I thought this is a very impressive concept.We as a human race need to explore option for our future. This is one option I myself would consider as opposed to what kind of mess we live in now and the disastrous mess that is around the corner. for more info, click the more link at the bottom of the intro.Thank you !
It has often been observed that common crises create common bonds.
While people seek advantage during the times of prosperity, shared
suffering tends to draw people closer together. We have seen this
behavior repeated time and time again throughout the centuries, during
times of flood, famine, fire, or other natural disasters. Once the
threat is resolved, however, scarcity patterns once again begin to steer
people back to their behaviors of seeking individual advantage.
Sensationalist motion pictures such as Independence Day depict a world
united for the purpose of repelling an invasion by a hostile alien
culture. Indeed, it seems that the only force that would mobilize the
world in a unified direction would be one that poses a common threat,
such as a colossal meteor hurling towards the earth, or some other major
catastrophic event. If such an event were to occur, all border disputes
would become irrelevant in the face of impending disaster. While many
would call upon divine intervention for salvation, all nations would
surely combine their efforts and call upon science and technology to
deal with this common threat. Bankers, lawyers, businessmen, and
politicians would all be bypassed. Every resource would be harnessed and
mobilized, without any concern for monetary cost or profit. Under this
kind of threatening condition, most people realize where the key to
their survival lies. For example, during the Second World War, it was
the collective mobilization of both human and material resources that
lead to a successful resolution for the U.S. and its allies.
As the amount of scientific information grows, nations and people are
coming to realize that even in today's divided world there are, in fact,
many common threats that transcend national boundaries. These include
overpopulation, energy shortages, pollution, water shortages, economic
catastrophe, the spread of uncontrollable disease and so forth. However,
faced even with threats of this magnitude, which are common to all
nations, the direction of human action will not be altered so long as
powerful nations are able to maintain control of the limited resources
available.
Although many people, publications, and multi-media presentations
portray various aspects of the future and paint spectacular pictures of
the developments to come in such areas as transportation, housing, and
medicine, they ignore the fact that in a monetary-based economy the full
benefits of these developments continue to be available to a relative
few. What is not touched upon is how these new technologies of the
future can be used to organize societies and economies efficiently and
equitably, without the necessity of uniformity, so that everyone would
benefit from them. The few think tanks devoted to brainstorming newer
approaches to bring social organization up to speed with today's
technological capabilities do not deal with social change as a global
systems plan.
Neither are there any overall social plans in government or industry to
totally eliminate the negative effects of the displacement of people by
machines, nor does there seem to be any genuine concern to do so. Many
people believe that in the event of any social breakdown the government
will bring about the necessary changes for their survival. This is
highly improbable. In the event of such a breakdown the existing
government would most likely declare a state of emergency in an attempt
to prevent total chaos. It would then institute measures that may
address immediate problems, at the same time attempting to preserve
existing institutions and power structures, even though these may be a
chief contributing factor to the problems.
Many people throughout history have taken politicians to task for
actions that have not been entirely in society's best interest. The
reasons for this become clearer when one realizes that even in modern
democracies, these leaders do not benefit the lives of the average
person. Rather, they maintain the preferential positions of much of the
established order. There are growing indications of awareness on the
part of people in many areas of the world that events have gone beyond
the control of their political leaders. Everywhere we see political
figures and parties come and go, political strategies adopted and
discarded for their inability to satisfy the demands of one faction or
another.
The reason that we do not suggest writing your congressman, or any
number of governmental agencies, is that they lack the necessary
knowledge to deal with our problems. Their focus is to preserve existing
systems, not to change them. It appears that there are few within
present-day societies who want to phase themselves out. In modern
industrial societies the cause of inaction lies within the cumbersome
political process itself, an anachronism in an era when most decisions
can be made on any important issue in a split second by the objective
entry of relevant data into computers.
The prime conditions that would really effect social change will come
about when conditions have deteriorated to such an extent that
governments, politicians, and social institutions no longer have the
support and confidence of the people. What once worked is acknowledged
to be no longer relevant. If the public were better informed, only then
would it be possible to introduce a new and improved social arrangement.
Unfortunately, today the majority of people respond to simplistic
answers, which tend to repeat the cycle of events. When faced with
intolerable social conditions, many of the older patterns will emerge
again as people attempt to find someone or something to blame for the
conditions, e.g. minorities, immigrants, negligence in adhering to
religious principles or family values, and the influences of some
inexplicable supernatural forces.
True social change is not brought about by men and women of reason and
good will on a personal level. The notion that one can sit and talk to
individuals and alter their values is highly improbable. If the person
one is talking to does not have the fundamental knowledge of the
operation of scientific principles and the processes of natural laws, it
is difficult for them to understand how the pieces fit together on a
holistic level.
