificial Intelligence thats the problem. We don’t need machines to think for us or make decisions for us I don’t care if they count calories for me, or crunch any other numbers for us as a society. But its a very slippery slope to say that governments won’t be needed when in truth your creating a new type of government a MECHNOCRACY. The Resource Based Economy itself is a great idea the native Americans had this type of Natural Resource Economy and many other tribal and ancient societies had variations of Natural Resource Economies. The Sioux people’s had a Confederated System meshed with a Resource Based Economic system. The Ancient Jomon people’s of Japan had a Resource Based Economy that was meshed with a Mageocracy or enlightened rule by a council of mystics. Both were systems based on Management and distribution of resources as common heritage of the people. Of course Marxists would try to claim those societies as ancient Communism but none of them were Monetary based. They did require a system of trade and exchange within the Confederation or Mageocracy’s region. Nowadays however machines can of course crunch numbers for us and things can be automatically exchanged for other things in other regions. Its fine to automate the trade aspects required to run a Resource Based Economy. The problem however is total Cybernation of the state aka your Cybernated Mechnocracy only differs from Technocracy in the sense that Cybernated Systems are put in place of The Human Bureaucracy existing in a Technocracy. It seems when Mr. Fresco had his schism with The Technocrats he completely flew to the other extreme of Technocracy and declared Mechnocracy as his alternative. Quite frankly The Venus Project should call their system what it really is MECHNOCRACY!
Fortunately we don’t go to the extremes The Venus Project goes to. Our Resource Based Economy is not meshed with Mechnocracy. Our’s is based upon a Direct Proportional Democracy and not like this false 2 party system we have in America or the Bourgeois Parliamentary Democracy of Europe. Rather ours is quite simply based on the model of a Consumer Cooperative. The economy itself is broken into 3 facets; Resource Management, Manufacturing, and Distribution I’m sure we can both agree these are the three aspects of any economy. In the Venus Project model of course some how Resource Management Centers, Manufacturing Centers, and Distribution Centers emerge. Some how of course being the key word and cybernation would randomly select people to maintain and repair the machinery at each center. Ok that part is clear but there’s no exact plan of transition we on the other hand have one. First off the people should elect Technical Teams to setup each of the 3 centers. A Resource Management Team to go out and audit resources and figure out what sort of machinery needs to be created, a Manufacturing team to setup manufacturing centers, and a Distribution team to figure out how to get resources distributed. The reason is that if these centers are built on the basis of people and real Democratic principles, this would effectively keep a Cybernated Bureaucracy from emerging. A Cybernated Bureaucracy would further develop an absolute Carceral State.
Of course always having people in charge of the machines to fall back on would be important in case for whatever reason power grids go down or technology fails. Or heck even some sort of terrorist decides to launch an EMP attack on your cybernated systems. I mean lets face it at first there is going to be many people who won’t like the change and will resort to individual acts of terrorism. Its bound to happen when society is first transitioning and self defense militia units will need to be there to provide security for the community. Of course never should we yield unchecked defensive powers to a central authority whether it be a Cybernated one or a human one. Whats more is that if the system itself is backed by trained, elected, technical experts you have something you can always fall back on no matter what happens. Nothing we can build even at 100% efficiency is going to be indestructible because no mass of constance lasts forever it all eventually becomes energy once again. Degradation is a natural part of all things that have form in the physical universe. Direct Proportional Democracy comes into play because its the best and most effective way to control production. We should never fully Cybernate systems because then we have machines making decisions for us. We should also never take the power to elect our Technical Experts out of the hands of people because then you’ve effectively made Machines the cybernated dictators of a new Carceral Orwellian State.
So in conclusion yes we need a Resource Based Economy but not The Mechnocratic one The Venus Project proposes. What we need is The Directivist Model of a Resource Based Economy as put forward by The Promethean Workers Association (PWA). We empower people for a New Age of Aquarius away from the old Piscean Age based on Religious and Scientific Materialist Dogma’s which have led the people of this current aeon astray. Further we intend to resist vehemently and militantly any form of Religious or Scientific Materialism which tries to take hold of society by whatever means necessary to do so. Right now it is Religious Materialists who still hold society hostage but if it ever shifts to Scientific Materialists we intend to resist equally as vehemently. Further its not that we are against change either we want to end the monetary system as well we just don’t want a Mechnocracy is all.
{When we think of sustainability, often we think of durability, longevity and environmental respect. In general, a sustainable practice is a practice that takes the health of the future into consideration. However, this idea isn’t just reserved for the physical, material world- it also applies to thought, belief, human conduct and society as a whole.}

I think this is probably the one and only place anyone’s ever going to hear you admit there’s something beyond the physical and material world.
{An unsustainable practice is one that has an unbalanced negative effect, which, through time, will adversely effect a person, society and/or the environment.}

Sorta like Scientific Materialism it has a long term negative effect in that It makes consciousness enslaved too an absolutist view of physicality. Scientific Materialism is just another poisonous dogma being spoon fed to the populous.

