Where do we go from here?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-03-2013, 10:27 AM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2013 10:33 AM by TrulyX.)
RE: Where do we go from here?
(22-03-2013 03:25 AM)Luminon Wrote:  As for free speech, I'd say it should solve itself by education. We need to educate people, that nobody has the right to their own opinion. Personal opinions don't matter, we either arrive at a knowledge through scientific method, or we don't know it yet.

Can you tell me please, which people proposed this move towards socialism? Not just Marx, was there any Adam Smith or other classic among them? They seemed to believe in things like trickle-down of wealth, that eventually we'll all have enough wealth just to stop working and then there'll be socialism.
However, the ownership we have allows for unlimited accumulation of personal wealth and therefore for unlimited inequality and poverty, that only forces people to expand further and produce "empty callories" of economic growth. And nobody dares to question that. The most radical any economist (I know) can get is to return to the golden standard. SRSLY? Back to the age of bank robberies, stolen belt pouches and government ban on private gold mining? Back to the age of coin shaving and biting the coins to see if they're true? As you say, people need to look at practicality of the system and I don't just mean the gold is heavy.

I have set out to "convert" my dean to RBE. He wants essays and presentations, I'll give him that and more. If he read just the one book I pointed him at, "The best money can't buy", my job would be done. I'll also show the books to anyone who asks.

Not just over time. There's a wonderful mechanism called generational revolt. Only now we see something else yet. We see the internet natives growing up in a whole different world than anyone before. We see even old people joining them, disillusioned by all the useless revolutions. We see leftists speaking out for rightful business. The result is, the changes are faster than most people can imagine, yet alone notice. In medieval ages it took centuries to keep a good idea in head and keep the head on one's neck. Today the global consciousness expands in explosive speed.

I'd say that all political structures are by definition unsustainable. And the sustainable ones are not necessarily good. The Chinese empire was so good at isolated sustaining, that sociologists theoretize it might have continued forever if the white men didn't destroy it from the outside.
Again, RBE does not have politics, if a decision needs to be made, measure the need, make an experiment and come to a conclusion. Let the reality itself rule. As for social structures, it's all good how we call ourselves, if no part of the structure has a lack goods and services for that.

RBE solves all these, perhaps except of the asteroids. Most scientists I know of, they say we don't have time, 10,15 years tops to radically change the way we do things.

First, if RBE solves the problems, then the problems would have already been solved, given that the RBE is already an idea. That is: Solving a problem actually requires the implementation of a solution, not just a random, not very revolutionary, unique or good, idea.

I don't know what you mean by: "Can you tell me please, which people proposed this move towards socialism? Not just Marx, was there any Adam Smith or other classic among them?".

There wasn't a proposed move toward socialism. I was just talking about Marxism, in general, post-Industrial Revolutionary views on economics and societal structures. The natural move toward the left. Besides Marxism/socialism: labour movements, social democratic movements, progressive movements, etc. A lot of the socialism and revolution was obviously suppressed, in the West, for the most part, due to Cold War politics, letting ideas from John Maynard Keynes, Friedrich Hayek, etc., to become more prevalent in society, as opposed to Marxism, and hence why I said that the move wasn't as much as you would like to have seen. You obviously had Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism in the East, and elsewhere to lesser extents. In the US, Daniel DeLeon is really one of the only names, I can think of, linked to Marxists views (De Leonism).

But, I really don't understand the question. The trickle-down, Adam Smith and socialism, stuff. What are you getting at?

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2013, 10:43 AM
RE: Where do we go from here?
(22-03-2013 09:07 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(22-03-2013 08:07 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  There seems to be but one direction - war. A big, fat, species-reducing worldwide conflagration. There's just too many stupid, greedy, short-sighted monkeys holding to outmoded paradigms for there to be any kind of effective change. (Of course, that's my cynical voice. Tongue )
More likely the war-like superpowers will face such domestic unrest that they'll choose to keep the army at home. But there will be a financial collapse probably, that or dismantling the financial industry, whichever comes first. A government might find itself in trouble to pay the soldiers and policemen. There is but one military superpower and it's already spread too thin, militarily, financially, economically... It however maintains a firm grip on the media. All global media are owned by someone. These someones are owned by two companies. One of them is Reuters, the other is owned by Reuters.

So making opinions with such media is pretty much impossible. Unless you know of any independent press. Which I do.

I think I more or less agree with HoC. Explain what you are referring to above?

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2013, 03:32 PM (This post was last modified: 22-03-2013 03:37 PM by Luminon.)
RE: Where do we go from here?
(22-03-2013 10:27 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  First, if RBE solves the problems, then the problems would have already been solved, given that the RBE is already an idea. That is: Solving a problem actually requires the implementation of a solution, not just a random, not very revolutionary, unique or good, idea.
No argument here, Fresco and Meadows work tirelessly for decades to implement this solution. But they need to make a great film, then let masses of people see this film. Then the governments pressured by the people need to sponsor building a prototype self-sustaining city by Fresco's blueprints, for all other governments to see. That's how they want to implement RBE.

(22-03-2013 10:27 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  I don't know what you mean by: "Can you tell me please, which people proposed this move towards socialism? Not just Marx, was there any Adam Smith or other classic among them?".

There wasn't a proposed move toward socialism. I was just talking about Marxism, in general, post-Industrial Revolutionary views on economics and societal structures. The natural move toward the left. Besides Marxism/socialism: labour movements, social democratic movements, progressive movements, etc. A lot of the socialism and revolution was obviously suppressed, in the West, for the most part, due to Cold War politics, letting ideas from John Maynard Keynes, Friedrich Hayek, etc., to become more prevalent in society, as opposed to Marxism, and hence why I said that the move wasn't as much as you would like to have seen. You obviously had Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism in the East, and elsewhere to lesser extents. In the US, Daniel DeLeon is really one of the only names, I can think of, linked to Marxists views (De Leonism).

But, I really don't understand the question. The trickle-down, Adam Smith and socialism, stuff. What are you getting at?
I was pretty sure some of the classical capitalist economists believed that the accumulation of capital is not permanent, that it will lead to a stable and wealthy economy, where everyone is rich. I think some were well aware, that given golden standard and increasing wealth, everyone is richer and maybe at some point nobody will have to work, or will be able to retire fairly quickly. If not, nevermind.

(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  I think I more or less agree with HoC. Explain what you are referring to above?
I think HoC sees it a bit too pessimistically. Due to privately owned global media, we can't see the current situation clearly, we see only the version of the powerful people, who ignore much of public opinion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2013, 04:40 PM
RE: Where do we go from here?
(22-03-2013 03:32 PM)Luminon Wrote:  No argument here, Fresco and Meadows work tirelessly for decades to implement this solution. But they need to make a great film, then let masses of people see this film. Then the governments pressured by the people need to sponsor building a prototype self-sustaining city by Fresco's blueprints, for all other governments to see. That's how they want to implement RBE.

Give me more. "They need to make a great film, then let masses of people see this film".

You need political power. You need grassroots organization. You need massive amounts of money. You need organized campaign strategies. You need propaganda. You need to win elections.

Personally, I had no one knocking on my door last election, asking if I knew about the RBE. I saw no TV adds. I saw no news coverage.

Not every person believes the hype.

There are currently massive, powerful organizational structures in place for economics and governance. There are currently people who own, by law, a lot of the resources upon which I'd assume you want to base your economy. You think a film and political pressure is going to make them change their minds? As much as Bowling for Columbine eliminated guns, Inside Job eliminated too big to fail, Inconvenient Truth eliminated climate change, Bully eliminated bullying, or Religulous eliminated religion? That doesn't even cover books.

Quote:I was pretty sure some of the classical capitalist economists believed that the accumulation of capital is not permanent, that it will lead to a stable and wealthy economy, where everyone is rich. I think some were well aware, that given golden standard and increasing wealth, everyone is richer and maybe at some point nobody will have to work, or will be able to retire fairly quickly. If not, nevermind.

I just didn't get the trickle-down part or socialism part. It's just that wealth is created. Nothing trickles down, and the goal isn't socialism, just wealth creation through specialization, division of labor, free-trade, money, private ownership, etc. If that worked, trickling down wouldn't be needed, as those who were involved, contributing and trading would have what they needed; it would cycle through and around, with maybe some getting more, because of profits, but that would be balanced out. Again, if that worked, it would pretty much be like socialism and/or make socialism unnecessary, but socialism deals, also, with getting rid of private ownership, while capitalism is based on private ownership.

(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  I think HoC sees it a bit too pessimistically. Due to privately owned global media, we can't see the current situation clearly, we see only the version of the powerful people, who ignore much of public opinion.

I can't speak for any other people, but the news I watch covers public opinion statistics regularly. Just from having worked, and getting an estimate of other people's sentiments, it's a cold, dead hands deal. The US party running with the slogan We Built It, almost won, and actually do currently control majority power in one of our legislators and at state and local levels.

We are in a global economy also. There isn't a need for a NWO or some conspiracy bullshit. The people in power know what they want. Powerful countries, and their leaders, who are working for plutocracy, make decisions accordingly. It's all interconnected, and nobody wants to see a collapse or riff economically.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TrulyX's post
23-03-2013, 03:50 AM
RE: Where do we go from here?
(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  Give me more. "They need to make a great film, then let masses of people see this film".

You need political power. You need grassroots organization. You need massive amounts of money. You need organized campaign strategies. You need propaganda. You need to win elections.

Personally, I had no one knocking on my door last election, asking if I knew about the RBE. I saw no TV adds. I saw no news coverage.

Not every person believes the hype.

There are currently massive, powerful organizational structures in place for economics and governance. There are currently people who own, by law, a lot of the resources upon which I'd assume you want to base your economy. You think a film and political pressure is going to make them change their minds? As much as Bowling for Columbine eliminated guns, Inside Job eliminated too big to fail, Inconvenient Truth eliminated climate change, Bully eliminated bullying, or Religulous eliminated religion? That doesn't even cover books.
I'm sorry to say that, but USA will be probably the last place where political opinion changes. USA did a good job of getting into such a trouble that the right (stupid) thing to do is to continue as usual to "save face". It worked so well with war on drugs and war on terrorism, it's a tradition now.
As for the powerful structures, these rely on money and money are essentially dollars. The value of money is today quite artificial. So is the value of financial market and numbers like GDP, based mostly on government spending. These institutions got so far from reality that they hold together by belief. Every time someone bails out a country or bank, the collapse is postponed, but another country gets on the train going nowhere.

Fresco was on the Larry King Show back in the 80's. But he spoke against smoking cigarettes and some of the sponsors were cigarette companies. And since then no American media want to have anything to do with him. I get a feeling that it's about more than just cigarettes. The whole thing is bad for all products, he says in the future advertisers of today would be seen as criminals.

Fresco says 600 people register daily on his page. Then there is the Zeitgeist Movement, a self-appointed activist branch, or as I privately think in strong words, useful idiots. I'm pretty sure there was some kind of connection to UN, some dealings with some UN agency, that would be great. But when I try to look up that website again, the net is chock full of the NWO conspiracy nuts saying it's a bad thing. They're like drowning people saying that a floating ring thrown to them is a conspiracy trick to make them drown.

(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  I just didn't get the trickle-down part or socialism part. It's just that wealth is created. Nothing trickles down, and the goal isn't socialism, just wealth creation through specialization, division of labor, free-trade, money, private ownership, etc. If that worked, trickling down wouldn't be needed, as those who were involved, contributing and trading would have what they needed; it would cycle through and around, with maybe some getting more, because of profits, but that would be balanced out. Again, if that worked, it would pretty much be like socialism and/or make socialism unnecessary, but socialism deals, also, with getting rid of private ownership, while capitalism is based on private ownership.
Yeah. I don't get why liberal right economists don't get it. They think they can have freedom AND accumulation of wealth and yet no state. That's like saying you can have a whole zebra to yourself and not a single fly or jackal will touch it.

(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  I can't speak for any other people, but the news I watch covers public opinion statistics regularly. Just from having worked, and getting an estimate of other people's sentiments, it's a cold, dead hands deal. The US party running with the slogan We Built It, almost won, and actually do currently control majority power in one of our legislators and at state and local levels.

We are in a global economy also. There isn't a need for a NWO or some conspiracy bullshit. The people in power know what they want. Powerful countries, and their leaders, who are working for plutocracy, make decisions accordingly. It's all interconnected, and nobody wants to see a collapse or riff economically.
I didn't mean any NWO conspiracy bullshit, it irritates me just as much as you. I just heard that the corporate ownership of global media all end with Reuters. Of course, the local media take their news from the global, and they also take orders from the government, report this, don't report that... But I don't know how is it in the USA, I wouldn't rely much either on U.S. public opinion or media.
The only U.S. media I get regularly is the Occupy movement Facebook feed. I know the European and my national media and they're totally biased, one hand with the government. My national secret agency reports on people like me as "extreme leftists", mentioned alongside extreme rightists, such as the Neonazis and Worker Party (once banned by the court). But I visited the protests in question and they were actually full of pensioners, families, students and teenagers. The national TV of course undervalues the numbers, to 1/4 I'd say.

I don't know how about U.S.A., but I'd say there are signs that the public opinion is awakening and the power will weaken, as the financial system goes to shit. The people who hold the power are (at least in my country) idiots who don't know what's happening and believe their own lies: they see high GDP and openly say on TV the nation's all right, the same GDP they keep up by government spending on corrupted state contracts. You know something is wrong if left-wingers have to tell the right-wingers to shut up and stop destroying the private business sector.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2013, 08:31 AM
RE: Where do we go from here?
(23-03-2013 03:50 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  Give me more. "They need to make a great film, then let masses of people see this film".

You need political power. You need grassroots organization. You need massive amounts of money. You need organized campaign strategies. You need propaganda. You need to win elections.

Personally, I had no one knocking on my door last election, asking if I knew about the RBE. I saw no TV adds. I saw no news coverage.

Not every person believes the hype.

There are currently massive, powerful organizational structures in place for economics and governance. There are currently people who own, by law, a lot of the resources upon which I'd assume you want to base your economy. You think a film and political pressure is going to make them change their minds? As much as Bowling for Columbine eliminated guns, Inside Job eliminated too big to fail, Inconvenient Truth eliminated climate change, Bully eliminated bullying, or Religulous eliminated religion? That doesn't even cover books.
I'm sorry to say that, but USA will be probably the last place where political opinion changes. USA did a good job of getting into such a trouble that the right (stupid) thing to do is to continue as usual to "save face". It worked so well with war on drugs and war on terrorism, it's a tradition now.
As for the powerful structures, these rely on money and money are essentially dollars. The value of money is today quite artificial. So is the value of financial market and numbers like GDP, based mostly on government spending. These institutions got so far from reality that they hold together by belief. Every time someone bails out a country or bank, the collapse is postponed, but another country gets on the train going nowhere.

Fresco was on the Larry King Show back in the 80's. But he spoke against smoking cigarettes and some of the sponsors were cigarette companies. And since then no American media want to have anything to do with him. I get a feeling that it's about more than just cigarettes. The whole thing is bad for all products, he says in the future advertisers of today would be seen as criminals.

Fresco says 600 people register daily on his page. Then there is the Zeitgeist Movement, a self-appointed activist branch, or as I privately think in strong words, useful idiots. I'm pretty sure there was some kind of connection to UN, some dealings with some UN agency, that would be great. But when I try to look up that website again, the net is chock full of the NWO conspiracy nuts saying it's a bad thing. They're like drowning people saying that a floating ring thrown to them is a conspiracy trick to make them drown.

(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  I just didn't get the trickle-down part or socialism part. It's just that wealth is created. Nothing trickles down, and the goal isn't socialism, just wealth creation through specialization, division of labor, free-trade, money, private ownership, etc. If that worked, trickling down wouldn't be needed, as those who were involved, contributing and trading would have what they needed; it would cycle through and around, with maybe some getting more, because of profits, but that would be balanced out. Again, if that worked, it would pretty much be like socialism and/or make socialism unnecessary, but socialism deals, also, with getting rid of private ownership, while capitalism is based on private ownership.
Yeah. I don't get why liberal right economists don't get it. They think they can have freedom AND accumulation of wealth and yet no state. That's like saying you can have a whole zebra to yourself and not a single fly or jackal will touch it.

(22-03-2013 10:43 AM)TrulyX Wrote:  I can't speak for any other people, but the news I watch covers public opinion statistics regularly. Just from having worked, and getting an estimate of other people's sentiments, it's a cold, dead hands deal. The US party running with the slogan We Built It, almost won, and actually do currently control majority power in one of our legislators and at state and local levels.

We are in a global economy also. There isn't a need for a NWO or some conspiracy bullshit. The people in power know what they want. Powerful countries, and their leaders, who are working for plutocracy, make decisions accordingly. It's all interconnected, and nobody wants to see a collapse or riff economically.
I didn't mean any NWO conspiracy bullshit, it irritates me just as much as you. I just heard that the corporate ownership of global media all end with Reuters. Of course, the local media take their news from the global, and they also take orders from the government, report this, don't report that... But I don't know how is it in the USA, I wouldn't rely much either on U.S. public opinion or media.
The only U.S. media I get regularly is the Occupy movement Facebook feed. I know the European and my national media and they're totally biased, one hand with the government. My national secret agency reports on people like me as "extreme leftists", mentioned alongside extreme rightists, such as the Neonazis and Worker Party (once banned by the court). But I visited the protests in question and they were actually full of pensioners, families, students and teenagers. The national TV of course undervalues the numbers, to 1/4 I'd say.

I don't know how about U.S.A., but I'd say there are signs that the public opinion is awakening and the power will weaken, as the financial system goes to shit. The people who hold the power are (at least in my country) idiots who don't know what's happening and believe their own lies: they see high GDP and openly say on TV the nation's all right, the same GDP they keep up by government spending on corrupted state contracts. You know something is wrong if left-wingers have to tell the right-wingers to shut up and stop destroying the private business sector.
Sorry for the very late response but my computer is now in it's final days of it's life. I usually have about ten minutes from the time it takes to turn the computer on to it's freeze. And it takes forever to get on to the internet.

I get that your not coming from the TMZ side of things and find your term "useful idiots" amusing.

My problem though is that from what I have read your argument seems to go for two things.

That the problem lies in getting the public aware and that you have to create a prototype city to show the world.

This seems to be a problem with " how do you eat an elaphant" kinda thing.

There are multiple areas of the market where you can activley puch whatever technological ideas you have forward. Reseorce extraction, food production, and even some product production are not reliant entirley on other countries.

So my question to you is why doesn't anyone in these org's. Either the TVP or TZM try to collectivley pursue using tech for these fields.

Just an outsider looking inn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2013, 09:50 AM
RE: Where do we go from here?
I'm digging the thread, it's got me thinking, my mind is whirring and then...


A knock on the door.

A nicely dressed woman and young boy wearing a starch shirt and tie are there. They are inviting us to celebrate Jesus' death with them.

I have lost my train of thought completely. We're fucked as a species.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
23-03-2013, 04:07 PM (This post was last modified: 23-03-2013 04:16 PM by Luminon.)
RE: Where do we go from here?
(23-03-2013 08:31 AM)Foxcanine1 Wrote:  Sorry for the very late response but my computer is now in it's final days of it's life. I usually have about ten minutes from the time it takes to turn the computer on to it's freeze. And it takes forever to get on to the internet.

I get that your not coming from the TMZ side of things and find your term "useful idiots" amusing.

My problem though is that from what I have read your argument seems to go for two things.

That the problem lies in getting the public aware and that you have to create a prototype city to show the world.

This seems to be a problem with " how do you eat an elaphant" kinda thing.
Sincere condolences with your computer. I take it you had the chance to backup the data, that's important.
Yes, TZM people are useful in the sense that they like and spread RBE. But many of them believe everything else as well. NWO, conspiracies, bad history, bad science perhaps...

Informing the public, that's diffcult. But if they can get the money to hire a big name from the film industry, the film is guaranteed to get the attention. "Hey, ever heard of the new Spielberg movie? It's some kind of futuristic communism stuff, with flashbacks from the present, all demonstrations and people fighting the cops..." "Sounds good, let's go see it!"
To be sure, I have sent a message through Facebook to the account of Bill Gates. Maybe in several months it will get to him and the financing problem will be solved Tongue I could in my spare time show the movie to Jehovah's Witnesses groups, that's a hundred people for the cause at a time. I'd just show them how things would go in the Kingdom of God. No banks, no stock markets, no money, that's what you guys want, right?

(23-03-2013 08:31 AM)Foxcanine1 Wrote:  There are multiple areas of the market where you can activley puch whatever technological ideas you have forward. Reseorce extraction, food production, and even some product production are not reliant entirley on other countries. 

So my question to you is why doesn't anyone in these org's. Either the TVP or TZM try to collectivley pursue using tech for these fields.
It may seem surprising, but TVP is not about technology. Fresco has the blueprints and they're being digitalized right now, but they're not the stuff of science fiction. Fresco is a generalist industrial designer, he uses technology that was available, only in a new way. And today we surely have a better technology or materials in some areas. Super-advanced technology is not the point. Fresco's job was to design things in such a way that they "fit into each other", like that a ship can be partially disassembled and its parts are big containers that fit into the trains, or that one machine lays down tunnel pipes that are exactly the right size for maglev trains, things like that, you get the idea. Not necessarily more advanced, anyone can improve the technologies later, just more efficient and fitting together.

The point is in the idea, philosophy and society. It may seem terribly nebulous, so you may imagine it as a design. How do we design, build and organize things today is wasteful. Capitalism is terribly wasteful and so is every city ever built (perhaps except the new one in Dubai). This wastefulness stems from the fact, that we don't design things, we let them chaotically evolve. Let's say, Prague is a medieval city, surrounded by Communist architecture. Both are unfit for modern electricity, heating, transportation, wi-fi, plumbing and so on. I spend months at school listening to the drilling noises from the building next door. Prague is like mouth of a medieval beggar full of rotten teeth, constantly worked upon by modern drillers of a tireless dentist.
We think it's too expensive, but our cities are really expensive. We should level all that is not historically valuable and build a city that is designed to be efficient, serialized, homologued, moddable, replaceable, repairable, modern, of high quality materials, with all kinds of infrastructure and engineering networks already built in. That's what TVP says. This of course demands to give it to the people, because there's no way a market could do that. Market just can't secure us for the future in such an organized way. Market won't get us into a world where a house is just another appliance, easily produced, easily replaced. We need to make a transition, but it must be a global, systematic one. This is what Fresco means by "future by design". A market or history has no design, it just grows the way wind blows. RBE is about cooperation, inspired by how human body works and how organs share all the resources. If our body worked like the market, competition for money and resources, we wouldn't survive two days.

Furthermore, RBE is even more about social change. With introduction of rationalized, efficient production the scarcity will be eliminated. Most of the science of economy, jobs of today and the law is based on money and scarcity. Also most of our social structures and life style. (including family) Creating abundance will bring a whole new life style, value system and way of thinking.

(23-03-2013 09:50 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  I'm digging the thread, it's got me thinking, my mind is whirring and then...


A knock on the door.

A nicely dressed woman and young boy wearing a starch shirt and tie are there. They are inviting us to celebrate Jesus' death with them.

I have lost my train of thought completely. We're fucked as a species.
C'mon, what a wonderful opportunity! I've always wanted Jehovah's Witnesses to knock on MY door. 
I say, "what do you guys want?" 
They say, "We want to talk about Bible." 
I say,"Sure thing, what do you want to know?"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2013, 10:54 PM
RE: Where do we go from here?
(23-03-2013 04:07 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(23-03-2013 08:31 AM)Foxcanine1 Wrote:  Sorry for the very late response but my computer is now in it's final days of it's life. I usually have about ten minutes from the time it takes to turn the computer on to it's freeze. And it takes forever to get on to the internet.

I get that your not coming from the TMZ side of things and find your term "useful idiots" amusing.

My problem though is that from what I have read your argument seems to go for two things.

That the problem lies in getting the public aware and that you have to create a prototype city to show the world.

This seems to be a problem with " how do you eat an elaphant" kinda thing.
Sincere condolences with your computer. I take it you had the chance to backup the data, that's important.
Yes, TZM people are useful in the sense that they like and spread RBE. But many of them believe everything else as well. NWO, conspiracies, bad history, bad science perhaps...

Informing the public, that's diffcult. But if they can get the money to hire a big name from the film industry, the film is guaranteed to get the attention. "Hey, ever heard of the new Spielberg movie? It's some kind of futuristic communism stuff, with flashbacks from the present, all demonstrations and people fighting the cops..." "Sounds good, let's go see it!"
To be sure, I have sent a message through Facebook to the account of Bill Gates. Maybe in several months it will get to him and the financing problem will be solved Tongue I could in my spare time show the movie to Jehovah's Witnesses groups, that's a hundred people for the cause at a time. I'd just show them how things would go in the Kingdom of God. No banks, no stock markets, no money, that's what you guys want, right?

(23-03-2013 08:31 AM)Foxcanine1 Wrote:  There are multiple areas of the market where you can activley puch whatever technological ideas you have forward. Reseorce extraction, food production, and even some product production are not reliant entirley on other countries.

So my question to you is why doesn't anyone in these org's. Either the TVP or TZM try to collectivley pursue using tech for these fields.
It may seem surprising, but TVP is not about technology. Fresco has the blueprints and they're being digitalized right now, but they're not the stuff of science fiction. Fresco is a generalist industrial designer, he uses technology that was available, only in a new way. And today we surely have a better technology or materials in some areas. Super-advanced technology is not the point. Fresco's job was to design things in such a way that they "fit into each other", like that a ship can be partially disassembled and its parts are big containers that fit into the trains, or that one machine lays down tunnel pipes that are exactly the right size for maglev trains, things like that, you get the idea. Not necessarily more advanced, anyone can improve the technologies later, just more efficient and fitting together.

The point is in the idea, philosophy and society. It may seem terribly nebulous, so you may imagine it as a design. How do we design, build and organize things today is wasteful. Capitalism is terribly wasteful and so is every city ever built (perhaps except the new one in Dubai). This wastefulness stems from the fact, that we don't design things, we let them chaotically evolve. Let's say, Prague is a medieval city, surrounded by Communist architecture. Both are unfit for modern electricity, heating, transportation, wi-fi, plumbing and so on. I spend months at school listening to the drilling noises from the building next door. Prague is like mouth of a medieval beggar full of rotten teeth, constantly worked upon by modern drillers of a tireless dentist.
We think it's too expensive, but our cities are really expensive. We should level all that is not historically valuable and build a city that is designed to be efficient, serialized, homologued, moddable, replaceable, repairable, modern, of high quality materials, with all kinds of infrastructure and engineering networks already built in. That's what TVP says. This of course demands to give it to the people, because there's no way a market could do that. Market just can't secure us for the future in such an organized way. Market won't get us into a world where a house is just another appliance, easily produced, easily replaced. We need to make a transition, but it must be a global, systematic one. This is what Fresco means by "future by design". A market or history has no design, it just grows the way wind blows. RBE is about cooperation, inspired by how human body works and how organs share all the resources. If our body worked like the market, competition for money and resources, we wouldn't survive two days.

Furthermore, RBE is even more about social change. With introduction of rationalized, efficient production the scarcity will be eliminated. Most of the science of economy, jobs of today and the law is based on money and scarcity. Also most of our social structures and life style. (including family) Creating abundance will bring a whole new life style, value system and way of thinking.

(23-03-2013 09:50 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  I'm digging the thread, it's got me thinking, my mind is whirring and then...


A knock on the door.

A nicely dressed woman and young boy wearing a starch shirt and tie are there. They are inviting us to celebrate Jesus' death with them.

I have lost my train of thought completely. We're fucked as a species.
C'mon, what a wonderful opportunity! I've always wanted Jehovah's Witnesses to knock on MY door.
I say, "what do you guys want?"
They say, "We want to talk about Bible."
I say,"Sure thing, what do you want to know?"



(FYI, im typing this on notepad so if it's posted bad then my apologies. It's the only way to save so that a crash doesn't
ruin my post) Here's the problem that I take with that. For the most part, to my knowledge, there are two things that one needs at the fundamental level, product production and innovation. In order to produce you need resources and in order to get resources
you need labor. Whether that labor comes from man or machine is the point. One of the propositions of the RBE is the Elimination of money since that undermines the ability to efficiently use and distribute resources accordingly. Yet if you eliminate money than the effect is that you undermine the human laborers ability to operate those labor jobs. In other words, You can't expect a human to do intensive labor for some good cause on a large scale. Especially if they have no desire to do
such jobs. So my question is. How, beyond replacing those labor jobs with machines, do you expect people to work for no money.


I also only don't whole hardily agree that capitalism is completely inefficient or leads to inefficiency. I do think that to some degree you should expect more efficiency in a system that has some reason to push for more efficient products. Scientist are still active in many different areas of product production. Case in point is agriculture. While not perfect agricultural growth, Unlike the
organic crowd, has created a far greater degree of food than has ever been produced before. Is it perfect, no. Lots of food is wasted. This is however to me a example that you can make more efficient produce. This happened in a capitalistic system even if capitalism wasn't the sole cause.

Just an outsider looking inn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2013, 10:56 PM
RE: Where do we go from here?
Wow, talk about distracting that last post really went south. Sorry I promise that I wasn't yelling. Don't know why it did that.

Just an outsider looking inn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: