This conversation is closed.

Breaking Away from the Dystopian Cliché

What kind of aspects, challenges, conflicts and/or problems would you like to exhibit and experience from a story depicting a peaceful, prosperous and abundant city/society/world beyond scarcity, money, war, poverty and human suffering, assuming it didn't turn out Dystopian, to make it interesting, engaging and immersive?

  • Dec 22 2012: This might be difficult to depict, but I think that one of the main challenges in a world of abundance will be the fight for meaningful values. Just look at the rich people of today. So many lives are spent in pursuit of meaningless, trivial pleasures. So many entertainers and sports celebrities turn to drugs. This issue is directly related to our environmental problems, which could be fixed very easily by putting a monetary value on aspects of the environment so that prices would include environmental costs. You might develop a story about teachers that are trying to instill character into their students, inspiring them to lives of accomplishment rather than lives spent pursing meaningless pleasures. If today's entertainment is any indication of what we will see in the future, those teachers will have a very difficult task.
  • thumb
    Dec 20 2012: Perhaps you could detail a society that evolved to be "utopian" after suffering through a period of dystopia, such that it nearly didn't survive. It might be interesting to see the issues such a society would encounter just as it was emerging from adversity and trying to settle in to its new existence.

    Star Trek: The Next Generation is written in such a universe, and its writers do a beautiful job with it. You might consider watching if you're looking for media to model your project after.
    • Dec 20 2012: That's a cool angle! Kind of like showing flashbacks of how they emerged from there to here. I like that!

      Oh yes, I'm very aware of Star Trek and especially The Next Generation universe. I pretty much grew up with it. As you point out, it's beautifully written. But I really want to take this kind of storytelling to the next step (though someone might see it as a step back!). You see, I'm trying to do it without any aliens, firearms or spaceships (at least not warp drive ships). Refine the "Utopian" genre to something tangible and attainable. Something that might happen in the near future. Make it very much real life, but set in the future. As real life as possible that is. But I don't want my personal project to cloud any minds here, as I welcome and value any opinions and ideas!

      Thanks anyway, Jacqueline!
      • thumb
        Dec 20 2012: I like your idea of flashbacks too. This sounds like it could be a very interesting project. I hope you'll keep us updated as you make more progress on it!

        To clarify, I was not suggesting that you incorporate aliens or other science fiction elements from Star Trek into your project (as cool as it is in TNG...I also grew up watching it, so I may be a bit biased). I was more referring to the way their society is structured, how they treat others, their system of values, the eradication of poverty, crime, money, etc.

        Best of luck to you, Mats!
  • thumb
    Dec 22 2012: Story line:
    hmm interesting engaging and immersive scenario in a movie with peaceful prosperous abundant society would be about the trials and tribulations of wrestling the muse and each other and creating art

    I see a multiple story line (6) with

    1, a skateboard club challenging each other on the street.

    2, video clip challenge exchanges among dancers around the world

    3, sailing races with one-man boats

    4, jazz musicians challenging and blending

    5, mathematicians on Earth System Science projects

    6, protein folders sequencing DNA gene maps
    • Dec 23 2012: I like that! "Causal" topics in a "Utopian" world. Could be an awesome angle! I would also think there would be higher incentives to compete with oneself. To enhance your own abilities and predictability and so forth.
      • thumb
        Dec 23 2012: Mats Kaarbö,
        "Causal" and "inspirational" or "heroic" I would wish...
        Have you ever seen how skateboarders compete with each other? The best skateboarders honor their competitors by imitating elements of each other's performance and attempting to take it to the next level. Street dancers often do the same, sometimes breaking language barriers in the process. Jazz musicians can speak to each other with their musical experiments, riffs, and improvisations, and it leads to the same kind of non-zero sum competition. I think the essence of the idea is about exploring competition in its old meaning as something like "competere," struggling together to become fit. The spirit of that intent can be felt among mathematicians and scientists in the right context.
  • thumb
    Dec 22 2012: Speaking for myself, Mats, my approach to making the world better is to pick individual, small, specific problems and try to improve them. For example, if I'm out on a walk, and I see a big piece of trash lying in the street, I'll usually go pick it up and put it in the nearest trashcan.

    I'm usually suspicious of and uncomfortable with things that present a vision of trying to make the whole world utopian in a vast sense. I'm more interested in watching things that show me how to solve very small, specific problems. I probably believe that if everyone worked on small, specific problems, the world would become better.
    • Jan 9 2013: "I'm usually suspicious of and uncomfortable with things that present a vision of trying to make the whole world utopian in a vast sense."

