Skip to content

Peter Joseph’s Iowa Lecture held on November 15th, 2009 “Where are we going?”

The title of this presentation is “Where are we going?” This is actually the second part of a two part series, the first one was done in London called “Where are we now?” that dealt with the financial system and other attributes you might be familiar with if you follow the work that I do with The Zeitgeist Movement which is the activist and communication arm of another organization called The Venus Project. More on these organistions as we go along.

Part 1 – Evolutionary Baggage

Roghly ten thousand years ago the human species stumbled into a new social paradigm which is now referred to as the Neo Litihc revolution. During this time it appears that we began the transition from predominatly egaliarian societies consisting of hunters and gatherers to an agricultural revolution where deliberate cultivation of food replaced the more passive finding of food sources hence allowing for much more conrol over production.

At the same time there also seems to be a major push into the advancement of what we call technology today. Stone tools where advancing which eventually set the trend for the bronze age which used the forging of more malleable copper and then the iron age which enabled more strength so on and so forth I think we know all these patterns.

Since this period we can look back and recognize a constantly increasing rate of technological development. In fact it appears to be an exponential increase.

This graph here, made my Ray kurtzweil, shows an exponential increase of the mass use of inventions, specifically communication technology, computer technology and the like.

Next to it is another chart which shows a history of technological invention and the amazing rate of progress in general. I think it is safe to say that this evolution of technology and hence science itself has been, and contiues to be, the fundamental catalyst for progress and change. It is by far the primary factor driving the development of human civilaztion, not only in the faciliation of achieving specific ends, but also in the more suble manifestations of our belief systems, philosophy, frames of reference and essentially how we interpret the world around us.

The scientific method itself is a form of technological tool and its application has continually advanced our understanding of the world us, facilitating constant change. Unfortunately, cultural beliefs, beliefs that we all share, traditions, are very rarely in tandem with the socially progressive nature of science and technology.

This is termed Culture Lag.

This stems from social identifications with existing traditional values and established institutional practices. These emotional identications are a source of comfort for us.

In fact, I have an anecdote. When I was coming here from the airport I saw the Amish, they evidently lived nearby, and they were driving down the street, it was night time. What do they have? They had electric lights on their horse and buggy. I’m like hey that’s cheating!

The things is that it is difficult for any establishment to really keep moving forward without eventually giving in to the beauty of the advancement of technology and what it can do for us.

As a classic example of this phonomenom which I’m sure that many of you have heard before, was when the Italitian Physisist Astronomer Gallileo first presentation evidence to the political institution of his time and region regarding the earth revolving around the sun.

He was met with deep threat and deep opposition by the political religious establishment. For it was very much contrary to their religious texts and hence traditional identifications.

In fact, The Inquisition banned the re printing of Gallielos works for the 76 years after his death.

The reality is, instituational establishments, meaning institutions of both traditional codified thought and institutions with societal influence and power, meaning philosophy dogmas on one hand and corporations and governments on the other, each has a high propensity to engage in denial, dishonesty and corruption to maintain self-preservation and self-perpetuation.

The result is a continous Culture Lag where social progress by way of incorporating new socially helpful scientific advancements is constantly inhibited. It is like walking through a brick wall, as the established power orthodoxies continue to perpetuate themselves for their own interests and comforts.

Now, to illustrate this phenomenon in a modern context let’s examine one of the oldest established orders still in use today: The Monetary System.

When I say The Monetary System I don’t mean native monetary policy, interest rates, the fractional reserve policy, central banks or any other component attribute. I refer to the absolute foundation of the concept; being a system of incentive, acquisition and exchange.

So first, let’s ask the most fundamental question: Why did we invent money?

Contrary to the attitude of most of the worlds population today money is not a natural resource nor does it represent resources. Money is actually a social convention for managing scarcity and rewarding creation.

If a person grows a food product on a plot of land that product a value one) based on how scarce the product is in the region hence the level of demand versus supply and two) along with the amount of labor and time spent to produce that product. Generally speaking if a product is rare in the society then it’s value is raised. If the skill set needed by a person to cultivate that product is also rare in the community then the value is increased aswell.