The solutions to our problems will not come about through the
application of reason or logic. Unfortunately, at present we do not live
in a reasonable or logical world. There appears to be no historical
record of any established society's leader who deliberately and
comprehensively redesigned a culture to fit the changing times. While
there is no question that political leaders, to a limited extent, modify
some modes of behavior, the real factors responsible for social change
are brought about by bio-social pressures, which are inherent in all
social systems. Change is brought about by natural or economic
occurrences that adversely affect the immediate circumstances of large
numbers of people.
Some bio-social pressures responsible for social change are limited
resources, war, overpopulation, epidemics, natural disasters, economic
recession, downsizing on a mass scale, technological displacement of
people by machines, and the failure of elected officials to overcome
such problems. The introduction of the medium of money to the exchange
process brought about a significant change in society, as did the
introduction of mechanized agriculture and the Industrial Revolution.
Unfortunately, the world's outmoded social, political, and
international order is no longer appropriate to these times. These
obsolete social institutions are unable to grasp the significance of
innovative technology to achieve the greatest good for all people, and
to overcome the inequities forced upon so many. Competition and scarcity
have caused an atmosphere of jealousy and mistrust to develop between
individuals and nations. The concepts of proprietary rights,
intellectual property, copyrights, and patents manifested in corporate
entities and in the sovereignty of nations, preclude the free exchange
of information that is necessary to meet global challenges. The European
Union represents an attempt to bridge the present with the future, but
it falls far short in that it relies on the crutch of the monetary
system.
We cannot regress to traditional values, which no longer apply. Any
attempt to retreat to the methods of the past would condemn untold
millions to a life of needless misery, toil, and suffering.
However, it is not enough to point out the limiting factors that may
threaten the survivability of all nations. The challenge that all
cultures will encounter in this technological age - some more than
others - is that of providing a smoother transition, which would
introduce a more appropriate way of thinking about ourselves, the
environment and the management of human affairs.
The ultimate survival of the human species depends upon planning on a
global scale and to cooperatively seek out new alternatives with a
relative orientation for improved social arrangements. If humankind is
to achieve mutual prosperity, universal access to resources is
essential.
Along with the introduction of new paradigms towards human and
environmental concern, there must be a methodology for making this a
reality. If these ends are to be achieved, the monetary system must
eventually be surpassed by a world resource-based economy. In order to
effectively and economically utilize resources, the necessary cybernated
and computerized technology could eventually be applied to ensure a
higher standard of living for everyone. With the intelligent and humane
application of science and technology, the nations of the world could
guide and shape the future for the preservation of the environment and
humankind.
What is needed to attain a global society is a practical and
internationally acceptable comprehensive blueprint. Also needed is an
international planning council capable of translating the blueprint and
the advantages that would be gained through world unification. This
proposal could be presented in the vernacular, in a way that
non-technical people can easily understand.
In actuality, no one should make decisions as to how this blueprint
will be designed. It must be based on the carrying capacity of our
planet, its resources, human needs and the like. In order to sustain our
civilization we must coordinate advanced technology and available
resources in a total, humane, global systems approach.
There is no doubt that many of the professions that are familiar to us
today will eventually be phased out. With the rate of change now taking
place, a vast array of obsolete occupations will disappear more rapidly
and more extensively than at any other time in history. In a society
that applies a systems approach, these professions will be replaced by
interdisciplinary teams – the systems analysts, computer programmers,
operation researchers, and those who link the world together in vast
communications networks that are assisted by high-speed digital
computers. They will eventually lead us to large-scale computer-based
methods of social operation. Social operations are far too complex today
for any elected politicians to handle.
It appears that most politicians do not give serious attention to this
and other problems. Only in times of war or national emergencies do we
call upon and assemble interdisciplinary teams to help find workable
solutions to varying social problems. If we apply the same efforts of
scientific mobilization as we do during a war, large-scale beneficial
effects can be achieved in a relatively short time. This could readily
be accomplished by utilizing many of our universities, training
facilities, and staff to best determine possible alternative methods to
solving these problems. This could eventually help us to define the
possible transitional parameters for the future of a sustainable global
civilization.
The process of social change must allow for changing conditions that
would continuously update the design parameters and allow for the
infusion of new technologies into emerging cultures. Design teams
utilizing socially integrated computers could automatically be informed
of new developments. As this process is continuously updated, it would
generate a more appropriate code of conduct. By appropriate conduct we
mean the necessary procedures to accomplish a given task.
All the limitations imposed upon us by our present-day monetary system
could be surpassed by adopting a global consensus for a worldwide
resource-based economy, in which all the planetary resources are viewed
and treated as the common heritage of all the earth's inhabitants. In
this manner, the earth and our technological procedures could provide us
with a limitless supply of material goods and services without the
creation of debt or taxation whatsoever.
The Obsolete Monetary System
Although skillful advertisers lead us to believe otherwise, in today's
monetary-based economies, whenever new technology is introduced, the
human consequences are of little concern to those introducing the
technology - except, of course, as customers. In a monetary-based
system, the major concerns of industry are profit, maintaining a
competitive edge, and watching the bottom line, rather than the
wellbeing of humanity. The social problems that arise from mass
unemployment of people, who are rendered obsolete by the infusion of
automation, are considered irrelevant, if they are considered at all.