      I've come to realize that with many people. The typical knee-jerk reaction always seems to be that of the fear of a New World Order or other types of grand conspiracies leading to what one would might call a Dystopic future. I'm not saying you are one of these, but I am however interested in why this holistic thinking makes you uncomfortable. And what would a story contain to make you less uncomfortable in regards to global decision making?
      • thumb
        Jan 9 2013: I believe my thought is that how could anyone present a lifestyle that would work for everybody, a utopian lifestyle that would work for vast numbers of people, because how can you know that the lifestyle you are presenting is the one that will work for those vast numbers because you don't personally know all those people. How many people do you really know well in your life? You know your family, your friends, your co-workers. All together, most of us might know only fifty people really well. Or fewer. So how are we going to construct a lifestyle that will work for hundreds of millions, or billions, of people when we don't know all those people?
        • Jan 9 2013: I hear you. However, from a scientific point of view, meaning not my own opinion, we've known for quite a time now that human beings have certain needs. From biological ones to quality of life. These are universal. Everybody needs food, clean water, clean air and shelter to survive. People who think about social designs usually don't think about how people should live their lives, but instead how their design can meet the most basic needs for all people to create an environment where people can reach their highest potential in life. This is however not what politicians does, just to make that clear. Life is personal and nobody should tell us what to do, but in order to have a peaceful and stable society this also requires us to teach our children of how the world works and what's relevant for our future survival. It's a big topic and I could ramble on, but I think you get my point. Global social designs doesn't automatically mean bad.
  • thumb
    Dec 20 2012: I am confused by your question, Mats. Are you saying you want to picture a peaceful society beyond war and human suffering that still has challenges and conflicts? Like in the children's book The Giver, where people are kept content artifcially? Or like the ivory towerish community in Hesse's The Glass Bead Game, which itself is somewhat idyllic by design by being detached from the messier politics of the surrounding country?

    As this is a not uncommon story line (I have to believe there is some Kafka along these lines as well, but I don't remember, and maybe some Twilight Zone episodes)... do you want to bring an existing work into film or write a script?
    • Dec 20 2012: "I am confused by your question, Mats. Are you saying you want to picture a peaceful society beyond war and human suffering that still has challenges and conflicts?"

      Well, I don't believe in Utopias. That's the short answer. I believe that all societies regardless of how civil and enlightened they become will still have challenges and face problems. War, poverty and human suffering are not the only problems our species have to fix and be worry about. We still need and, hopefully, would want to cure cancer, eradicate illnesses, find better and more efficient ways of gathering and consuming energy, develop geoengineering to gain weather control and further develop nanotechnology etc. The list is endless.

      If you however know a way of telling a story that doesn't have to inhabit challenges, conflicts or problems to be interesting, engaging and immersive, I more than welcome you to share your ideas!
  • Dec 20 2012: Make a story normalizing what people find objectionable, I think controversy is the only way to make it interesting. Given that conflict is the essence of what makes stories interesting.

