Kait Kenel

Sales, Miller Shoes

This conversation is closed.

Read the proposal behind 'The Venus Project' and give critical feedback!

I need some people to please read, in its entirety, and gain a full grasp on, the outlined perspective drawn out by Jacque Fresco in 'The Venus Project'. I am looking for some critical feedback on it. I have not been able to find many true flaws in it, but I know that does not mean it is undoubtably devoid of any. I am just curious to get a new perspective on it, if not at least spread its message.

link: http://www.thevenusproject.com/

  • thumb
    Jun 22 2011: Bravo Venus Project!

    What I like so far after looking at the VP materials is not it's actual vision/plan to solve our world's most daunting, pressing problems, but just the very fact that it IS putting forth a vision for the future.

    Agree with ithe VP vision or not, pick it apart if you want, but what I think the world desperately needs at this particular point is something of a glimpse into a future where these problems that so affect all of us are answered with solutions. It may not be the final resolution to the epochal changes that lie ahead, but at least it is a start. Bravo Venus Project!
    • thumb
      Jun 22 2011: I agree we need a global visonary stratgey ..what, specifically , in the Venus Project do you see as a good start?
      • thumb
        Jun 22 2011: Their mission/purpose statement for one....

        Their attention to detail.... This is not just a vision, this appears to be a growing group's life's commitment - they've found something bigger than themselves.

        Their desire to rid the world of such things as racism, poverty, hunger, etc.

        Their holistic-style approach to the world....

        Their call for the best and the brightest in all fields to join.

        The fact that it is not faith-based.
      • thumb
        Jun 22 2011: Again, I am not saying the VP is the answer to ending things such as hunger, racism, poverty, etc. Just saying they are thinking about it in a way that I think is new and it could spark other ideas that will combine/build upon their vision and become the new reality.
  • thumb
    Jun 21 2011: Those that give TVP the erroneous sobriquet of "Communism" have absolutely no idea what communism is, basing their judgement from Hollywood movies and mass media propaganda. The concept has its share of lacking in many aspects of what a society requires to function. But to call it communism is just plain ignorant. I look at it as a Technocracy concept, regardless of the issues that concern me about it.

    As for the Zeitgeist films, be assured that they are meticulously made and do not make an amalgam between money and currency at all. There have been many articles(mostly inarticulate amateur blogs) trying to point out the "Hoax" or "Debunking" the films and its associated movement. I have read carefully through many of those, and so far I have not find a single one that didn't hide some sort of grudge, either religious, political, patriotic or call it what you will.
    Regarding the Zeitgeist films and the interpretation I made of them, I do support the TZM as its road seems to allow the grass to grow back. Perhaps it doesn't have all the answers but better take a detour towards the right path than carry on on the wrong one.
    • thumb
      Jun 22 2011: but now we have you to teach us what is the real meaning of "communism" is. will you? you could also emphasize the difference between the v.p. and communism.

      criticisms of the zeitgeist movies can not be rejected on the basis of any prejudice of the authors. only on the facts they presented. if you never encountered a debunking site with hard facts, i assume you don't know google.
  • thumb
    Jun 21 2011: I took a quick look...

    And plan to look at the VP in more detail because it looks to have all the earmarks of an idea borne by visionaries and nothing - not facts, not data, not philosophy, not reality - nothing turns me on more than visionary thinking.

    Thanks for this Kait.
    Looking forward to learning more about possible solutions to what I think are epochal events taking place on our planet.
  • Mar 31 2011: Before I saw this conversation, I had no idea what the VP was. I went to the provided website URL with a completely open mind. I have been sifting through the website reading the materials and trying to understand what they mean and all that jazz. So far from what I understand Zeitgeists believe that human reason and creativity can be reproduced in machines, enviromental protection and conservation are paramount and that all governments are inherently evil and must be abolished. I am confident that I am rght, so far.

    Okay...they are interesting ideas, but there are so many flaws with this idea...
    1) The VP is an attempt to bring nations together to stop war, poverty etc. Is that not what the UN was founded for? Look at its great progress!
    2) In one of the videos on the website Jaque Fresco said that there has "never been a democracy". That is absurd.
    3) He kept on talking about how we are told we are free and that we feel like we are free, but not really free. I am certain that I can do whatever I want with the exception of doing something like murdering someone or being free to play the violin well (even though I have never picked one up).
    4) Jaque said that "Every politician throughout all of the earth's history has been or is ignorant." You have to think really highly of yourself to say something lke that.
    5) On the VP website it said that "The U.S. Department of Agriculture, whise function is presumed to be conducting research into ways of achieving higher crop yields per acre, actually pay farers not to produce at full capacity." Is any one aware of crop rotation?
    6) If there is this central computer that controls all facets of life, who produces the computer parts for it when it breaks down? It seems to me whoever is in charge of programming and giving maintanence to that central computer then are they not in charge?

    I am running out of characters. I am going to continue to look throught the information. Please let me hear your thoughts.
    • thumb
      Jun 21 2011: I had looked at it before because it keeps coming up.in TED Conversations....very silly stuff..jacques is no visionary..he is an ego maniac

      I love hi splan for getting started

      raise money to

      make a film
      build a model city of his wacky designs ( I guess he didn't follow whta fared of Le Corbuisers hi-rise vision)
      build a theme park

      yeah//a brilliant start on how to save humanity.

      just wacky .
  • thumb
    Mar 20 2011: I'm familiar with this project since a few years now. Personally I had similar ideas and intentions on how to make our presence a better one. Still the Venus Project made it much simpler to put the whole thing together. I'm studying electrical engineering/ automation and robotics, so based on my experience and that of others the way that VP shows is the only one that makes actually any sense. We all live on one planet and in near future this is not going to change. We have a x resources and we're wasting some of them too rapidly. A intelligent, disciplined and self coordinated species would stop consuming and doing what it does, collect all information it can and make a judgement call what is the best for it. We behave like we own this place and in reality we obey worlds/natures law/s. Everyone need air, something to drink, eat, human contact to remain human and shelter. All we did until now is guess. Over 400 years ago everyone thought that Earth is a plate. If you thought otherwise and talked about it or insulted god or any high authority, they burned you on a stake and made you believe it would clean and free your soul. So what's now different? We think a little bit different about the world and yet it is still the same way. We have more access to more information that is more reliable. We live in a illusion with high moral values that so many of us died for and all most of us do is talk about them. We do (as a society or a part of a society) something only if there is pressure of time/violence/fear/whatever. That is the problem number one I have with VP. Until something really fundamental happens status quo remains (Look at north Africa, they have now a chance for change because of this pain and injustice they are capable of fundamental change of thinking). Fresco argues it will come alone when people see what is possible with VP. That's a good assumption, but you need to start somehow and in a money based "economy" you need money which is ironic.
    • thumb
      Mar 20 2011: 1. what is that x resource that we use so fast, we will run out of it within 50 years? can you imagine the level of technology 50 years from now?

      2. ancient greeks knew that the earth is a sphere. they even measured its diameter quite accurately. we don't even know who discovered it. this knowledge seems to be older than written history.
  • P C

    • +1
    Mar 15 2011: Imagine that there's a storehouse with two windows. In one window, you can take whatever you want. In the other window, you give whatever you want. In order for the storehouse to function, you have to give something that someone else wants, take out no more than you put in, and whatever goes in must ultimately be balanced with whatever comes out.