Any need that may be met is secondary to acquiring a profit for the
business. If the profit is insufficient, the service will be withdrawn.
What industry seeks to do is improve the competitive edge to increase
the profit margin for their shareholders. It does not serve the interest
of a monetary based society to engage in the production of goods and
services to enhance the lives of people as a goal. With rising public
concern regarding the greenhouse effect, acid rain, polluted air and
water, etc. some companies are also beginning to realize that for
sustained market presence it is in their best interest to heed social
and environmental concerns. While such trends are commendable, they are
insufficient as a method of solving the overall problems of waste,
environmental degradation and unnecessary human suffering.
The monetary system has been a useful, but interim tool, it came into
being as a means of placing a value on scarce objects and labor. The
monetary system of course replaced the barter system, which involved
direct trading of objects and labor. However, just as there was no
universal-bartering standard in the past, there is no global monetary
system today. Individuals and groups, now as in the past, however, still
need to exchange objects and labor for today's goods and services. The
unequal distribution of skills, resources and materials throughout the
world necessitates global trade.
Until the last few decades, the monetary system functioned to a degree.
The global population of three billion was not over consuming world
resources and energy, global warming was not evident, and air and water
pollution were only recognized by a relative few. The start of the 21st
century however finds global population at an exponentially rising six
billion, with resources and energy supplies dwindling, global warming a
reality, and pollution evident worldwide. Planet earth is in crises and
the majority of world population cannot meet their basic needs because
people do not have the means to purchase increasingly expensive
resources. Money is now the determinant of people's standard of living
rather than the availability of resources.
In a monetary system purchasing power is not related to our capacity to
produce goods and services. For example, in a recession there are CD's
in store windows and automobiles in car lots, but many people do not
have the purchasing power to buy them. The earth is still the same
place; it is just the rules of the game that are obsolete and create
strife, deprivation, and unnecessary human suffering.
In today's culture of profit, we do not produce goods based on human
need. We do not build houses based on population needs. We do not grow
food to feed people. Industry's major motivation is profit.
The monetary system is now an impediment to survival rather than a
means of facilitating individual existence and growth. This imaginary
tool has outlived its usefulness. The limitations on earth's population
now caused by the monetary construct can be phased out. It is not money
that people need but the access to goods and services. Since humanity
requires resources to exist, the replacement system should provide those
resources directly to people without the impediment of financial and
political interest for their private gain at the expense of the lives
and livelihood of the populace. The replacement system is therefore
logically a resource-based economy. This global resource-based economy
would be gradually phased in while the monetary system is phased out.
All of the world's socio-economic systems- socialism, communism,
fascism, and even the vaunted free enterprise capitalist system -
perpetuate social stratification, elitism, nationalism and racism,
primarily based on economic disparity. As long as a social system uses
money or barter, people and nations will seek to maintain positions of
differential advantage. If they cannot do so by means of commerce they
will resort to military intervention.
War represents the supreme failure of nations to resolve their
differences. From a strictly pragmatic standpoint it is the most
inefficient waste of lives and resources ever conceived by any creature
on the planet. This crude and violent way of attempting to resolve
international differences has taken on even more ominous overtones with
the advent of elaborate computerized thermonuclear delivery systems,
deadly diseases and gases, and the threat of sabotage of a nation's
computer networks. Despite the desire of nations to achieve peace, they
usually lack the knowledge of how to arrive at peaceful solutions.
War is not the only form of violence in the developed and
underdeveloped countries that is superimposed upon the populace by
inadequate social arrangements. There is also hunger, poverty, and
scarcity. As long as there is the use of money, the creation of debt,
and economic insecurity these conditions will perpetuate crime,
lawlessness, and resentment. Paper proclamations and treaties do not
alter conditions of scarcity and insecurity. And nationalism only tends
to help propagate the separation of nations and the world's people.
Even the signing of a peace treaty cannot avoid another war if the
underlying causes are not addressed. The unworkable aspects of
international law tend to freeze things as they are. All of the nations
that have conquered land all over the world by force and violence would
still retain their positions of territorial and resource advantage.
Whether we realize it or not, such agreements only serve as temporary
suspensions to conflict.
Attempting to find solutions to the monumental problems within our
present society will only serve as temporary patchwork, prolonging an
obsolete system.
In this world of constant change it is no longer a question of whether
we choose to make the necessary changes; it is now mandatory that we
take on this challenge and adopt these new requirements or face the
inevitable decay of our present social and economic institution.
This is the dilemma we must face head-on, and the solutions we arrive
at must fit the circumstances of the "real-world." There appears to be
no other way than to update our outlook and create a newer direction by
relegating the old values to past civilizations. Unfortunately, this may
not be accomplished prior to the point of no return in the global
economy. (MORE )
No comments:
Post a Comment
your input helps my output ^5