This is the basic theory of value which you’ll hear in Economics One O One.

As innocuous as this may seem on the surface let’s now consider some of the unspoken negative retroactions of this system, namely the profit mechanism and it’s relationsship to establishment preservation.

Very simply, problems and scarcity equals profit. Socially negative attributes of society become positively rewarded ventures for industry- The more problems and scarcity there is, the more money that can be made of of attempts at solutions. The more effiency created in society the less opportunities for monetary acquistion.

Think about this.

In other words, and this might sound rather pessimistic and abrupt, but there is very little intrinsic reward and hence motivation to solve any current profitable problem in existence. The very nature of monetary reinforcement condones the perpetuation of the problems.

For example, energy is the cornerstone of our society you would think that scarce and depleted oil supplies which is a common speculation at this point in time, Peak Oil, would be a dire concern given our current social dependence, posing nothing but negative connotations. No, not in the short term. There is nothing the Oil Companis want more than consistent scarcity. The 2007-2008 speculative bubble in Oil which shut down schools, school buses and caused immense hardship for the lower classes for both home heating and transportation is a classic example.

If Oil Companies know that they can make more money by having their items scarce, the propensity to deliberately limit production and disregard social concern, or simply be dishonest outright about available resources, is very high. The same goes unfortunately for every other socially dire problem, such as environmental polution.

The more polluted our water tables and taps become, the more industry can compensate by offering profitable solutions.

This creates a perverse reinforcement of indifference to environmental concern by industry. For the more damage there is, the more money that can be made. It is simply how the game is set up. And the the psychological ramifications are sick and profound.

Let’s consider the medical industry, which should be one of the most altruistic and progressive institutions we have, as our quality of life often depends on it. However we need to realize the simple reality that the medical establishment, with it’s millions of employees, thrives of of the sickness of the population. The more problems solved in the realm of disease, the lesss money that can be generated.

For example, the cancer industry. This is massive, multi-billion dollar a year industry, a trillion dollar industry, with a very large number of people in employment. Suppose for a moment hypothetically that a cure for all cancers was somehow achieved and the method of treatment was simple and easy. In other words there was no longer a way to make all of this money of of the illness by the medical establishment.

Do you realize what would happen to the economy, to the medical institutions, if that particular problem was actually given a viable solution?

And when you realize that, do you really think that the intent is to cure this illness?

It’s something to think about.

And it would also lay off tens of thousands of people I mean keep in mind it’s an establishment. The moment you have emplyees and everything and even if you’re working initially for an altruistic cause, the moment you’re in the position of supporting a group, and the group relying on the institution, suddenly motivations change.

As another example, what if a company made a car that could last 80 years, without service and also runs without the need for perpetual need for refueling through battery technology? The after-market value of that car would be virutally zero and billions of dollars would lost due to the now obsolete consumer oil and auto-service market industries.

I’m sure many of you know that we have the technology now to create electric cars, that can go a 80 miles an hour for a 1000 miles on one charge. You might also know as a case in point that The White House, during the Bush administration – which was in fact the oil cartel in power – made sure their corporate constituents in the oil industry were safe guarded against this new reality by helping to just get rid of the idea itself – squashing it.

In fact there is now reason why very single car sold could not be electric right now. They aren’t because social progress and human well-being is always second to monetary gain.

I’ll say that again – social progress and human well-being is always second to monetary gain.

Also, if people cannot make money of of solving social problems, they simply will not be done. Take a look at the horrid, dire destitution in Africa, or simply the rampant and growing homelessness across the world.

I think George Carlin actually put it best:

“Have you ever noticed that the only metaphor we have in our public discouse for solving problems…is to declare war on it…we have the worar on crime….the war on cancer, the war on drugs…but did you ever notice that we have no war on homelessness. You now hy? Because there is no money in that problem. No money to be made off of the homeless. If you can find a solution to homelessness where the corporations and politcians can make a few million dollars each you will see the streets of America begin to clear up pretty damn quitck”

– George Carlin

Most when they think about these kinds of things, the word corruption comes to mind. Most feel that these are ethical issues.