    In the window where people put stuff in, if too many people add things to the storehouse that no one wants, then the stuff they make will pile up on the shelves and fill the warehouse with junk. If people don't add enough stuff that others want, then there will be conflict over the few things that are available.

    In the window where people take stuff out, it'll be easy for people to take things that there are a lot of (the storehouse will practically be giving them away). If there aren't a lot of things, then there will be long lines that form.

    In the ideal storehouse world, what you put in will be connected with what you're allowed to take out; and there would be some way to link what you put in with how much is already in the storehouse (how much others want).

    The storehouse is symbolic of supply and demand, and what links them together is money. Price isn't about the inherent value of the items on the shelves in the storehouse, but how much is available and how much people are demanding it.

    In "TZM" world, the storehouse is an automated factory where people can always take things out but never have to put things back in. People stop contributing to the economy, and everyone has to accept, good or bad, whatever comes out. Worst of all people stop looking for ways help each other.

    Keep in mind that in the free market system, what you are allowed to take out of that storehouse is limited by what you put in that other people want. So your success depends on your ability to identify what others want and give it to them. TZM's greatest weakness is that it offers no incentives to do that.
  • thumb
    Mar 14 2011: Wow, I am so grateful for everyone's responses! This is the thinking we need to generate in order to figure out what path our world should be taking next!

    From a personal perspective, I truly do believe that if we were to our focus attention on every human being having the essentials for life (water, food, shelter, clothing) then we possibly would have enough resources to support it (especially through the use of greener energies). Yes it is an absolute to say that our current lifestyles of the west and the growing resource-demanding lifestyles of developing areas would have to change. I guess my concern is, can we make these changes while still operating under the same systems of monetary reward. It appears to me we can not, but I am truly seeking any way that it may be possible, or a change that may be successful outside of it...
    • thumb
      Mar 14 2011: "systems of monetary reward"

      can you elaborate what does this phrase mean?
    • Mar 30 2011: There are few shows that I would elicit advice from, but In Star Trek: The Next Generation, there is no monetary system. Everyone works for the betterment of humanity. I think ths is what Kait means by "monetary reward". Why work, why care, why put in the effort? Because we get paid money, which is essential to live. There is inequity in the world. I can admit that. Working for the betterment of humnaity is not selfish. I know it almost sounds utopian....but very alluring at the same time. However, the VP sounds great in theory...I don't not know enough to say if I like it or not. I get back to you on that one...
      • thumb
        Mar 30 2011: I agree with Colby,

        It is through the traditionalized acceptance of money (in the respect to the monetary system) that it is seen to be a good system, however when one person has more money someone else HAS to have less. That is why money is primitive, everyone deserves the same as long as they are being an equal in society.
        • thumb
          Mar 30 2011: but of course you didn't even try to read any of the materials i gave to you.
        • Mar 31 2011: Nicholas: Your comments are frightening. To say that everyone "deserves" the same as long as they are being an "equal" in society implies that someone, somewhere is set up as The Judge of who is equal to whom. The system you appear to dislike so much is the most inherently fair of all systems, because each of us is free to judge who we want to deal with and what we are prepared to exchange with each other for the fruits of each other's labour.

          "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." Where have I heard that before? Did it work out? Hmmm...
      • thumb
        Mar 30 2011: @ Kristian No, because my philosophy is not based off collected thoughts of a philosopher mine are based off of my perception of reality as a parallel to actual reality. My goal is to make my reality as close to actuality as possible. The only thing I learn from my philosophy courses is philosophy is a field that is limited, today it is taught as a "history of thought" not "the science of thought" because as long as the argument is sound enough it must be plausible. The science of thought involving philosophy, which I prefer, tells me to read theories, concepts, laws, and facts to create my own thoughts. I understand reading philosophical books as a hobby and a passion but Aristotle said it perfectly “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it” — Aristotle

        You should read space-time theory, metaphysics essays, and the psychology of emotions. These ideas are ageless, they can be updated but never fully replaced. So, if you are going to give out materials know first someone actually wants them.
        • thumb
          Mar 31 2011: so you didn't read my proposed books because 1, it would disconnect you from reality and 2, you learn boring stuff at school. this is not satisfying at all. neither of these two. former is speculation based on no information. latter is not related.

          let me bet that i know more about space-time than you. in case it is the theory of relativity kinda space-time.
      • thumb
        Mar 31 2011: Krisztián, be a philosopher by not working under philosophers otherwise you are a scientist (in the post-modern sense). 1. never said it would disconnect me, I said I won't read a philosopher's work because they are limiting. 2. Not that i learned boring stuff, it is because as a future educator I take time to break down courses I am in, to what they really are.

        And you're wrong, the information is coming from me, I formed them from various ideas to create them. The facts of this topic in our micro-debate are what philosophy is about, it is open-ended. There is no set definition of philosophy, therefore there is no set way to create information.
      • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Apr 1 2011: @ Colby, You are right about ideas and thoughts, but, transparency must be maintained or else conformity becomes a problem. I take my principles from examples of others yes, but i did not take one person principles and continue to manipulate them over time.

        So yes I make my principles but I respond to them as still being open-ended because i recognize my ignorance. Indeed I feel everyone should recognize their ignorance because that is a strength as well as an understanding of weakness.

        Also Colby i rather keep arguing on this thread than any other, because it will keep it active, otherwise i would have never said anything, VP is an excellent alternative incite on how to work the world, conflicting different views is what progresses people, agreeing to disagree does not.

        Your mention of "attacking" is somewhat correct but again so what? I do not care who reads this, I have seen far more educated people argue based on the straw man entirely.

        Clearly I can now argue with you what is rational and logical, and by doing so we both gain the others view point and be better prepared for future debates. Criticism is the greatest thing when it comes to philosophy, please do not under mind a good argument, because you do not have to read nor care for it.
      • thumb
        Apr 1 2011: @ revett I was not born nor lived through the "threat of socialism" so I am free from those boundaries of thinking in a box of political structures. However I do agree I am not using good vocabulary there. Every human deserves to eat, live, and be happy. The "work" equal "reward" I am thinking would not be measured by an individual but a large group of people. I say large because their A LOT of people to consider. Indeed since this is a Venus Project idea thread I assumed to write in terms of thinking in reference to futurism. Fine I'll say it the Venus Project is similar to socialism, but I feel people who are educated in terms of politics need to stop thinking in these preset terms. Because by definition communism and socialism are great IDEAS, but in practice fall short due to the lack of understanding of the human condition.

        Being a future educator I have read how the original unions for teachers HAD to start or else teachers could be treated in anyway the government wanted. Indeed when the original individuals who promoted the unions were asked the following "Have you ever participated in a union or have been a part of the communist party" as if one and the other had something to do with each other. STOP THINKING IN ELITIST VOCABULARY AND UNDERSTANDINGS. The world is much more broad than government ideals of how to organize people, we should be worried about what matters in parallel with what exist. What matters is everyone on this earth doesn't die from hunger and has a place to sleep. What exist are obese people dying from over eating, the most entertained period of time in the world, are just some of the problems.

