What will be the future earth society?

[strawdog65]

 

 

 

 

Hi JB,

 

Interesting video. Is the point you are trying to make with this that

no government can remove inequality between people?

 

I agree if that is the case.

 

Inequality of people needs to be removed for any society to be

fair and productive to all.

 

This is why even though the resource economy idea has many

issues to overcome, I still believe it would achieve a more

equitable and fair way of life for everyone.

 

Human diversity will always be, it is the way we view the value

of all human life on this planet that needs to undergo change.

 

Thanks for posting the interesting video.

What year/time frame is this from? Looks to be early 80's?

 

 

Peace

[Owledge]

(good and bad always try to reach equilibrium!)

That's a very convenient concept. Mankind will never move closer towards divinity and I can feel good doing bad, because by that I will cause good to become stronger somewhere else. It's just a redistribution. So no matter what you do, it'll always be OK. Also, if you do bad to a person, the increased likeliness of good balancing that out will apply to everything else, including you. So by doing bad things to other people, you actually raise your own chances for being happy.

 

More and more of those concepts I've come about don't live up to reality an/or are really not helpful. Concepts help with justifying actions. They're helping you avoiding to verify the impact of your actions on reality.

I would state the thesis that concepts are all based on mundane wisdom, not matter how spiritual they might appear. So you can only live higher wisdom if you don't follow any concepts, at least by starting to not follow the ones you're conscious about.

[strawdog65]

 

The new Zeitgeist movie is out!

Please take a look.

 

The first part discusses the nature of humans and

how the environment influences how we become who

we eventually become as people.

 

The second part is about what a future earth society might be like

and goes into some depth about how such a society and city may

be when built to support the humans inhabiting it.

 

There is of course the discussion of money and how we would need

to change to get to that point.

 

Well thought out presentation.

 

I do believe that by the end of the movie we are being

shown that a revolution is what will be necessary to achieve

the goal of changing our world and society for the better.

 

What's eerie is how this movies ideas coincide in timing with

the many protests for change we are seeing throughout the

world right now.

 

Peace!

[Owledge]

What's eerie is how this movies ideas coincide in timing with

the many protests for change we are seeing throughout the

world right now.

What is eerie about that? It takes a heavy desire for making the world more interesting through injecting artificial mystery to make such a statement.

Furthermore, few people do comparative historical research. Often when people talk about these times of today, about how today is special compared to the past, they just don't realize how similar the past was. All tendencies that can be summed up by resistance of the people to rigid power structures, and other things, have always existed. It's not like a few hundred years ago all of humankind was just a bunch of mindless slaves. And if you realize that, you also won't claim that people are especially today.

Many people are aware of the cultural phenomenon of repeating doomsday phophecies, but few seem to be aware of the repeating paradise prophecies.

[strawdog65]

What is eerie about that? It takes a heavy desire for making the world more interesting through injecting artificial mystery to make such a statement.

Furthermore, few people do comparative historical research. Often when people talk about these times of today, about how today is special compared to the past, they just don't realize how similar the past was. All tendencies that can be summed up by resistance of the people to rigid power structures, and other things, have always existed. It's not like a few hundred years ago all of humankind was just a bunch of mindless slaves. And if you realize that, you also won't claim that people are especially today.

Many people are aware of the cultural phenomenon of repeating doomsday phophecies, but few seem to be aware of the repeating paradise prophecies.

 

 

Commentary about anything is from a personal perspective.

 

This thread is about what the coming future earth society

may be... what are your thoughts on that?

 

Examples that have been cited with lots of accompanying information

have been about the Venus project and some of the ideas being

presented in the Zeitgeist movies, as well as the idea of

a Resource based economic model.

Edited October 5, 2011 by strawdog65

[strawdog65]

Is this most recent uproar in people reclaiming their say in their

own governing (Egypt) a sign of times to come?

 

Can a future earth society really have a chance at being a one

world society when we as a people are so utterly divided by our

limitations to understand and our ignorance to seek change?

 

We live on one Planet.

We are all Humans.

We are all of equal value as living beings.