But is it really corrupt for an energy establishment to want to limit supply artificially so they can make money? Is it really corrupt for a company to seek indifferent, self-preservation at the expense of social progress? Actually no, it isn’t. It is simply business as usual and this is what I’m trying to point out.

And you should expect nothing less than this tendency.

The profit mechanism creates established orders which constitute the survival and wealth of large groups of people. The fact is, no matter how socially beneficial new advents may be, they will be viewed in hostility if they threaten an established, financially driven institution.

Meaning social progress can actually be a threat to the establishment.

So to put it into a sentence: Abundance, sustainability and efficiency are the enemies of profit.

Progressive advancement in science and technology which can solve problems of inefficiency and scarcity once and for all are, in effect, making the prior establishment’s servicing of those issues obsolete. Therefore in a monetary system, corporations are not just in competition with other corporations – they’re in competition with progress itself.

That is why social change is so difficult within a monetary system. In other words, the established monetary system refuses free flowing change. You cannot have a social convention where money is made off of inefficiency and scarcity and expect a quick incorporation of new advents which can relieve those problems.

I know I’m drilling this in but most do not see this and I wanna to make sure it is perfectly clear.

Now, I don’t want to spend too much time on the monetary system because as I mentioned it was the focus of a prior presenation. However I want to quickly point out to important issues.

The first is the economic reality that the entire global economic system is based on what I call cyclical consumption. The only way the system can work as if money is perpetually circulating. Money must be continuously transferred from one party to another in order to sustain so-called economic growth.

This is done through constant, or cyclical, consumption by virtually everyone in society. Jobs are entirely contigent upon demand for production in some form. If there was no demand for goods and services then there would be no demand for labor and financial circulation would hence stop.

What this translates into again is that inefficiency equals profit. The entire system demands problems for it to work. This is not only paralyzing as we have discussed but it also creates outrageous amounts of resource waste, irrelevancy and extremity.

The second point I would like to make on this issue, which is much more broad, has to do with the holistic nature of the monetary game in historical practice and the fundamental intent.

All societies today whether termed capitalist, socialist or even communist, are fundamentally based on money. Money is the enabler of possibility within the system itself. Free-market capitalim as it is often called, is now the dominant economic religion of the day. I say religion because when it comes to the cultural perception of this methodology few today seem to have the ability to even ponder any other options for social operation – they are fully indoctrinated.

The free market in practice can be defined as:

“ A market in which supply and demand are unregulated except by the country’s competition policy, and rights in physical and intellectual property are upheld”

You’ll notice it says “unregulated except by the country’s competition policy”

In other words, there is no such thing as a pure free market. And I know most of us know this but I wanna make the point. For nor could there ever be a pure free market without the system despotically self-destructing beyond repair.

Why? Because the basis of the free market pursuit, meaning the self-interested based pursuit and strategic aqcuistion of market share – the gaming strategy – can only lead to monopolies and cartels.

That is the basis of the entire motivation. And it’s funny how economists today will deny that up and down.

For example let’s say I wanna open an electronic store in a relatively small town, say here in Farifield, Iowa. And at that time there are three other stores in this same area and therefore I have to compete with them. As time moves forward I work to streamline my competitive strategies and reduce overhead in such a way that my store becomes the dominant, most affordable distributor of a certain set of items.

And everyone in the town flocks to my store over the others for such items. Due to this, two of the other three stores go out of business and leave town. So at that point it is just my store and the other competitor in the region, dual competition. Now since my profits has been so good I make an exceutive descision. I decide to attempt to aquire, or buy, the other competing store in town. Seems reasonable right? Aquistions happen all the time. And they agree. So I purchase that store, put my logo on it, and boom, I have a regional monopoly.

Likewise, let’s assume I didn’t purchase the other store but rather just became friends and in turn partners with them. And we figure out a way to work together and flourish in a non-competitive way. Seems logical right? Well, guess what? Now I have a cartel.