    Think of the current worlds greatest outcasts for certain behaviors, then make those behaviors normal and entered into freely in the future. Would ruffle a lot of feathers.
    • Dec 20 2012: I like that! And that would in fact be the very nature of a story that depicts that kind of "Utopian" society. Many things would be different, that would require an explanation. I would argue that that in and of itself would be interesting and perhaps even appealing to an audience.
  • thumb
    Jan 20 2013: Mats, under what socioeconomic system do you think we'll be able to triple our food production? Because from what I see, we've got countries living under a variety of socioeconomic systems--capitalism, socialism, communism, mixed, dictatorship--and nobody has been able to triple their food production. Or even come close. So it doesn't sound realistic.
  • Jan 14 2013: I have been assuming that we are half-civilized right now, even in Norway. It seems to be clear that civilization correlates with Cheap Energy, and the Industrial Revolution's use of it. If we were merely like the Romans , we'd still have Slaves, and Inequalities of all kinds.Luckily the energy problem is on the way to being solved (Thorium LFTR power, "Energy Cheaper than Coal" Prof . Hargraves) So when we are all the children of wealthy families, what then? We will have the Rich Kids problem of how to avoid becoming layabouts , drug addicts, etc. It is interesting that in the History of Science, so many notable contributors were the children of the wealthy and titiled, who were allowed to follow their interests. In the future, if money (energy) is no longer a problem, there will be plenty of people looking for excitement. An early psychologist, William James , wrote a book called the "Moral Equivalent of War" about the Existential Crime problem, and some contrived solutions. In the future it will likely be very much easier. There seem to be a great number of habitable planets to colonize,( or create) So it should be possible to solve several problems at once. Adventjurous types can do the colonizing. Social problems on Earth, could be harmoniously defused, by convincing Jews and Arabs, for example, that their true Homeland is some other planet, all their own,.. We would do well to encourage space travel anyway, since an Asteroid strike seems to be inevitable at some future date. Since space is measured in light years, it reduces drastically any need for all the people on Earth to become one big happy family, which they do not seem eager to do. But we could "finesse" it, hopefully without conflict, at least for a long time, by dispersiing peacefully.
  • thumb
    Jan 13 2013: Mats, I was thinking it'd be an interesting project to find out what the total wealth is in the world, and then divide that by the number of people. If in our imagination we redistributed that total wealth so that everyone had exactly the same, I wonder what kind of standard of living each person would have, based on whatever that amount is. I'm thinking it might be at the level of poor, that every person on earth would be poor if you evenly divided the world's wealth between every person; or maybe they'd be lower middle class, or middle class. Or maybe everyone would be upper class, although my gut feeling is not, since there's many more poor people than rich people, and when you divide the few rich people's wealth among the many poor people, each person is not going to have that much. If you do this project, let me know. The results might suggest to us that everyone on earth cannot have a "high" standard of living.
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Jan 13 2013: Thanks, Kate. Well, Mats has been talking with me and has actually helped me to understand better what people might mean when they start talking about designing policy for the whole world. So I'm really thankful.

        On the issue of whether people get back to you much later about your effect, you know, Kate, I hope this doesn't seem unsupportive, but I tend to have more of a Zen attitude, if people get back to me it's great, if they don't, well, at least I got to express myself, and I feel confident in my heart that I've touched some lives.

        It sounds like you're saying TED speakers actually participate in TED conversations before they "rise" to the level of TED speaker. Do you really know this is true, or are you just guessing? I would have guessed that the vast majority of people who participate in the conversations never give a TED talk.
        • thumb
          Jan 14 2013: Greg, if you want to know what Feyisayo's TEDx talk will be about, or if I am correct in my recollection that he will be giving one, send him a private message. He is a film-maker.
      • thumb
        Jan 13 2013: I believe Feyisayo will be speaking at a TEDx.
    • Jan 13 2013: That would be a fantastic project. In fact, a couple of studies has been done to find out how much food and energy we can produce, store and distribute and a study from World Health Organization found that we could feed the whole planet three times over. And a MIT report found that we have 4000 years of untapped geothermal energy in addition to solar, wind, wave, tidal and piezoelectric that could easily meet the energy needs of tomorrow. But, unfortunately, we still cling on to a socioeconomic system that perpetuate an ignorant view of what we really have. Our whole economy is built upon the logic that there is scarcity, but as the reports have shown, the opposite is true.
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2013: Yeah, Mats, here is why I begin again to become suspicious of projects that present to me "a world of abundance/peace/prosperity." Because even if we potentially have the-planet-three-times-over food, the difficulty becomes actualizing it, what does it take to really do it, there must be genuine, powerful impediments or we would have done it already. I don't buy that the problem is people clinging on an ignorance-perpetuating system because people are pretty skeptical, they don't take things for granted, they usually arrive at the truth. If we haven't tapped our food-producing potential, it's because the inventions don't yet exist to do it, or it takes more work than we can do, or something else. Same on energy. It's not to say we won't eventually have the inventions to do it, but inventing takes time, and implementing inventions takes time. It may be that in many, many years we will be able to produce more food, but any movie that tells me we can do it quickly I'm going to be suspicious of.
  • thumb
    Jan 11 2013: As you said, Utopia is simply impossible, at least for the current humans' attitude.
    What stop us from building a successful 'paradise on Earth' is that we cannot reach a point that we will think everything is perfect. Let me put it this way; companies that produce mobile phones try hard to make the best phone, which surpasses all other phones. Faster bluetooth, internet, better picture quality, sleek style, bigger screen, smaller screen, light weight, etc. etc. Every feature can be speeded up more, almost till infinity (unless there is an absolute limit), made more attractive and easier to use. But the problem is that a better phone will always emerge, and even if there was a limit to the 'absolute best phone', people would complain that they want something even better.
    Humans are by nurture (I wont say nature because that is not true), unsatisfied creatures.
    If all humans became satisfied at anything, even the world we live in now would suffice.
    Maybe the problems that exist now would just disappear, even.
    So the problem I would exhibit would be this internal conflict within most humans.
  • thumb
    Jan 10 2013: Yeah, Mats, below you say if you give everybody the necessities of life and a high standard of living, there won't be as much lack of money and therefore crime. But you know that the necessities of life and a high standard of living are not the same thing. I think it's easy to get behind everybody having the necessities of life, but when you start talking about everybody having a high standard of living you're starting to get into heavy politics, redistribution of wealth.
  • thumb
    Jan 9 2013: Yeah, thanks for your comment below, Mats, it helped me understand where people are coming from when they create programs about global policy. I would say, however, that even if you had food, clean air, water, and shelter for everybody, I don't know that that would be Utopia. We have all those things in America, and yet we still have many problems, such as the mass shooting in Connecticut ten days ago.
    • Jan 9 2013: Well, most crime and violence stem from monetary reasons (usually the lack of it), believe it or not. Money not only serves as a medium of exchange and a tool to give us access to the necessities of life, but nowadays it also has an 'important' social dynamic issue to it. It is often associated with status and to the success or failure in a persons life, unfortunately. And this is where most problems starts. Even wars. So, in abstraction, if you give everybody on the Earth the same access to the necessities of life and a high standard of living, which is possible, without the constraint of having to deal with money or barter you would in effect phase out most crime and violence. This would not create a Utopia, but would be a much better system than we currently have.
      • thumb
        Jan 10 2013: How about sword fights to win the love of a women,...or for defending some reputation...or honor...? ;) I am kind of kidding... but I really think humans will always find differences, resulting in conflicts and eventually in violence. Just think how much violence the difference in religious view has caused in the world. But here is a funny question: What would politicians do in an Utopian world?
      • Jan 14 2013: Mats: I am afraid that your idea that violence comes from money is simply way oversimplified, and often quite wrong. Do you seriously believe that the Taliban fights for money?! At any rate, if you look at the size of the Universe, there is clearly enough space and energy (money) for everyone, as long as no one insists that we all MUST live together in harmony., as one big happy family. I'm a believer in marriage, but I do think that some couples are just not suited to each other.
  • thumb
    Jan 9 2013: You can create philosophical conflicts around topics like meaning of life, origin of life, boredom, existence of God, seeking for whatever there could be beyond that perfect world; you could also create love stories, aspirations to perfection in science, art, sport...
  • Jan 9 2013: First and foremost excellent question! I agree when you state a utopian society is impossible. I believe humans worry far beyond their limits. We have grown in a world where we are taught that laws mean order and without order society will crumble. If we all focused on more simple things, the world would be a utopia on its own. We already live in utopia, we just forgot about it and created this evil world on our own. In today's world I believe order is needed, but in the true, natural world order is foolish. Ego is the most dangerous weapon out there, if humans learned to realize themselves and stop worrying about things that don't make sense like money, or possessions and instead focused on happiness, this world we live in, will naturally be a utopia.
  • thumb
    Jan 7 2013: In other words, you are asking "what would be a good problem to have in a society without problems?" Do I understand it right? Does it mean that a "society without problems" would seem boring and uninteresting and THAT would be a problem?

    It's a Zen question. As I meditate on it, I become increasingly happy with our current world.
    • Jan 9 2013: "In other words, you are asking "what would be a good problem to have in a society without problems?" Do I understand it right?"

      Not quite. First of all, I don't believe in Utopias, in the sense of a society with no challenges whatsoever. That's simply impossible. There will always be challenges. Second of all, a story needs conflict. Therefore, even if one were to depict a society "without" any problems, one would still need some sort of challenge(s) to drive the story itself forward [to make it interesting, fun and engaging]. That's the imperative of drama.

      And that is why I am reaching out to you guys to get some input on problems, conflicts or challenges YOU would like to exhibit and experience in a society that is seemingly perfect - from politics to social dynamics. Whatever comes to your mind.
      • thumb
        Jan 9 2013: What's the time-table for your writing project?
        • Jan 9 2013: Right now it has an indefinite time-table, but I will be reaching out to filmmakers soon to move it into pre-production, hopefully. The overall outline of the story and the main conflict has already been established, so I am simply here to get some "smaller" inputs and inspiration from you guys. But this is actually not the main reason I posted the conversation. I'm here to listen to what you guys have to say about this kind of material in terms of storytelling in general.
      • thumb
        Jan 9 2013: I understand, Mats. One of the things that appeals to me most about TED Conversations is when people come in to pick people's brains for their projects (as long as everyone realizes there is a lot of vigorous speculation here in areas in which the discussants typically are not experts!)
        • Jan 9 2013: Oh yeah, I find that very interesting and important too. TED Conversations is one of many untapped sources for crowdsourcing. From simple school projects to real-life game-changing innovation. Its got huge potential and will hopefully attract a lot more people with expertise in any given field ready to share their ideas and knowledge.
  • Dec 28 2012: hmmm, so obviously it should start with CERN & a nuclear terrorist happening at the same time & they blow each other out of existence (& all other such types). What's left is a time/space rift where past & future worlds mesh; dreams become real, ideas become objectified.
    -Someone ends up (let's say they're a psychologist) in a small room with several other of themselves. How do they remember which one they are & how do they maintain their individual value?
    -So you could have a variety of meetings of geniuses throughout history, different ideas about what the universe is, what the world is, what's going to happen to the world, various philosophies & religions throughout history & how they change through history.
    -Animals communicate & become smarter that we.
    -Someone with difficulties making chooses starts making multiple interacting realities - it starts out on a simple farm & ends in an almost chaotic city.
    -How quickly would society change if you could kill with a thought? How would you have to treat your enemy then, if you know that a close relative loved them?
    -What if the population were to be split into two perpendicular flat-lands who couldn't see each other directly?
    -What if the people on t.v. could see the damage they do to others' worldview?
    -What if the chain of causality (but not time) were reversed?
    -What if people lost all emotions?
  • thumb
    Dec 27 2012: How about a song theme in a movie based on a multi track composed by Eric Whitacre using the words from your title. Combine with visual choreography of LED, League of Extraordinary Dancers.
  • thumb
    Dec 23 2012: Chip the whole lot of us and hook us into a world we all want to see individually or poke out your eye's then try and find what is valuable in the darkness?
  • Dec 22 2012: Transition into

    • Jan 9 2013: Is that a reference to something?
  • thumb
    Dec 22 2012: I think that it is interesting to say that a dystopian society is a cliché, after all a cliché is something that obvious. A Dystopian society is obvious because a Utopian society is impossible; there will never b e a perfect society because nobody is perfect. We are all at some points in time irrational, greedy, emotional or selfish.
    A perfect world is not a good TV show.
    • Jan 9 2013: "A perfect world is not a good TV show."

      However, it would not be a perfect world. I've already mentioned that I don't believe in Utopias, in the sense of a society with no challenges whatsoever. That's simply impossible. There will always be challenges.

      And that is why I am reaching out to you guys to get some input on problems, conflicts or challenges YOU would like to exhibit and experience in a society that is seemingly perfect - from politics to social dynamics. Whatever comes to your mind.
      • thumb
        Jan 9 2013: That is what I am saying, humans are imperfect and therefore anything that they create and operate is imperfect.

        And a TV show about a imaginary perfect society would just be boring.
  • Dec 21 2012: "What kind of aspects and challenges, conflicts or problems would you like to exhibit and experience from a film or TV/web-series depicting a peaceful, prosperous and abundant society/world, beyond war, poverty and human suffering, assuming it didn't turn out Dystopian, to make it interesting, engaging and immersive?"

    Isn't that basically Star Trek? But I see that below you indicated you didn't want aliens (or hostile AIs created by humans) and FTL travel in it, I don't know anything that satisfies those additional constraints, probably because it would be hard to create an engaging storyline: you can't even make it about politics or an allegory of the contemporary world because the society you describe would not have any major problems.
    • Jan 9 2013: However, it would not be a perfect world. I've already mentioned that I don't believe in Utopias, in the sense of a society with no challenges whatsoever. That's simply impossible. There will always be challenges.

      And that is why I am reaching out to you guys to get some input on problems, conflicts or challenges YOU would like to exhibit and experience in a society that is seemingly perfect - from politics to social dynamics. Whatever comes to your mind.
  • Dec 21 2012: Mats,
    don't worry about what people here say in regards to your idea.
    They all think what we have is civilization when it isn't.
    Civilization has not yet begun.
    We still are warring, starving, enslaving, impoverishing, destroying, polluting, acquiring, lying,
    and they basically feel or think this somehow represents peace or abundance because waste is
    so abundant, war is abundant, starvation is abundant, poverty is abundant, pollution is abundant.