 

To me, any consideration of a future Earth society, must include

the mindset that we are all connected and important.

It is the ideology that some are better than others that keep us

at each others throats and limit what we could become.

 

The future is at best uncertain, but isn't taking a chance

on a new paradigm better than the status quo?

 

Peace.

[strawdog65]

The domino's are beginning to fall. Is this leading to a worldwide

change? Monetary systems and caste systems are in ruin,

is a Zeitgeist/venus project like society approaching us?

[Encephalon]

Is this most recent uproar in people reclaiming their say in their

own governing (Egypt) a sign of times to come?

 

Can a future earth society really have a chance at being a one

world society when we as a people are so utterly divided by our

limitations to understand and our ignorance to seek change?

 

We live on one Planet.

We are all Humans.

We are all of equal value as living beings.

 

To me, any consideration of a future Earth society, must include

the mindset that we are all connected and important.

It is the ideology that some are better than others that keep us

at each others throats and limit what we could become.

 

The future is at best uncertain, but isn't taking a chance

on a new paradigm better than the status quo?

 

Peace.

 

I sympathize with your wishes regarding the future but I haven't found any reason to share your optimism, so I obviously hope that I am wrong and you are proven right. The old high school biology experiment about the amount of bactaria that can live on a finite amount of agar in the petri dish remains a fairly accurate metaphor for our condition. Obviously, we don't live in an entirely closed system; we do profit from incoming solar radiation and photosynthesis, but the carrying capacity of the earth without cheap oil averages around a 2 billion people, given the most generous estimates of adequate topsoil, fresh water, and favorable climatic conditions (all of which are threatened).

 

James Lovelock estimates that no more than 500 million people will live to see the 22nd century -

http://www.uri.edu/artsci/com/Logan/teaching/html/HPR319_fall_2007/docs/lovelock_Rolling%20Stone_10-17-07.htm

and when I asked the Buddhist scholar Stephen Batchelor what he thought of his countryman's assessment, he found it pretty terrifying, but hey, that's a whopping 100 years away, right?

 

If virtually all the world's major insurance companies, the Pentagon, and the IPPC have declared global change and the end of cheap oil points beyond serious dispute then it would appear the most reasonable contingency for the future, social darwinism, is already going according to plan. Global sustainability is a fairy tale with 7+ billion people, but the end of the fossil fuel era, and the collapse of oil-based industrial agriculture will solve the problem with mass starvation. If resource wars don't end up being fought with nuclear weapons it is likely that those who live through the bottleneck will see the beginning of a return to ecological stability, but within a climatic condition that will bring much hotter and drier summers and much more frigid winters.

 

Who will live? That question has already been answered, and careful attention to current global policy yields a pretty straightforward answer without having to resort to conspiracy theories. It is clear that the powers that be are banking on a major depopulation of equatorial and third world regions, mostly through starvation and loss of habitat. Mid latitudes will be subject to intense heat storms, leaving Northern European, Northern American (Canada) and Siberian lands inhabitable, (although it will be interesting to see how Russian powerbrokers react to hundreds of millions of Chinese attempting to occupy Siberia). The southern tip of South America may also make it through the bottleneck.

 

The Haves will maximize their advantages at the expense of the Have-Nots - no surprise there - but there are several things people can do to increase their chances of seeing their families endure into the deep future. In the absence of wealth and power, the most obvious course of action is to prepare. Make yourself into the most useful person you can be and accept that communities will survive, loners won't. I've written in here before about the ancient Taoist village model, based as they were on independence and self-sufficiency. The technological level of the 1850s - think pre-mass production, post-oil - will be the most useful. Food production, medical chi kung, animal husbandry, carpentry, weapons, etc.

 

People might want to familiarize themselves with the eco-village movement, transition towns, and permaculture projects. But as much as my heart yearns for egalitarianism, at least in the sense of social justice, these movements will be occupied by the Smart Ones. There ain't no gettin' around the fact that intelligence and ability is not evenly distributed throughout our species. Beautiful models of green cities full of artists and poets living in harmony with nature presupposes a far more exalted state of human nature than we are capable of any time soon. The literature on starting eco-villages and other forms of small-scale communitarian movements are very clear: members must be selected according to strict criteria of emotional maturity and skill level. Eco-villages for the masses? Ain't gonna happen, not even if an intergalactic super-tanker drops anchor on the moon and starts pumping us free fuel and cheeseburgers.

 

The most likely rebuttal to all of this will be the usual: the carrying capacity of the earth is 20-50-150-200 billion people all living driving advanced, pollution-free Hummers to Black Angus...

 

Peak Oil is a myth... there's more oil off the Atlantic coast of South America than the in all the Middle East...

 

Human beings are infinitely wise and we'll just figure it out after the Superbowl... yadda yadda...

 

That's my take on it anyway. These aren't my ideas. I simply threw them together into a master's thesis, a Buddhist critique of global consumerism. Cheers!

Edited February 13, 2011 by Blasto

[strawdog65]

I sympathize with your wishes regarding the future but I haven't found any reason to share your optimism, so I obviously hope that I am wrong and you are proven right. The old high school biology experiment about the amount of bactaria that can live on a finite amount of agar in the petri dish remains a fairly accurate metaphor for our condition. Obviously, we don't live in an entirely closed system; we do profit from incoming solar radiation and photosynthesis, but the carrying capacity of the earth without cheap oil averages around a 2 billion people, given the most generous estimates of adequate topsoil, fresh water, and favorable climatic conditions (all of which are threatened).

 

James Lovelock estimates that no more than 500 million people will live to see the 22nd century -

http://www.uri.edu/artsci/com/Logan/teaching/html/HPR319_fall_2007/docs/lovelock_Rolling%20Stone_10-17-07.htm

and when I asked the Buddhist scholar Stephen Batchelor what he thought of his countryman's assessment, he found it pretty terrifying, but hey, that's a whopping 100 years away, right?

 

If virtually all the world's major insurance companies, the Pentagon, and the IPPC have declared global change and the end of cheap oil points beyond serious dispute then it would appear the most reasonable contingency for the future, social darwinism, is already going according to plan. Global sustainability is a fairy tale with 7+ billion people, but the end of the fossil fuel era, and the collapse of oil-based industrial agriculture will solve the problem with mass starvation. If resource wars don't end up being fought with nuclear weapons it is likely that those who live through the bottleneck will see the beginning of a return to ecological stability, but within a climatic condition that will bring much hotter and drier summers and much more frigid winters.

 

Who will live? That question has already been answered, and careful attention to current global policy yields a pretty straightforward answer without having to resort to conspiracy theories. It is clear that the powers that be are banking on a major depopulation of equatorial and third world regions, mostly through starvation and loss of habitat. Mid latitudes will be subject to intense heat storms, leaving Northern European, Northern American (Canada) and Siberian lands inhabitable, (although it will be interesting to see how Russian powerbrokers react to hundreds of millions of Chinese attempting to occupy Siberia). The southern tip of South America may also make it through the bottleneck.

 

The Haves will maximize their advantages at the expense of the Have-Nots - no surprise there - but there are several things people can do to increase their chances of seeing their families endure into the deep future. In the absence of wealth and power, the most obvious course of action is to prepare. Make yourself into the most useful person you can be and accept that communities will survive, loners won't. I've written in here before about the ancient Taoist village model, based as they were on independence and self-sufficiency. The technological level of the 1850s - think pre-mass production, post-oil - will be the most useful. Food production, medical chi kung, animal husbandry, carpentry, weapons, etc.

 

People might want to familiarize themselves with the eco-village movement, transition towns, and permaculture projects. But as much as my heart yearns for egalitarianism, at least in the sense of social justice, these movements will be occupied by the Smart Ones. There ain't no gettin' around the fact that intelligence and ability is not evenly distributed throughout our species. Beautiful models of green cities full of artists and poets living in harmony with nature presupposes a far more exalted state of human nature than we are capable of any time soon. The literature on starting eco-villages and other forms of small-scale communitarian movements are very clear: members must be selected according to strict criteria of emotional maturity and skill level. Eco-villages for the masses? Ain't gonna happen, not even if an intergalactic super-tanker drops anchor on the moon and starts pumping us free fuel and cheeseburgers.

 

The most likely rebuttal to all of this will be the usual: the carrying capacity of the earth is 20-50-150-200 billion people all living driving advanced, pollution-free Hummers to Black Angus...

 

Peak Oil is a myth... there's more oil off the Atlantic coast of South America than the in all the Middle East...

 

Human beings are infinitely wise and we'll just figure it out after the Superbowl... yadda yadda...

 

That's my take on it anyway. These aren't my ideas. I simply threw them together into a master's thesis, a Buddhist critique of global consumerism. Cheers!

 

 

Blasto!

 

Dude where have you been?

That's one hell of a great response. Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on this

important issue in such a thought provoking manner. I do agree with just about everything you

stated. It is unfortunate that the power of greed will determine the lives of the masses

at some not to distant point in our future.

 

I have more to add to what you have said, just don't have time right now.

 

Blasto, thanks for taking the time.... I appreciate it.

 

 

Peace!

[strawdog65]

With the renewed interest in the Zeitgeist movement and

the Venus project, I wanted to bump this old thread of mine

because of all the info and heated discussion here.

[TaoBee]

I believe its important for more people to view and learn about the Zeitgeist Movement and the Venus Project. Change happens slowly, and painfully, but needs to happen. The world has to stop being a planet of ME ME ME. A planet of have and have nots.

[strawdog65]

Hello Everyone!

 

Isn't the shallowness of the view that we are whatever country we

are born into and what language we speak, and the color of our skin,

an obvious shortcoming of a mind that does not fully see the reality

of it's existence?

 

Can we not preserve our cultural gifts and still come to an agreement

that this is a shared world, and as such we are all part of it, equally?

 

What is the next step in the natural progression of a world society

if not a one world government?

 

Can anyone honestly say that they continue to see the present form of

government succeeding in the future?

 

I think that we are obligated to change how we perceive this

world and the thinking of the people populating it, and realize that we

must eventually reconcile our desire for separation with the actuality

of us all being connected to each other, and needing each other.

 

If the thought process of identifying with a country, or a belief system could be

altered to identifying with our entire world, would we not see people differently?

 

Imagine no countries, imagine one world, with one people that understand

and grasp that they are brothers and sisters only separated by

the thoughts they believe to be true, which are not.

 

As long as people of all countries, ethnicities, and belief systems focus on

what our differences are, we will never know peace. It will take the shift in

consciousness that we are a one world community, with billions of individuals

making up the whole, and that we are all children of planet earth.

 

When population reaches the point of resources not being able to support

the people of the world, that's when there will be change. There are resources

available to be shared. The issue with sharing resources is that there is no profit to

be made in helping others unless they can pay. So resources, food, oil, technology,

sit and are not used unless someone is making a profit. This type of world economy

will become unworkable in the near future.

 

A profit based economy is a symptomatic of the lack of regard for life and

stewardship we have for our planet. It will lead to more war and ultimately

planetary destruction.

 

The way out is for us to change.

 

Technology will be the key to this change, machines will eventually remove

man from the work place, it is inevitable. Once machines take over the work

place what next? This isn't as far fetched as you may think, the progression has been

and will continue to be work that has been done by mankind, will continue to taken

up by machines and computers. Man will become obsolete as a physical means of

getting things done. This is when it gets interesting.

 

Repurposing mankind: what will we do with all the people?

People will need purpose. How about them working for the good and betterment

of the world we share? When you eliminate working for profit, you enable people

to share their gifts for what they are good at, freely.

 

One world, One people, One future together.

 

Peace!

[strawdog65]

I wanted to throw something into the mix here,

based on what I have seen time and again said about

the nature of man(the animal), is it possible to change

this nature?

 

Is it possible to teach sharing and compassion for others

all the while eliminating the teaching of greed?

 

I believe this is a major stumbling block to any future

society that will try something different then we have now.

 

Open your mind to the possibility. The system by which our world runs,

is a created thing. It can be changed and replaced by another way.