{Any practice that causes an irreversible resource depletion or long term environmental pollution is an unsustainable practice.}

Of course but also Scientific Materialism causes long term damage to consciousness and by its very practice and application is an unsustainable practice as well.
{Given our current system of profit, most everything that is produced is done so with a built in weakness, due to the need to compete for market share.}

Of course I have a radio from the 80’s basic cassette deck type system and compared to a new electronic 3 disc CD changer well lets just say my radio from the 80’s with its single tape deck has lasted much longer. We can produce efficiency yet we don’t and this is alarming indeed.

{This is, of course, unsustainable by definition, for the inherent inefficiency of the economic system eventually creates unnecessary multiplicities, waste and pollution.}
Of course and on these points and others like it we are in total agreement with you.

{And this leads us to unsustainable ideologies.}

What about Unsustainable and unbalanced dogma’s such as Scientific Materialism and Religious Materialism which create people ignorant of higher forms of consciousness within themselves?

{In a Profit System, there is no reward for sustainability, for the system is built upon competition and regeneration. In such a circumstance, sustainability is always second to profit, for the survival of a company is based on profit, and profit is partly based on reducing costs and expanding income.}

In fact at one point it was impossible to create profits through production of domestic goods because there was not enough consumers to purchase those products. This happened once upon a time when Rome’s domestic technologies had reached a level that was pre-industrial something close to the 1600’s or 1500’s level of technology. Of course there was just one problem, most labor was carried out by slaves who produced far more then there was consumers to buy or use the services. More and more aspects of Roman services were becoming privatized and privately owned by Roman Merchant Corpus or Corporations. In the Roman 2 party political system both political parties The Populares and The Optimates worked together to pass laws to benefits the bankers and corporations. Very similar to how nowadays Democrats and Republicans in America do the same thing. Fact was early corporations saw more profit in using religion to outlaw domestic technology label it heretical and then focus all their efforts towards developing weapons. During the Dark Ages domestic technologies fell backwards by centuries while weapons for warfare continued developing to the level of guns and cannons. History has shown this scenario in play before and since we know history repeats itself we know for a fact domestic technology will once again start sinking while all efforts are diverted and focused towards military development. Now all thats missing is a new type of Fascism to rear its ugly head.

{In theory, most would agree that having an abundance of resources, along with products that are made of the most endurable materials for maximum sustainability and efficiency, is a good thing. However, these notions are not rewarded in our current world monetary system. What is rewarded is Scarcity. Scarcity and planned obsolescence are rewarded in the short term, for it creates a ‘turnover’ of profit, while also making more jobs. Sadly, this ‘short term reward’ is at the cost of ‘long term destruction’.}

Of course such is the nature of the monetary and profit systems again we agree 100% with this point as well.

{So then, what is an sustainable ideology?
While this question will always bring new answers as human evolution continues, in the present day we have a concept called The Scientific Method.}

You mean Scientific Materialism because this method is only Scientific in terms of Materialism its not scientific on any other level beyond that. It can’t even be used to prove the Material world is absolutely here beyond a reasonable doubt.

{Very simply, the Scientific Method is a process of investigation }

Perhaps you could try rewording that as Investigative Materialism?

{An example would be a problem with a car. If your car doesn’t start, you would begin a train of thought, based on logic,}

Here’s where you really get absurd actually your intuition would kick in because your first experiencing phenomenon. So you’d experience the phenomenon, rationalize it, Understand it, then reach a conclusion something like “gosh I better check under my hood” then you’d apply the observable method. The way you were explaining it just now skipped completely over the intuitive process perhaps you didn’t consciously realize the Einstein Method would assist you better in the car situation.

{A quick glance at the modes of operation used in the world today reflect a gross negligence of reason, logic and scientific application.}

True right up until you said Scientific application you should have said what you really meant to say with is Scientific Materialism as applied dogma and mass opium.

{Therefore, we need to begin an approach which maximizes education, technology and resource management.

Until this is done, sustainability will be in jeopardy.}

Yes and the sort of education we need is one that teaches individuals to master themselves and their minds. One that teaches people how to find insights within themselves that allow them to be open to other alternative systems then the Economic Materialism characteristic of all monetary based economies. In closing we agree on economic principles but it is ideologies and Scientific Materialism we disagree on. Only an ideology with a more Secular Metaphysical Agnostic and Skeptical Approach can ever be a progressive ideology. An ideology based on Scientific Materialist Absolutism which pigeon holes all Spiritualism in an ignorant manner is going to nowhere fast. If it does however it will create a new type of ignorance in society and impose through social psychological means Scientific Materialism as the new Dogmatic bible. In your movement it seems everything is up for discussion and review except what you call The Scientific Method. If your movement was based on a Resource Based Economy coupled with true Democracy not Cybernated Bureaucracy and The Einstein Method over your Scientific Method well then it would make sense. In closing we do look eagerly forward to your reply.

-Promethean Workers Association (PWA)


Questions


As previously stated, this blog is not primarily for questions, but rather answers. Some questions have their place, though, and this post is for the questions. Do you have more questions? Post them as comments to this post. If you have answers, post them as new posts. Thank you.

When I first heard about the concept I couldn’t stop thinking about it. What can RBE be like? What will it be like??? WHAT WILL IT BE LIKE???!!!

Read More