        Yeah I want people treated equal because it is now more than ever before POSSIBLE to do, but is prevented by ideologies and people who reinforce those ideologies with more ideologies. What matters comes first, and everything else second.

        Love first, pleasure second.
      • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Apr 2 2011: Philosophical writings are an influence of both. And if their was data that analyzed the result of critical thinking base education (as subject base (one course) or as the entire education), I would of known about it/them. Please, prove me wrong about that one.

        But to end this petty stuff publicly please e-mail me from my profile.
    • thumb
      Apr 1 2011: @ Revett Arrogance is purely opinion based, but no.

      Because you gave me the ammunition of this statement. "What is wrong with having EVERYBODY do the judging, which is how it is currently done in our democratic capitalist system?" Is a load of for a lack of a better word, crap. I have spoken to politicians that claim our government is ran basically under free enterprise. That in politics if you want to see who is running the show you have to follow the money. THAT IS NOT FREEDOM. look at Wisconsin, it isn't the state versus the government it is the state versus a corporation. Through lobbyism total control over this nation has happened without the majorities consent, that is not a good system, it has cause the death of millions in the past ten years because of resources.






      The words that are defined as such does not mean they are being performed and practiced as such. The constitution of this country is tossed aside time after time while the rich become more rich and the poor become more poor.

      VP stands for these injustices to be ended on a global basis, everyone deserves the same no matter what, as long as they are willing to be on the same level as everyone else.
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Apr 2 2011: Because we are thinking in two completely different respects, this argument must end publicly. Those links are genuine, you can post websites that debunk them, if they aren't good. This one isn't any good either.


          There is no left or right. Life is an arrow. One dimension (Up, down, left, right) ideals are not enough to make a real genuine idea. You need to consider everything that is involved with everything you do, this is how you become aware of what really does work and doesn't.

          My biggest issue is the result of ideologies. If ideas do not work you are supposed to change them, not cover them up.

          Revett, I would love to continue this argument, but in private. E-mail me off of my page. I can imagine reading my writing is getting annoying for everyone and this thread.
  • thumb
    Mar 13 2011: you have a link? http://www.thevenusproject.com gives a lot info.

    What I do know is that there is a lot skepticism

    so try and surf Google with search terms "debunk" or "skeptic" attached.
    • thumb
      Mar 13 2011: Thanks, Christophe, I initially forgot to add the link :) but have added it now. I have had pretty good exposure to the concept, including searching their formal site, but I am curious to see if anyone would like to present their skepticism's here! Feel free to add any of your own if you come across any!
      • thumb
        Mar 14 2011: (ARGH, after 2 pc crashes, I really get tired of trying to write a sensible responce)

        To be honest (and this is not a valid argument, I know)
        I saw the movies a few years ago, and had some critiques back then. I forgot, and I know they were subtle.
        I don't want to do this exercise again (which is not an argument), as it takes time. BUT you can pay me to do this (as an incentive! aha! it still works... doesn't it?)
        And I do wander why they need donations... I guess the people working for Venus should have been able to generate abundance by now? (ok, also not the best argument,...)

        What you can do as excersise: find 10 claims they do (from which they say are facts, or declarative statements), and go verify the facts (try google scholar and wikipedia)... Now you are doing hard scientific research.
        If 5 of those claims are quite wrong, I would say that would be a good indicator that the whole theory is flawed.
        if you can't find any flaws in the theory, then you should become an advocate of it!
  • thumb
    Jun 21 2011: Kait,

    Seriously..Jacques lays out all these high global values that are widely shared and his plan to raise cosbciousness on these important issues is to raise money to build a theme park and demo city to showcasehi sown without protfolio & credentials designs and to make a film????.. all ttansparaently self promtional and just plain ridiculous.

    By the way, all here , is you have not done so already, go toour TED Common Ground survey and vote at www.goo.gl/mod/0073

    Kait, I am always glad to see anyone take up an interest in global issues. There have been a lot of truly visonary, truly brilliant people working onvariou saspects of this this for decade..look at Bucminster's Fuller's work, look at Paolo Soleri's work, look to theGolbal Oneness Project..look to ideas and peiplae that really can and will make adifference.
  • thumb
    Jun 21 2011: Kait - Btw, I just read your profile. You are very impressive!!!!!!
  • thumb
    Jun 20 2011: I thought we were talking about the Venus project..keeps getting cited around here as a model we should look to for just about everything. I woudlike to get right into on the Venus Project,,is that we are doing with this big roundabout on socialism? Socialism is a big topic..the Venus project....not so big..
    • thumb
      Jun 20 2011: VP or VP-like ideas need to be discussed more universally, indeed. Socialism is tricky....
  • thumb
    Jun 20 2011: Not impressed with the site or with jacques
  • Jun 20 2011: Part 2

    "Who will secure resources? Who will do jobs that robots can't do? How will you get people to learn things?"

    Yet another one, but in this one i'd like to point out the notion that people thoughout history have never done anything that wasn't motivated by financial gain as if the adquisition of property was a divine mission of man, an end by itself. A prime example of a capitalist mindset. All the while, adquisition is necessarily based on production, wich is only a means of the reproduction of life.

    Finally, as a response to op. There are no real flaws in the logic of VP, as there are no flaws or legitimate criticism about the principles of Historic Materialism. That is why it took a huge propaganda machine to fight the ideas off, and i suspect this propaganda, and the social pressures it ensues are the reason VP disguises itself as something different from communism.
    • thumb
      Jun 20 2011: analyzing your opponent's words does not classify as an argument. yes we say that people work to get more stuff, be more comfortable, more safe, and so on. if their actions don't result in any of these, actions are less likely to be taken. if you have a counterargument, present it.

      finally, there are no flaws in the logic of v.p., as it is one big utter nonsense. it hardly classifies as a concept or a theory. it is just a collection of phrases designed to be attractive to an idealist but economically ignorant audience.
  • Jun 20 2011: It is Communism rebranded and as such i find nothing wrong about it, because i understand that Historic materialism and the communist society proposed by Marx & Engels have nothing to do with the "Communist" society implemented by the USSR, wich are so blatantly demonised as the same by (sorry) brainwashed Americans. If one reads The German Ideology, this becomes undeniable.


    To Philip Crume:

    "The core principle of socialism is the expansion of the "public commons" into private ownership. The Venus Project IS socialism. The only thing that distinguishes it from communism is that it isn't advocating the dictatorship of the proletariat."

    The core principle of socialism is the abolition of private ownership and not the expansion of anything into private ownership, Historic Materialism is, as every other complete and worthy vision of the world, self-sealing and unfalsifiable from any other vision of the world, which, as i see by the way you are using the concept of proletariat, what i believe you are doing.

    "Raise the money needed to buy a very large plot of land and create your own money-less experimental society."

    Another example of what i stated above.

    "I'd be most interested in how you deal with incentive motives."