In other words, business is based, in part, on a gaming strategy to win market share and hence profit. Therefore it is a natural gravitation to seek dominance in your sector or industry. And the highest level is monopoly and cartel. It is a natural progression of the free market system to become as dominant and powerful as possible.

But it doesn’t stop there. And I’m sure most in this room understand the practice of congressional lobbying by corporations, considered absolutely normal. Well, what is financial lobbying? Lobbying is the prostitution of the state to grant further powers or positions of ease to corporate industries. In other words, if you pay of a few of congressmen to support your companies agenda then you have further secured your position economically. The same thing goes for campaign contributions.

Now people say that’s corruption. No, it’s not. It’s the free market at work, what else do you expect?

There is no such thing as an objective government in a monetary system.

It is impossible. The whole society is based on money and income so why do you think any lines would be drawn and respected? We see this BS ethic argument all day long and guess what it has never worked, it never will work. Influence and hence corruption is a natural by product of our system – it should be expected.
In fact, let’s take this train of thought even further. Through out history there has been one empire of another. Each working to secure global land and resource domination. The central reason for war is for resources, profit, empire power and trade monopolies. Governments are fundamentally no different in function than corporations when it comes to self-interest. The United States invasion of Iraq could be considered a hostile coporate take over in effect for even the most naïve individuals today know it had nothing to do with weapons, freedom or democracy for the people. I don’t even wanna belabour that issue for it’s just considered passé to even talk about it, it’s not even in style – we’re so used to this level of corruption that we just look the other way these days.

However I clearly wanna point out what war really has to do with if you have any inhibitions. It is for the conquering of resources, industrial profit and empire expansion fundamentally.

In the words of two-time congressional medal of honour recepient Major General Smedley D. Butler :

“War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives”

Now, it’s important to point that ttoday he pursuit of profit in the market system is generating a different form of empire – a corporate empire. Based on merging economies through trade agreements.

It’s called globalization.

I think Jim Garrison, President of the World Forum, put it quite succinctly:

“Taken cumulatively, the integration of the world as a whole, particularly in terms of economic globalization and the mythic qualites of “free market” capitalism, represents a veritable “empire” in its own right…few have been able to escape the “structural adjustments” and “conditionality’s” of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, or the arbitrations of the World Trade Organization, those international financial instituions that, hower inadequate, still determine what economic globalization means….such is the power of globalization that within our lifetime we are likey to see the integration, even if unevenly, of all national economies in the world into a single gloabl, free market system”

Hence empire.

To put I gesturly, the propensity of the system is to create world monopoly That is the gestural natural gravitation of the methodoly and philosophy of the free market ideology itself. That is what the psychology sets up, I hope that’s clear. It is based on strategic domination, and think it is time people awaken to this – it isn’t based on freedom, it’s based on conquering.

The core basis of social functionality in our society is inheritly despotic. There is no such thing as an ethical transaction. Again, ethics and competition are incompatible for the basis of seeking differential advantage for personal gain is wholly unethical in any civilization. Leading perpetually to conflict and exploitation.

Dishonesty is the mode of operation at every level whether you realize it or not. And frankly, how anyone in their right mind could ever rationalize how a peaceful, sustainable, productive world could ever come out of open competition, hence open warfare – from individuals competing against each other for work, to corporations battling each other for market share, to governments competing against each other for global economic dominance – is beyond me.

We live in a paralyzing, detachment promoting , self-serving system which generates parasites and prostitutes. Each one of us due to the very nature of the monetary game is forced into a position of submission – either to an employer or a client. The basic goal is monetary aquicisition – not service to social progress.

We leach and exploit. Sadly, the only cooperation you’ll tend to find these days, or actually ever since the system was created, was when there was a common enemy, meaning when a particular group works to fight against another. Hence one corporation working to fight against another corporation.

Advantage is dishonesty I hope everyone thoroughly understands that.

Moving on.

I would like to address some other culturally common attributes of modern society, both institutional and ideological, which is rarely thought about in a holistic sense.