 

Thank you to Marblehead, for making me think about this tact.

Edited September 23, 2011 by strawdog65

[strawdog65]

From the Venus Project website, subject: "resource based economy"

 

http://www.thevenusproject.com/en/the-venus-project/resource-based-economy

 

 

 

A resource-based economy would make it possible to use technology to overcome scarce resources by applying renewable sources of energy, computerizing and automating manufacturing and inventory, designing safe energy-efficient cities and advanced transportation systems, providing universal health care and more relevant education, and most of all by generating a new incentive system based on human and environmental concern.

 

Many people believe that there is too much technology in the world today, and that technology is the major cause of our environmental pollution. This is not the case. It is the abuse and misuse of technology that should be our major concern. In a more humane civilization, instead of machines displacing people they would shorten the workday, increase the availability of goods and services, and lengthen vacation time. If we utilize new technology to raise the standard of living for all people, then the infusion of machine technology would no longer be a threat.

 

A resource-based world economy would also involve all-out efforts to develop new, clean, and renewable sources of energy: geothermal; controlled fusion; solar; photovoltaic; wind, wave, and tidal power; and even fuel from the oceans. We would eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could propel civilization for thousands of years. A resource-based economy must also be committed to the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants, allowing them to be energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.

 

What else would a resource-based economy mean? Technology intelligently and efficiently applied, conserves energy, reduces waste, and provides more leisure time. With automated inventory on a global scale, we can maintain a balance between production and distribution. Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.

 

As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, marketing and advertising personnel, salespersons, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste will be eliminated. Considerable amounts of energy would also be saved by eliminating the duplication of competitive products such as tools, eating utensils, pots, pans and vacuum cleaners. Choice is good. But instead of hundreds of different manufacturing plants and all the paperwork and personnel required to turn out similar products, only a few of the highest quality would be needed to serve the entire population. Our only shortage is the lack of creative thought and intelligence in ourselves and our elected leaders to solve these problems. The most valuable, untapped resource today is human ingenuity.

 

With the elimination of debt, the fear of losing one's job will no longer be a threat. This assurance, combined with education on how to relate to one another in a much more meaningful way, could considerably reduce both mental and physical stress and leave us free to explore and develop our abilities.

 

If the thought of eliminating money still troubles you, consider this: If a group of people with gold, diamonds and money were stranded on an island that had no resources such as food, clean air and water, their wealth would be irrelevant to their survival. It is only when resources are scarce that money can be used to control their distribution. One could not, for example, sell the air we breathe or water abundantly flowing down from a mountain stream. Although air and water are valuable, in abundance they cannot be sold.

 

Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such.

[michael245]

In my opinion the Zeitgeist has some truth in but it has b.s.in it too, but the venus project will never happen.For those who don't know what it is,these people want to take everyones land away and start a resource based economy.They would never be able to do this to the world,because people own guns and those people would never let their own land be taken away by a few internet hippies,in other words it would cause major violence.

 

 

`

[michael245]

In my opinion the Zeitgeist has some truth in but it has b.s.in it too, but the venus project will never happen.For those who don't know what it is,these people want to take everyones land away and start a resource based economy.They would never be able to do this to the world,because people own guns and those people would never let their own land be taken away by a few internet hippies,in other words it would cause major violence.

 

 

`

[Everything]

In my opinion the Zeitgeist has some truth in but it has b.s.in it too, but the venus project will never happen.For those who don't know what it is,these people want to take everyones land away and start a resource based economy.They would never be able to do this to the world,because people own guns and those people would never let their own land be taken away by a few internet hippies,in other words it would cause major violence.

 

 

`

Nah, we internet hippies will only share it impartially like nature and use it as efficiently as possible, not even wasting one drop of it. Everyone benefits equally. We can all party all day and sing songs of love. Yay

[strawdog65]

In my opinion the Zeitgeist has some truth in but it has b.s.in it too, but the venus project will never happen.For those who don't know what it is,these people want to take everyones land away and start a resource based economy.They would never be able to do this to the world,because people own guns and those people would never let their own land be taken away by a few internet hippies,in other words it would cause major violence.

 

 

`

 

This sounds very paranoid to me.

 

Please try to understand...we do not own land, no own actually owns any land.

As long as we pay taxes on something every year, and if we do not and it can

be taken away, then what do you really own?

 

The only thing you really own...is your body.

 

The Native Americans had the best idea about land, the land is our mother, it is she that owns us.

We live such short lives, how to compare to the timescales of geology?

 

If you think the Venus Project is a bunch of B.S., that's your right.

 

But also remember something vitally important.

It is the dreamers and the Idealists that create the future societies.

If while living in a box, you can never imagine what is beyond what you

have experience with, in that box you will remain.

Edited October 7, 2011 by strawdog65

[michael245]

This sounds very paranoid to me.

 

Please try to understand...we do not own land, no own actually owns any land.

As long as we pay taxes on something every year, and if we do not and it can

be taken away, then what do you really own?

 

Yes, we do own land and we own guns too!!!!.In order for the zeitgeist or the venus project cult members to go around the world and confiscate other peoples land and start a resource based economy ,they in fact would need a big military to succeed in conquering because nobody would ever give up their personal property.

[strawdog65]

Yes, we do own land and we own guns too!!!!.In order for the zeitgeist or the venus project cult members to go around the world and confiscate other peoples land and start a resource based economy ,they in fact would need a big military to succeed in conquering because nobody would ever give up their personal property.

 

 

Michael....

 

When you bought your guns, how many times did you pay for them?

Do you keep paying for them tear after year?

 

When something is "purchased" it is paid for 1 time, taxes and all,

at that point you have true ownership.

 

Land, and homes, do not meet this standard of "purchase".

Anything that you say you "own", would not have taxes to be paid on it year

after year for your entire life. You are sadly mistaken if you believe you

"own" land. Try not paying your taxes on it for a year or two,

and then tell me again that you "own" it.

 

Guns..big deal.

what's a gun compared to an Idea that changes minds?

Edited October 8, 2011 by strawdog65

[manitou]

Michael....

 

When you bought your guns, how many times did you pay for them?

Do you keep paying for them tear after year?

 

When something is "purchased" it is paid for 1 time, taxes and all,

at that point you have true ownership.

 

Land, and homes, do not meet this standard of "purchase".

Anything that you say you "own", would not have taxes to be paid on it year

after year for your entire life. You are sadly mistaken if you believe you

"own" land. Try not paying your taxes on it for a year or two,

and then tell me again that you "own" it.

 

Guns..big deal.

what's a gun compared to an Idea that changes minds?

 

 

And do you think mother earth considers that she's owned by anyone? this is just a construct of our own mind.

[strawdog65]

And do you think mother earth considers that she's owned by anyone? this is just a construct of our own mind.

 

 

Exactly....who owns who?

To say we own something on this earth is silly.

 

We are meant to be caretakers for those that come after us.

[strawdog65]

Maybe this "occupy Wall street" mentality is what we need to

kick some real changes into being?

 

Seems like there is so much apathy in regards to what we do

as single people out in the wilderness. Changing people's perceptions

is the beginning of actual, physical change taking place in the world.

 

Change your mind, and the world will follow.

[michael245]

Michael....

 

When you bought your guns, how many times did you pay for them?

Do you keep paying for them tear after year?

 

 

I don't own guns,maybe I shouldn't have spoken in a figure of speach.I do admit you hold well to your prospects.Maybe you should watch these two highly informative documentaries that may persuade your personal opinions about the zeitgeist differently.

 

 

Edited October 14, 2011 by michael245

[strawdog65]

I don't own guns,maybe I shouldn't have spoken in a figure of speach.I do admit you hold well to your prospects.Maybe you should watch these two highly informative documentaries that may persuade your personal opinions about the zeitgeist differently.

 

 

 

 

Watched the 2 videos of kids acting foolish after being stoned....

Not sure what relevance this has to the subject at hand...

Would you like to discuss what you think those videos mean in

regards to the Venus project or future earth societies?

 

Curious....