    Now this has been a mayor subject in criticism to the VP. The answer i find to it is: There is no "incentive" as such in a capitalist society. The adquisition of money cannot be seen solely as a motivation to labor, it is currently, the means of the reproduction of life for the individual of a capitalist society and as such it a NECESSITY. From this one could say that capitalism doesn't operate by incentive, but through coercion. Nice world ain't it?
    • thumb
      Jun 20 2011: corrections to the corrections:

      the failure of socialism is because of central planning. all other things, like violent nature, limiting of freedom and such are just secondary problems, and they follow from the central planning idea. central planning is doomed to fail.

      coercion by definition requires conscious intent. there is no such thing as natural coercion. necessities are not coercions. it is meaningless to say that the necessity to eat and reproduce is coercion.
  • thumb
    Mar 20 2011: A resource based economy guarantees meeting with our material needs, so that we can socialize more and evolve in our way of thinking. You could start doing things you always wanted, live a more happy life, making your surround much better. Today we work against each other, so many of us hates their jobs and still work all life. Take a scientific guess what we could accomplish if there was no Intel vs AMD. The technology progress would probably skyrocket (could be confusing), because we would use all resources needed to make research on diseases, technology etc. Living in such an environment with all human kind wisdom collected and available to anyone anytime without censorship, we could ask ourselves questions like: why are we here? what is our purpose ?(biologically speaking - sustaining our species - we've done it so far and we're capable of undoing it). Of course one could struggle to get the answers alone but it's a much smaller probability of getting to the truth. So my smart guess and suggestion is: let's try it at least - we can nothing but gain from it. Death and killing are a part our todays life, even though we try to look away and spend time on the useless. There is however last problem I've with the process: education. Even though we know we should spare oil, we allow automobile companies to product suv's and then buy them, motivating the producers to do more in the first place. Information is power and we don't fully control it (Italy for example). Indoctrination and miserable education systems leave a great responsibility in the hands of those who want to make life a better one for all of us.So you stand there and see how the whole world compares what happened in Japan with Chernobyl, where Chernobyl wasn't and isn't the worst nuclear accident area - it's Mayak (based on the numbers). I hope this helped somewhat. Tell me how to get rid of human stupidity and we will be one huge step closer to a VP. Read more, do your research. ZeitgeistMovement.com
    • thumb
      Mar 20 2011: 1, we don't work against each other. everyone works for someone else. go into the shop, pick a loaf of bread, literally hundreds if not thousands of people produced that for you.

      2, if there was no intel vs amd, the incredible progress in the CPU market wouldn't have happened.

      3, chernobyl was an INES 7 event, kyshtym disaster in mayak was INES 6. fukushima is INES 5.
      • thumb
        Mar 21 2011: 1. Take any antivirus software company. What they share is a necessary minimum. Instead of learning from mistakes of others also their experience, everyone is on his own. Everyone tries to reach their goal alone or in a small group. Rivalism is good in sports, but not in technology progress. We should share here and let everyone gain from every progress
        2. If there were none consumers there wouldn't have been any progress and it should have, even in that theoretical situation. It was only an example.
        3. Yes (Fukushima until now,hopefully it doesn't get any worse). At least one accident in Mayak wasn't given a score at all. I did not refer to these scales only, but also to the fact that some people are still there. Also do not forget it is in Russia.
        What would you see as problems of a possible transition to VP Krisztián?
        • thumb
          Mar 21 2011: 1. you can list the examples all day long. antivirus software is getting better exactly because of competition. it is mostly because every business is a discovery process. we don't know the one and only right solution. we have many approaches, and we need trial and error, and market feedback.

          2. it was a wrong example. just like the antivirus. competition leads to progress.

          3. ah, so there are events kept secret, but you still know about them reliably, and talk about them as facts? plus you demand people accept it too. sorry, [citation needed].
      • thumb
        Mar 21 2011: Fair enough. But you didn't convince me at all. And why don't share this wisdom? Because of credit to the authors? Tesla was probably the man of last century that was misused by the system. A genius that was very rich at some point in his life, loosed everything, also his public face, because he wanted to grant humanity another great invention. No one can predict if his Wardencliff tower would actually work as he presumed, because no one tested it. He never had the chance to finish his work and died in a hotel room he couldn't afford. Pt 2. Yes the original example wasn't the best one, and yes competition can lead to progress, it can lead to corruption as well. Is it any good that there is no optimization in code for many software and there is always a push to buy new hardware?Pt 3 Please don't try to discredit me in that way.If anyone believes that governments tells always the truth especially about things that could put them jeopardy, that person is well served in todays society. I tried to show my progress of thinking about some issues and put some feedback together as was it asked from Kait. Well I also would like to know the details of what happened in Katyn 70 years ago. Russian Duma recently admitted that this was an "incident", but still are information are missing and last members of families of the victims are slowly getting very old. No justice. Russia has a history of very creative incidents, but russias government never did any mistake or at least it always looks that way. My assumption about Mayak based on history is only rational. I do not demand belief but constructive criticism. Again based on reports from some scientists, journalists and documentaries I read over past few years - I wished I had information first hand. You want a list of sources? You'll find them. By the way do not discredit VP because I say Mayak is worse than Chernobyl - two separate cases. Overall VP is the better way to get things done or should we just continue like now?
        • thumb
          Mar 21 2011: they don't need a reason why not share information. in a free society, everyone can decide what information he/she shares. it is subject to ethics, and you can question the ethics of withholding an information about a virus. (however, i'm not sure they keep it as secret.) but you still have no word in what they do with the fruits of their own work. you are free to do it better.

          competition can not lead to corruption. except of course if there is a power, like government. governments are prone to corruption.

          you are discrediting yourself if you cite rumored, unknown, unsure subjects as facts. you can say that you think so. side note: we are 20 years after the collapse of the soviet union, and many signs of such accidents must have been preserved. we know a lot about chernobyl as well, even if it also happened in the soviet union. if you have any hard information, your responsibility for mankind is to go to wikipedia, and extend the article. maybe reading the article will be enough though.
      • thumb
        Mar 21 2011: That's actually a very good point. I agree with you totally on freedom of choice. We need a "think structure" - basic education - that would not let us to for example kill someone only to see what it is like. So a basic moral and value system if you will. VP extends that on a global scale - not only your family and nation is important but everyone on planet - if your human you deserve to have comfort of water,food,shelter and education of your choice no matter what ideally. i did not intend to picture it as if you were forced to share informations and goods - thats more in direction of communism with the government part. Competition can evolve to corruption, a kartel for products that have oligopoly for example. Why - because it more money in it.In any branch of industry you will end up with the same problem - profit - no matter what technology or solutions you have or what importance (human life) they have. And the sad thing is not the best one wins (VHS vs Video 2000). I'm interpreting VP as a system where human life would be the most valued "thing". If you have a disease and the is a cure, you will be helped. No one will deny it because you didn't earned it in money or other symbolic value. The values VP represents are IMHO nothing else as those we actually hear politicians taking about and commonly agree with.
        FYI if I read something that is uncommon I do research at the first place. The first source at Wikipedia was one of materials I was referring to, still Wikipedia is not a scientific resource per se (I hope it will be soon),because anyone can write anything in it. I wanted to encourage making this research and spreading this information. We probably wouldn't know anything about Chernobyl if it did not affect Europe directly. Also I would never underestimate people who barely consider crimes against humanity an incident. I hope very much you were referring to my Mayak statement, not Katyn. I'm unwilling to do homework for others.I mean this inarespectfulway
  • thumb
    Mar 20 2011: That would be mine problem number two. You can't start and make enough progress unless you have resources and/or money. Furthermore the most significant problem that I see is the following one:
    Imagine you have a business that served you well for generations. Your family is wealthy and powerful. You know mostly the good side of life as one would say today (personally I would disagree). So you are all set to just enjoy life. Now there comes someone and tells you you need to change and give it all up for a better place for everyone. You would probably wouldn't do that, mostly because you've been taught otherwise. Again look at the north Africa, Libya especially. Gaddafi and his friends have a way of life only very few have - plus he has power - military power.He will not give it up so easily. That not enough, if there would be a strong movement in world for a change, where weapons would be placed in museums, people like Gaddafi could see their chance to gain power and control. That is my biggest problem. How do you convince people, who are mostly incapable of understanding VP and a society based on resources, not to harm other for personal gain? Look at today governments: nothing but stocked up lies on lies - they lie so much, until they believe it themselves. Todays money making businesses are: weapons and ammo (war), drugs (legal and illegal), human trafficking (slavery), prostitution (in connection with the former), oil/rare resources (every product needs oil for production,transport and extinction) and money (laundering). It seems as it pays more off to be a criminal and have "good friends" than live with values most of share (honesty, justice, equality etc.). We created and accepted a system that promotes and motivates us to harm ourselves. Basically you are incapable of living in today world without money. There is no freedom in that sense. If you have luck, you may pursue your dreams, have a education. If not, you work your whole life to pay a debt.
    • thumb
      Mar 20 2011: 1, wealth does not mean power. even great wealth gives you very limited power. running a regular business for a few generations grants you nothing but a yacht.

      2, gaddafi didn't have power because he is wealthy. he became wealthy because he as power.

      3, i don't have statistics, but i'm quite sure poor people are much more against change than rich people. rich are more risk taking, and less dependent on material things.

      4, those you listed are not the top money making businesses. the biggest money making business is probably food, retail and informatics (walmart, mcdonalds and microsoft). those you mentioned are the most concentrated businesses, where few companies own the entire market, mostly due to government intervention.

      5, you can live without money on the same level as people lived before inventing money. you can be a hunter gatherer in africa. you can be a self sustaining farmer. obviously, no healthcare, no retirement benefits, lack of food, no clear water, no electricity, etc. money means exchange. exchange is human.
      • thumb
        Mar 21 2011: 1. Never said that. Yeah you're right it can grant you nothing but a yacht. Ever played monopoly with the bank-person cheating?That was my point.
        2. He used his people under the blanket of change for better, like many did
        3. That might be true in some situation, but I'm very sure mostly it's the opposite way. The dependencies on material things aren't there in VP (no scarcity, at least for the important goods)
        4. I'm not talking about "probably", I'm talking about our situation. You think about food as a moneymaker? Food costs to produce (in some countries there go 4 calories of energy for 1 calorie of food - energy inefficiency), but this can be very cheap. And there are many consumers.Still the most important thing is profit.And that one cannot be beat by drugs for example. Amphetamine - synthetic stimulant, depending on situation production cost for 1g is about 40-60€. Profits are massive, because street drug has only 5-10% of the actual drug in it, giving a 10-20x profit.You can still cut production costs. Consumers are there
        By weapons and ammo I don't mean only those things. Other thing: do you believe it is okay that granted by the economy system people who work in china are much less paid/compensated than those in EU? 1 hour of the same work should be worth the same, that's equality. Economy is a science about producing something with the most efficient use of resources, not about shifting those values of human labor and others. No matter where you live,your skin color, religion, whatever. This is not given by the monetary system.
        5. Yes but not in a system that is so massively based on monetary system. Money means power (sadly,actually it's only a symbol). I can buy a human life today or death if you will. Is that in any way okay? I doubt it. VP isn't about a retirement benefit. The time you're in it you're retired. It is about exchange of more important things than some symbol for debt. Watch "Let's make money", "We Feed The World" and ev. Zeitgeist 1.
        • thumb
          Mar 21 2011: 1. sure you said. your example was generations work and wealth and power.

          2. so as the v.p.

          3. we agree that in the proposed system, there is no risk taking, nor risk avoiding. it is total centralization of all decisions that count

          4. i'm talking about the sitaution too. except i admit that i don't have data, just like you don't.

          4b. people are paid according to the produced value, not effort. that is good. we need to increase working capital.

          5. "based on monetary system" has no meaning. express yourself clearly. money does not mean power, it means property claim. and in this system, you do can start a farm and feed yourself. why you say you can't?
      • thumb
        Mar 21 2011: I have to reply here. My first point in your reply was still referring to not giving up a extravagant way of life.If that is not understandable then I failed with my english skills.3rd pt: as in any system. "it is total centralization of all decisions that count" - elaborate. Next pt Of course I don't have all data about it, I wish I had and could share it. It is very probably that data IAEA and others have are based on that what they received from russian government and/or scientists. That's a grey area. I made this statement based on information I looked at from several reports from journalists and some documentaries that held some investigations, if you could call them so, on a tape. "people are paid according to the produced value" - like the bank managers that get paid millions in their bonuses? And have 5x times more in about a half year work than someone working their whole life. What do banks or stockbrokers produce? They can invest in some big projects - making progress, right? Or is it allowing instead of investing. "we need to increase working capital" - You want more children in india scraping pcbs? If the resources, machinery and workers are there and still nothing is build or produced although it could and possibly should be, then the system failed. That is what Fresco was referring to. Pt 5 That would ultimately end in isolation. The monetary system is based on debt. There is no physical coverage (in gold,some other resource) for all the money around. Property as well as capitalism would function great if there was justice. Well there isn't. VP isn't a utopia, it's just a another system, it's not perfect nor is it worse than the actual one. It would work better for all of us if we would overcome some boundaries we created. We need to feed and educate people and stop playing the game who has most of the money and is not a loser at the end of the day. In what way does the venus project (mis)use people? Elaborate
        • thumb
          Mar 21 2011: yeah, this ted interface kinda sucks. but luckily for me now i'm the one who can reply simply :)

          extravagant is a point of view. having two pair of shoes is extravagant in the eye of a worker of the 1900's. ahead by a few years, extravagant?

          capitalism is based on independent decision centers: owners of capital. the money is a tool that conveys information for them. v.p. seeks to abolish that system, and replace with planning. who will do the planning? an agency i suppose. that is central planning. eliminates the competition of different ideas.

          yes, bank managers are paid proportionally to the value they create. except when they commit crimes, or use the money confiscated by the central planner (that is, state budget). lawfully operating bankers conduct the flow of capital, like an orchestra conductor. they decide how to use our capital to the best effect.

          working capital is machines, tools, intermediate materials and so on. these are created by saving, and smart use of the excess resources and goods.

          in a free market capitalism, capital is never stalled. every piece of machinery, building or tool will be purchased and used for some reason. except when our "wise" government builds roadblocks.

          v.p. uses people through manipulation. it is an ideology that is carefully constructed to resonate people's beliefs, misconceptions, instincts, emotions. i'm not sure it is an intentional scam. it is possible that the founder also under the influence of those things i've listed. but it does not change the result: v.p. uses people to launch itself into power.
      • thumb
        Mar 21 2011: What if those decision makers used and killed people to make that capital in some criminal way? How big is the probability that this happens(/ed)? Money was helpful, now it is more more destructive. As far as I understand it any decision making would be locally best for communities (cities) based on information that are globally available. So we would end up eventually with a mix of democracy and technocracy - it would only makes sense to give decision making to people who actually understand what they are dealing with and not how to make good points in a conversation even if they talk trash, look good and be charismatic.I beg to differ. This structure gives any engineer and inventor the resources to do research. Central planning would occur on global scale. Meaning you would get an information that you should not use this resource for that product - there is a better way/someone used something different and had better results/so on. I don't see a global supercomputer that gives you orders, but a system that everyone can change if suggestion is good and is advisory. Bank managers - not really what I meant. I don't blame the money per se, but what we made of it. As I said today you can put a price tag on everyones life - that should not be possible and considered. Money would become obsolete as we know it in VP. Sorry about working capital - I misunderstood that one. "smart use of the excess resources and goods" - when does that happen today? It does mostly on local basis, but not on a global one. Exactly that is a central plus of VP."v.p. uses people to launch itself into power" - how exactly? I don't see manipulation, it appears to me as free choice. But you made me curious, explain In VP If I want something I get it, if it is there, or I make it, if the resources are there. It could end up in a producer-distributer-consumer system similar to that of an energy system, where there is instant production and distribution for exact consumption with minimal time lag.
        • thumb
          Mar 21 2011: decision makers commit crimes. they are so many, obviously some of them are criminals. centralized justice system failed to stop them.

          hm. decision making is hijacked by people who are good in convincing the masses? that's my point exactly! v.p. is one of such attempts. i see no difference between the current establishment and the wannabe establishments.

          a supercomputer that gives advices, i'm ok with that, as long as i'm not in any way forced to comply. but i must warn you, this attempt is in vain, as mises and hayek pointed out long long time ago. the knowledge is scattered, and we need trial and error.

          putting price tags on everything is inevitable. all we can do is to raise the price of precious things high enough. all other approaches are fairy tales. our possibilities are limited. the decision is not whether we want to save a life, but whether we want to save this life or that life. would we save one man or we want to give a million children a little more chance to survive, for example by raising the life standards of a poor country? life is a matter of money. there is a price tag attached.

          i admit, i can't give you evidence that v.p. aspires to power. i'm just oversensitve to movements that tries to control people's conduct. i see how similar socialism and v.p. is. and i don't want any more socialism, i had enough.
      • thumb
        Mar 21 2011: Fresco is very old. Of course it could be a fraud. I don't like to look at it as a project per se, but more as a way of thinking. Collecting all the pieces together and working together for a better tomorrow sounds like some hippie dreams about fantasialand, but you must admit the technology is there and it would flourish furthermore. So why not do it? I personally consider money as something disgusting. Ironically I have now more than enough, but there were very hard times for my family. i try to learn from mistakes of others and would love to see any hope in the current way of thinking. I don't. Optimizing and automatizing many of productions processes for products we really need, not based on how much a group or individual gain from it but on global profit for human kind, is a very good thought. I don't see why most of us think we need to work 8-10 hours a day, 5-6 days a week very often doing tasks we hate with time and are often not productive to society at all. You can't feed someone with money,but with food bought for money. I would gladly work for it to happen. Maybe I'm interpreting VP wrong, but I doubt that, there doesn't seem any forcing in it,but rather rational thinking on a global scale - something we lack today. I see why people want to save money, but it ends up in using other people misfortune (place of birth fe.) to compensate for their savings. I can understand why no one forces China or North Korea and others to grant human rights and democracy development, and at the end I see the motivation for it in money. It's depressing to read stories and watch dangerously recorded documentaries on exploit of humans and see how the end product is advertised. I can not assure anyone here that VP is the best solution, but its ideas are worth a try to finally end this unnecessary suffering. Now it seems all we do is patch work, we need to rebuild. Anyways what do you think Krisztián would be best way to continue our life? Everyone for themselves?
  • thumb
    Mar 17 2011: I heard about this once or twice before but didn't bother to learn more details, apparently "Fresco states that for this to work, all of the Earth's resources must be held as the common heritage of all people and not just a select few", according to Wikipedia.

    Ok, common heritage for the good of all leaving healthier, safer, better lives together in peace and harmony.
    Sounds like a great idea, but I couldn't find one idea on how to achieve this common heritage.

    Plus, I can't help but feel that this would in the end become as a big a failure as communism. By this I mean that even if you achieve this "common heritage of resources" you still need people to manage them, to make the decisions, you can't have a direct democracy with billions of people that actually works. So who can say that the new enlightened leaders would abstain from abusing their power?
    • thumb
      Mar 17 2011: Never before have so many people been capable of offering their points of view and expertise to such issues. Maybe if we give it a chance we just might come up with something new. You can't win if you don't play.

      Have you for instance got any suggestions?
      • thumb
        Mar 17 2011: My point was that even if you use the expertise of all and create such a brave new world, the management and distribution of resources in a fair and balanced way still needs to be done by someone.
        And just like politics today is often doing a great job at abusing power and using money for other purposes than the intended ones, so could and probably would a future leadership do with resources.

        The problem for me lies not only in creating this near-utopia - which would in itself be a huge challenge - but also in sustaining it.
    • thumb
      Mar 18 2011: What the Venus Project stands for and envisions cannot be realized without the final stage of human emergence. In other words, we have established states and nations across the world. But the international interconnectedness of nations is still on very shaky ground. Pick your form of collapse, be it monetary or technological inertia, a consolidation of nations into a new form is beckoning. The biological progression is as follows. atom---molecule--supramolecule--macromolecule--organelle--cell--tissue--organ--system--human--family--tribe--village/community--town--city--county--state--nation--?????? with a multitude of intermediate levels.

      No other animal made it beyond the community level. Will we fulfill the requirements to advance to the final level, the One Organism? Unfortunately, we will first have to endure the pain of consolidation before our path to sustainability can be reached.
  • thumb
    Mar 17 2011: I think it is a good idea in premiss Kait. Thank you for flagging it. Crowd sourcing of ideas on how to make this work should be presented for constructive criticism and implementation. It sounds more like the world I would like my children to grow up in.
  • thumb
    Mar 17 2011: The Venus Project has an activist arm they call the Zeitgeist Movement. The basic premise behind the whole complex is to offer a solution other than the contrived monetary system. They advocate strongly for a resource based economy...one that is guided by the scientific method and adheres to the principles of sustainability.

    My strong feeling is that they perceive a global collapse and are preemptively providing intelligible alternatives...ideas with technical merit (guided by the laws of nature). Indeed, they are predicting, like many others, the formation of a fully functional One Organism. This is the emergence of a unified system of all human transaction. Here is the basic logic. Levels of integration emerge in highly unpredictable ways through the progressive process of complexification known as evolution. Each level represents a stable structure. The biological progression is as follows. atom---molecule--supramolecule--macromolecule--organelle--cell--tissue--organ--system--animal (human)--family--tribe--village/community--town--city--county--state--nation--??????

    Each step along this path of 18 levels (there are many intermediates) is more complex, robust, and stable. Each level includes all the other levels and requires MORE ENERGY to exist. Each level arose in a very unpredictable way. My guess is that VP is trying to guide, through collective intelligence and consciousness, the emergence of the multi-nation whole. Everyone deserves to have his or her vision...right? Mine, Augmata Hive, is coincidently complementary to the Venus Project..( I have technical issues with their work, but agree with over 95% with their mission)
    Detailed explanation here: http://www.emrgnc.com.au/tenets.htm
  • thumb
    Mar 14 2011: Thanks for the reference Kait. Interesting ideas and nice graphics and stuff, but I find the whole thing a bit disconnected from reality. It seems to present a utopian future but not a real concrete method of reaching it.
    Consider just this one statement on the site:
    'At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth's inhabitants'

    This is unfortunately not the case. The earths resources are finite. As affluent people we consume far more resources than poor people with a low standard of living.
    You may argue here what is the definition of a 'very high standard of living'. If its what most reasonably affluent middle class people aspire to then the burden on the earth's resources if EVERYONE lived like this would not be sustainable.
    Very poor people have a very small overall carbon footprint, or environmental impact. As the proportion of, for example, china's growing population becomes increasingly affluent, they demand more resources- they want nice food, usually eat more meat, drive cars, live in resource consuming houses etc.
    I dont wish to be negative , but just realistic.
    I think a better future is possible, i just dont think this is it.
    • thumb
      Mar 14 2011: Your statement lacks understanding of alternative energies.

      It lacks the true reason behind the project's idea.

      And any future progression from today's life styles and "progress" will make us vulnerable to the appending global disasters, and make us only more separated as time goes on. Indeed I believe any person can learn, work, sacrifice, and come together. What prevents this are ideologies and the best idea is the one acceptable to change otherwise it is narrow-minded and self fulfilling. Watch the zeitgeist moving forward.
  • thumb
    Mar 14 2011: The idea of a resource based economy makes logical sense. The things I like about it is

    - every body gets food
    - every body gets to do their own thing
    - Eco - friendly

    But my criticisms would be below :

    - Who decides the resources to be allocated and how much ?
    - If there is a centralized authority who determines this, then I am not comfortable with such an aspect, which has no element of democracy in it.
    - It calls for a technological dependency, which makes us more dependent on technology, which may not be the ultimate technology
    - It is completely based on material technology. I do not see any kind of "spiritual" resource persay in the project. This is a big flaw in my opinion. To take care of this limitatiion calls for ultimate knowledge in spirituality / faith/ consciousness, which the venus project doesn't seem to have. It's a big thing for me personally :)

    Other flaws related to the zeitgiest movie are
    - the first movie has the "astro-theology" version completely wrong. There is no similarity between the story of Krishna and Jesus. Just read about Krishan's mythology and try to fit a cross in there ;-)
    • thumb
      Mar 14 2011: - The people decide the resources, yes the idea of voting would happen, but I assume those who have the knowledge and know how to create a plan and organize the people would step forward to do so. This is toughest, but I feel given a chance the science community would drop what their doing to help the world for the better.

      - There is no authority, people are the authority, if someone is still able to find meaning in killing while the world is united the community would take care of him/her not a police force.

      - ultimate technology? only thing technology should be used for is to make our lives better, after that anything with technology is extra.

      - humanitarians spirituality comes from just being with people and sharing ideas and working in harmony. Conscience and awareness comes with the enlightenment of reality. Faith is a virtue that involves defending an idea, no idea is worth defending wholeheartedly then it becomes an ideology, the only faith one should have is in themself to do whatever they put their mind to doing. Life is beautiful once you realize how unique everyone is and isn't different.

      Yeah, there is no difference, except they lead people around had followers and believers and ultimately had people carry down their name through time, no similarities?
      • thumb
        Mar 14 2011: - I do not think science community would be willing to drop what they are doing and divert fully into such a project unless their basic needs are met, which would be calling for corporate / government partnerships to get the venus project into action. Who will pay the scientists to do the research before that? Of course we are all assuming everbody gets the basic food and shelter requirement met. Being in the science community myself, I do not think there would be many who would be willing to come forth for such an endeavour unless it comes from the top of the food chain as far as science organizations are concerned.

        - That would be a good thing to see. People being involved in their governance. That is callling for a very high level of transparency at every level. Who did what / where is this money going in this organization etc. You have one mole, the system could come down.

        - Question then would be , what would be the purpose of life ? especially for those who are involved with the venus project ? The video of venus project showed robotic trains / vehicles. How does one think these will be coming forth ? It is calling for industries to be in place. Even power industry. Venus project is a high end technological challenge.

        - I am okay with a humanitarian principles. The question is would all in the present communities be okay with humanitarian principles , and be willing to put their faith and other issues aside for the sake of such a community ? The project is asking for an enlightened population. The project won't survive without the humanitarian idealogy that would be at the core. Honestly, realistically looking at it, I do not see that happening unless we are threatened with extinction.

        I don't want Venus project to end up being another idealogy/faith that has to be defended. I would like to see it evolve into something significant that can change our lives for the better.
  • thumb
    Mar 14 2011: There is no flaw with the Venus project, it is pure hearted for all human beings to live safe, a long time, and in peace.

    Indeed the only flaw with the project is it is too far ahead of its time to be done. Look at the followers on the website it is under 2 million. Granted a good start but there are over 7 billion people in the world. This idea is new still and needs to be spread more.
    • thumb
      Mar 15 2011: world population is just under 7 billion. not 70.
    • P C

      • +2
      Mar 15 2011: Nicholas, you're relying on emotional logic and are surrendering your capacity to reason. Please indicate which points of the VP are better than our current system. One does not become safer by surrendering the capacity to ensure one's own safety to something else.

      The VP is an extreme form of socialism not very different than its 20th century counterparts. Citing the number of followers on the website is an ad populum appeal, and is not a valid point. This idea doesn't need to be spread more, it needs to be studied and tested on a small scale before public dissemination. Failing to provide a superior alternative, it needs to be rejected.
      • thumb
        Mar 16 2011: I would be quoting the entire project, the idea humans build machines that would just continuously build homes, cars, plant food, pick food, and tools of play. The houses are also built to last through anything from earthquakes through another ice age.

        Our current system has allowed a small percentage of people to take the majority of wealth, not because they are smarter or wiser than anyone else but because they had the opportunity and system where a group of people can take away from millions is not a system I want to be a part of let alone consider good in anyway.

        VP needs the influence of humanitarianism, environmentalism, futurism, and transhumanism to succeed. As you said Philip people are entirely to worried about what they see to worried about what they do not. The current system is enabler of stupidity. Education works in an academic standard for most countries a system of education that does not influence creativity, personal reflection, and group values. Philosophy is a subject children are the best at because we are naturally curious in nature as human beings, what has made us stupid is accepting the environment as good enough and that comes from our education, parents teachers, and peers. If 2 of those 3 would have told any child growing up, never stop asking, always consider the possibility of being wrong and you will be happy in life without material.

        I may be talking of emotional logic but that is because i know a lot of disturbing statistics I can not unlearn. While people die of obesity others die of hunger, and while those obese people can learn about health, compassion, and responsibility there are those who have no chance of such.

        Granted there is no such thing as perfect, but the fact VP is an alternative should be worried about more than if it will work, because right now a lot of places are not working. you cannot compare VP to socialism because they revolve around economy (money) this revolves around the safety of the human race
        • thumb
          Mar 17 2011: it is kind of painful to see how you struggle with logical analysis and economic reasoning, despite being a philosophy student.

          i give you a homework which you either do or not do. but i alleviate my responsibility, i've warned you.

          homework is two books:
          Ludwig von Mises - Human Action
          Ludwig von Mises - Theory and History
          you can replace the first one with some more basic introductory material to austrian economics, just because it will be used as a basis in the second book.
        • thumb
          Mar 17 2011: Hello Nicolas,

          Please continue to "Shoot for the stars because those who aim for mediocrity usually fall short."

          You are the youth who are inheriting this mess and if you don't nurture a constructive stance you will all loose.

          Keep your eyes open, stay humble and don't get brainwashed.

          I am happy to know you.
        • P C

          • 0
          Mar 17 2011: Nicholas, socialism is not about money. The core principle of socialism is the expansion of the "public commons" into private ownership. The Venus Project IS socialism. The only thing that distinguishes it from communism is that it isn't advocating the dictatorship of the proletariat.

          What I meant before about studying it on a small scale is that if you think you can do better than free market capitalism, then go for it. Raise the money needed to buy a very large plot of land and create your own money-less experimental society. Go ahead and build those magical robots that build everything and central computers that manage everything. But be honest about it and let the people outside see any failures that arise. I'd be most interested in how you deal with incentive motives. Who will secure resources? Who will do jobs that robots can't do? How will you get people to learn things?

          Since the first generation was educated, trained, and had their skills developed in a different economic system, the scoreboard really doesn't begin until the new generation that has only known their new society. It would be those and their children that should be studied.
      • thumb
        Mar 17 2011: Hello Phillp,

        "One does not become safer by surrendering the capacity to ensure one's own safety to something else.'
        When the first two persons who began any culture began to walk together there was even then a surrendering of capacity to ensure one's own safety to something else. These are those earliest rules of engagement and conduct which have evolved through ongoing experience and assimilated wisdom into Sustainable Laws. It is part of what makes us accountable to one-another.

        "Citing the number of followers on the website is an ad populum appeal, and is not a valid point. This idea doesn't need to be spread more, it needs to be studied and tested on a small scale before public dissemination."
        If I correctly understand Nicolas' point; 2 million is a good start, but if more people see and talk about it (kind of like what is happening here on Ted), the more effective an approach to the idea may come to light.

        "Trust the people. Give them choices."
        • P C

          • 0
          Mar 17 2011: Choices are a good thing. Viable choices are even better.
  • thumb
    Mar 14 2011: there is another conversation about the venus project


    however, you stated that you want us to "read, in its entirety, and gain a full grasp on, the outlined perspective drawn". i can't promise you that, because the venus website is overly verbose and seriously lacks any concrete information. i can't spend more than 5 minutes reading it before my head goes numb. so i'm not able to participate in this conversation, unless you release that "entry barrier".
    • thumb
      Mar 14 2011: HAHA! I apologize if this is a serious remark, but of course you may still offer opinions. The issue that I have will come up if questions are asked or opinions inferring things that would be proven incorrect by simply taking the time to read the material offered. This is my true objection to people commenting without fully understanding the concept.

      By all means, tell me what your preconceived objections are!

      Also, another avenue to explain this viewpoint that may be less mind-numbing is the movie series "Zeitgeist". Give it a watch if you can.
      • thumb
        Mar 14 2011: a brief, straight-to-the-point introduction of the proposed *steps* would be more useful. when a material only presented in long, movie-like, essay-like form, it is always fishy.

        since i was not able to found such a brief material, i have to pick some crazy ideas instead, which made me not read more.

        1. what they say about money and profit is totally bogus. money is just a smart tool, and can not possibly be the cause of anything. money represents resources, human and natural. profit is achieved when your way of production creates more value than other ways of production using the same total amount of resources. it is that simple.

        2. they use the word "scarcity" in different meanings. economic scarcity can not be theoretically eliminated. common sense scarcity is eliminated on daily basis today, it is not a real problem in the western world.

        3. the (in)famous zeitgeist movie. debunked a million times, both three parts are shameful pieces of dishonest propaganda.

        i'm willing to comment on other things they come up with, as soon as someone summarizes it to me in a meaningful, brief form. very much unlike this:

        "Evolving from money-based, nationalistic economies to a resource-based world economy."

        which is a serious case of bs. our economy is not money based. resource based is just a buzz word with no definition whatsoever. this sentence is meaningless.
        • thumb
          Mar 14 2011: 1. Money is just another ideology, because even the resource it should be based on, gold, is only worth the idea that it is worth more than food. Money was a smart tool, now it is primitive because with the ideology of money comes the idea of having more money and in order for someone to have more someone else needs to have less or none at all. Money is not the problem it is the people supporting the ideology of money. In this idea money is useless because everything will be free based on the evolving human condition. one car per person, enough calories to survive, unlimited entertainment, and basically true freedom.

          2. It may not be a problem to most, but it is still a problem, and the fact it isn't a concern of everyone's to feed the world shows how spoiled a lot of people really are.

          3. One link that debunks anything beside the first part of movie of the first film, post it. And even if it was propaganda, the ultimate message is for people to come together in harmony and not listen to governments that feed us lies. Oh dam I forgot about how in America disney used donald duck to sell war bonds during world war II. shameless really?

          you should watch the movies with an open mind and if anything does not seem right you have the ability to do your own research. oh and at least in my history class when i heard the word economy it was referencing to money, unless my education really sucks that bad. OF course economies today are based on money, what else could they be based on? Futurist are hard to understand without the ideas of human well being as number one priority always, nothing else matters except people. Not cars, not being famous, nothing is more important than people to futurist, because in 100 years no one will know who you are but you will hopefully have great great etc grand kids in the future anyways living and enjoying the same things you do now. I guess that is greedy thinking.
        • thumb
          Mar 15 2011: Krisztián, I agree with you.
      • thumb
        Mar 14 2011: Nicholas: money is certainly not an "ideology". it is a simple tool that makes it easy to measure your contribution, so you can claim goods in return. the economy is a cooperation. you work for me, i work for you. and the "common denominator" is money. money is nothing else than information, and in the near future, it actually will entirely reside in computers. the venus project is against information.

        lack of food, shelter and clothing is a problem in a lot of places. because they have undeveloped economies. the best way to develop economies is economic freedom for the people. the venus project is against that freedom.

        the ultimate message can be whatever, if it is presented through misrepresentation of facts and boldface lies. btw i watched the movie with open mind. i don't know too much about christianity, not to mention earlier religions. so i was like, wow, that's a game changer. then i looked up facts, and was greatly disappointed that most of the "facts" there are complete fabrications. the second part was painful to watch after i was already aware of 9/11 denialism and read a lot of debunking. googl "911 conspiracy" for a truckload of it. and the last part is a complex part, i didn't really understand back then, but a few factual errors, and the other two parts made me suspicious. since then i learned some economics, i found out that the makers of the movie had the same problems with understanding the economy as i had. except they didn't take a course, but made a movie instead. wrong move. i was open minded yesterday. today i'm angry.