This is going to be a little bit abstract but I would like to show how the integrity of these current conventions are either outdated, polluted by the monetary system and self-interest, or are simply ignoring the root causes of the problems which these conventions are attempting to solve.

The four points are:

1) Laws, Rights and Paper Proclaimations

2) Security

3) Methods of Government

4) Activism and “Ethics”

Laws, Rights and Paper Proclaimations

In society today government attempts to control human behaviour by way of threat, in the form of laws. Little regard is given to the reasoning behind causes for these so-called criminal acts, or socially offensive acts. If a person is arrested for stealing, very little regard is given to the environmental conditions that generated the interest to steal to begin with – the motivation.

Is a mother who steals food to feed her starving family a criminal?


She’s simply doing what she has to do.

When we reflect on this reality that we as human beings are really nothing more and nothing less than animals, and operate with the same basic behavioral reinforcement survival tendencies as most other species, we see then that it is illogical and irresponsible to consider any human behaviour outside of the realm of the social condition.

In the early 1990’s a study was done called the Merva-Fowles Study which found that a 1 % rise in the unemployment in major US cities resulted in a relatively substantial increase in crime. This shows how so-called criminal behaviour is directly related to the socio-economic circumstances. It should be no surprise that the great majority of people in prisons come from deprived socio-economic positions.

Society is producing the behaviour, particularly scarcity if you pay attention. And year after year the number of people in prisons rises, along with the number of laws on the books. Therefore obviously something isn’t working right? Something is not working, something is wrong. If society was progressively managed with the intent of collective human well-being then we should be seeing a constant decrease in crime and prison populations, a decrease in laws.

In fact, the goal of a productive and stabilizing society would be the intent to eliminate the need for prisons, police and everything we’ve just mentioned all together.

I think Lisa Simpsons but I best:

(showing a clip from an episode of The Simpsons)

“Marge: And that’s the drunk tank and this is mommy’s desk.

Lisa: Mom, I know your intentionsn are good but aren’t the police a protective force that maintains the status quo for the wealthy elite? Don’t you think we ought to attack the roots for social problems instead of jamming people into over-crowded prisons?

Marge: Look Lisa, it’s MaGriff, The Crime Dog!”

This brings us to the concept of security now.

Since 9/11 security measures across the world have gone berserk with irrationality. The public at large, especially in America, is now neurotically obsessed with security. The solution to violent human behaviour is evidently more police, more cameras and less freedom and liberty.

I hate to bring it to everybody but if somebody really wants to kill you, or blow up an airplane, blow up a shopping mall or do anything they want essentially in the form of violence, realease toxic gas in the subway – they will find a way to do it. No form of security will ever stop that.

Therefore the logic is wrong.

It is impossible. And the whole basis of security is we know it is the absolute reverse of the application that’s recquired to solve these types of issues.

True security comes from solving social problems. Addressing the environment, the reasons or the neurosis and distortion of the human being.

This is a chart covering the last 200 years. The Y axis shows life expectancy and the X axis shows income adjusted for inflation. Each bubble is a country, the size shows the population and each colour a continent – the keys in the top right hand corner. You will notice that in 1800 life expectancy was under 40 years of age in all countries and income was less than 3000 dollas. Now, what I want you to pay attention to is the trend of disparity, particularly in income, as we view this chart through time.

You will notice that life expectancy has basically risen along with wealth in general. But what do we see mostly? What do we see? What stands out?

We see a tremendous and growing economic disparity. Africa for example are just left in the dust by the western nations.

We went from this – to this.

Economic disparity is obviously growing now why am I bringing this up?

There is some research that’s been done by a few parties, one being Richard Wilkinson of the University of Nottingham in the UK, which has shown a strong corrrelation between crime and income inequality. Not absolute income, but inequality itself. It’s psychological.

For example, in the United States, which has the largest income gap in the world – I wonder why we – and of course we are also the wealthiest in the world – I wonder why we also have largest prison population in the world? Why is there so much distortion?

It’s possibly because of this tremendous economic stratification.

Here is a chart showing the growing disparity divided into the upper and lower classes. While the lower classes stay poor on average, the gap between them and the upper and middle classes continues to grow extensively. I believe this is the basic source of the increase in crime across this planet holistically.

There seems to be a correlation between growing disparity and prison population and hence crime. The more income inequality, the more crime. It comes from what some people refer to as psycho-social stress.

So, coming back to my original point when it comes to the concept of security I think one of the most important things we should be considering is reducing the global income gap. In other words, I think that the more this inequality in the world grows, the more world conflicts that will arise on multiple levels.

Okay now we’re gonna to move on to Paper Proclamations.

Today we use paper proclaimations as we called them to denote a persons so called rights. And just like laws, they are culturally biased, artificial concoctions which attempt to solve reoccurring problems by simply declaring something with words on paper usually.

Rights in fact have been invented to protect ourselves from the negative by products of the social system itself. And once again, instead of seeking a true solution to a problem, we invent these patches by way of paper proclaimations in an attempt to resolve them.

This does not work, it has never worked, there is really no such thing a unalienable right outside of the culture of which it is assumed. We are making this up. Therefore, liberties need to be inherent in the social system, by design, not alluded to ambiguously on paper.

As a classic example of this, let’s take the notion of divine law, the famed ten commandments.

Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not murder.


These are surface notion cop outs created by men who didn’t have any real information.
Who did not understand that we live in a cause and effect reality.

Telling people this doesn’t virtually nothing as history has proven.

Morality is an empty idea that has no empirical referent.

An intelligent commandment would be something like:

“Thou shalt continually reorient thyself and society to reduce reactionary propensities that lead to abberated consequences such as stealing and murder”

– The gospel of Peter Jospeh J

The same surface irrelevancy applies to any constitution or Bill Of Rights of any country on this planet.
In the Bill Of Rights of the United States there is an attempt to secure certain freedoms and protections by way again of mere text on paper. Now, while I understand the value of this document and the temporal briliance of it in the context of the period its creation, that does not excuse the fact that it is a product of social inefficiency and nothing more.

In other words, declarations of laws and rights are actually an acknowledgement of failures of the social design

There are many people today in the so called Patriot and Liberty Movements. I know many people like this I’m a fan of people who are proponents of this, in part, because I believe there is a place for it.

But this document is not the saviour of America.

Some people seem to believe that the United States had some magical position at one point or another, perhaps where we slaughtered the Mexicans and Indians to steal the land. Or the fact when the Constituion was written, only white, property owning males which was about 10 % of the whole population of the nation, were allowed to vote – this is government by the people?

Moving on let me demonstrate what I’m talking about here.

The Fourth Amendment details how people have protection from unreasonable searches and seizures.

This statement is basically qualified by the termed notion of “probable cause” in the amendment.

What is “probable cause”?

The only way to figure this out is to find a legal working definition that is culturally accepted.

A common definition of “probably cause” in this context is:

“a reasonable belief that a person hwas commited a crime”

Okay so qualifiers is now “reasonable” right?

Reasonable, okay this is often defined as:

“Fair: not excessive or extreme”

Well okay then I guess we have to move on the word “excessive”¨

You see my point I hope.

It is meaningless semantically therefore it cannot be trusted, none of it can. In other words, legal definitions are not empirical. All the amendments are subject to the whims of interpretation which is why they are abused by the police, homeland security and the IRS on a daily basis.

Therefore back to my original point: there is no such thing as rights as the reference can be altered at will. The Fourh Amendment is an attempt to protect people from state power abuse, that is clear. But it avoids the real issue and that is: why would the state have an interest to search and sieze to begin with?

How do you remove the mechanisms that generate such behaviour?

We need to focus on the real cause. Now, to be clear again, I’m not saying that laws, rights and the like are not needed at this time, they certainly are, but we need to hone our focus to resolving the actual problem.

And by the way for all the nationalists out there I’m not attacking the US Consitution once again, however it is not the answer. And it is naïve to think that this document really has that much relevance.