    They cannot envision what you mean, thus they have to ask!!!!
    They are mentally ill.

    Therein lie some answers though, to your questions, indirectly, as to what stands in the way.
    • Dec 21 2012: "They cannot envision what you mean, thus they have to ask!!!! They are mentally ill."

      That's a bit harsh, isn't it? :) However, there is definitely a lack of knowledge of our technological possibilities to create an abundant society/world where there is enough for everybody (even though there are tons of studies out there that supports it). That's why filmmakers and storytellers needs to merge with scientists, engineers and technologists (that will build the future) or at least become scientifically literate to create the type of media that showcase our possibilities and how this could lead to better social systems.
      • Dec 23 2012: Hi Mats
        No, I don't think it harsh at all.
        The head of the CIA, William Casey, in 1981 said, "We will know when our program of disinformation is complete, when everything the American public believes, is false."

        That is closer than anyone thinks and of course, they will think it isn't.
        Being out of touch with reality is being mentally ill.
        Having to ask and split hairs about what one means by "peace" or "peaceful" indicates to me that people now think it reasonable, rational and sane to think about peace in ways or with elements that are in fact not peaceful.

        There already is enough for everyone but the management of it all needs to be in the hands of everyone so to speak, and completely without a monetary system as a guide because monetary needs profit and profit is fueled by scarcity, not abundance.

        Yes, I do believe that most are seriously mentally ill.
    • thumb
      Dec 24 2012: I agree that civilization has not begun yet. Expanded global empathic civilization would be a new event.
    • thumb
      Dec 26 2012: /
      As I read your comments and trace your style through your profile I am intrigued. It all seems dystopian in the same way that Bucky Fuller was dystopian in his book "Grunch of Giants." Mats has a real challenge ahead in trying inspire goodness. We are not a hopeless species but our large systems of organization seem to work against out better nature.
  • thumb
    Dec 21 2012: Mats, where would you draw the line as to what constitutes a "peaceful, prosperous and abundant society/world"? A person could make the case that the world is already somewhat peaceful, somewhat prosperous, and somewhat abundant.
    • Dec 21 2012: I'm not sure if I could draw a definitive line, but obviously a peaceful world would be one without war. Not even one. A prosperous and abundant world would be one that had enough resources to meet the needs of the people, making competition, the exchange of goods and poverty unnecessary for example. That to me is a peaceful, prosperous and abundant society/world - when a society live together in harmony with their environment and each other etc.

      I get you point though and I know a few people who have different notions on whats peaceful, prosperous and abundant.
    • Dec 21 2012: The world is only prosperous in some places, and that's prosperity on a creditcard: it's by no means sustainable.
  • thumb
    Dec 20 2012: I love the TV series 'Terra Nova', an amazing green and new earth.
    I would join the fight against the 'Sixers' and stop the 'evil' company from stealing from the past in the future.
    • Dec 21 2012: I'm not that familiar with the Terra Nova universe, but I'll definitely look more into it! What kind of things do find intriguing with that world other than what you've already said? Feel free to be specific, as I love details!
      • thumb
        Dec 21 2012: Having lived in the times before 2149 and being opportuned to go back 85million years into the Cretaceous past.....that would be an amazing experience for me as a citizen of 2149.
        I love the simplicity of life in Terra Nova. There is so much to discover, the air is clean, the rivers are pure and the green scenery is a wonder. Besides, there is a beautiful lady who I had hoped would not be stranded in 2149 and was able to make the journey with me.
  • thumb
    Dec 20 2012: (MDR) A TV series based on the lives and adventures of the members of the department of the (MDR) “Major Disaster Response” The MDR sadly being fictional would be a US government department that work much the US armed forces in that it would be divided into branches, MDR-search & recues, MDR-evacuations, MDR-food-shelter and water, MDR-unities recovery, MDR-medical, and etc. and this department would have full timers and reservist.

    Such a series would have a near endless amount of plot-lines, allow for guest stars, and could have multiple spin-offs.
    • Dec 20 2012: I love that! Kind of like a parallel government that arrives at decisions instead of making them through politics or political ideologies, right? Such a government body would not be limited to state either, it could be recognized as an internationally scientific advisory board that acts in need and at the same time design better social systems that will eventually move us beyond the major problems we face today.