Again, I am a fan of people like Ron Paul and Dennis Kazynicz, I believe there is a place for the work that they do, but it’s not the answer. The history of America is just like the history of any other country on this planet, it’s history of deception, fraud and corruption.

There is nothing to return to for the integrity was never there to begin with.

We must mov forwards – not backwards.

And this brings us to Government.

All governments in existence today whether you recognize it today are institutional dictatorships. They are publicly sanctioned power-monopolies.

And democracy as it is practiced today is simply a game that is played, I’m sorry, but it is simply a game that’s played to give the public the illusion of control.

People think they have choice in our current system because they can press a button on a voting machine and put a pre-selected person into power. However, once that person is in power the public then has virtually no say. Did you vote for the bank bailout? Did you vote for the cabinet of a new President? Did you vote for the tax increase? Do you vote for where highways or power grids or any infrastructure goes? Did you vote for the wars in Afganistan and Iraq?

So where is your real participation?

In part three we will discuss how a true democracy would actually work and it’s not the election of people, it’s the election of ideas.

We have to understand that government as we know it today is not in place for the well-being of the public but rather for the perpetuation of their establishment and their power – just like every other institution within a monetary system

Government is a monetary invention for the sake of economic and social control and it’s methods are based on self-preservation first and foremost.

All that government can really do is create laws to compensate for an inherent lack of integrity in the social order. It is also worth pointing out that most politicians in fact are lawyers. Most players in government come from the world of law. And in reality they have no absolutely no real education therefore or understanding about the true foundation of social operation. Can a lawyer come fix your home heating system? Can a lawyer go and organize a power grid for a particular area? No.

Lawyers and hence politicians are simply not trained in any tangible way to solve real problems. They’re trained to solve artificial, non sensical problems that are culminated by products of our non sensical society.
In other words, society is in fact a technical creation. I’ll say that again; society is a technical creation – consisting of infrastructure, resources and management. Society is a technological construct. Republican, Democrat – it doesn’t mean a damn thing.

If you really wanna see a society that works you have tobegin to realize that science and technology is the overarching element that governs the entire mechanism of social organization. And therefore those who study those attributes should be given, not control, but should be given the forefront of participation.

The forefront of influence to say “Hey you know we can feed and clothe all the impoverished people in Africa and in the Third World – we can technically do it”

But unfortunately they go to their corporate bureaucracy and hence government bureaucracy and of course the governments say “Oh we don’t have the money for that”

The question has never been ”Do we have the money?”

The question has always been ”Do we have the resources and technological know how?”

Now, the final issue I would like to cover in this section has to do with activism and the traditional patterns of activism we’ve seen historically across the world. In the world today there are countless, well-intentioned people in activist organizations making a lot of noise about the rampant problems and injustices in our world. Yet unfortunately as you tend to find very few offer any real tangible, long-term solutions. Those that do offer solution however almost universally frame those solutions within the pre-existing social establishment.

Their tactics tend to involve new legislation and of course they always demand ethics and accountability. Very little regard is given to the root structure of our system. Battling and protesting corporate organizations, corrupt corporate organizations, and seeking money from society in an attempt to curtail such trends, is a typical path that is taken. It is a very respectable path in general however it is not going to create long-term change.

I’m nothing but pleased to see something like this (showing a graph of a boat protesting Pirate Fishing)

But does that really do anything?

When it comes to social corruption, poverty, environmental disregard, human exploitation and most personal and social turmoil in the world today – the great realization is that most of these problems is not the result of a particular company, some nefarious elite group or some government legislation.

These are symptoms of the foundational problem.

The real issue is human behaviour. And human behaviour is largely created and reinforced by the social patterns required for survival as necessitated by the social system of that period in time. We are products of our society. And the fact of the matter is it is the very foundation of our socio-economic system and hence our environmental condition which has created the sick cultural climate you see around you.

Very rarely do any activist organizations today consider the possibility that maybe, it is the social system itself that is the problem.

The bottom line is that we can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that mysteriously wander out from underneath our refrigirator setting traps, or laws, or we can get rid of the spoiled food behind it that’s causing the infestation to begin with.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: