TED Conversations

Tim Colgan

TEDCRED 50+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Nothing's off topic

This conversation is meant to be one where nothing is off topic. That is, a conversation which is unconstrained and able to take on any direction.

The diversity of background and depth of thinking of TED conversation posters is outstanding. Where will an open conversation lead? Let's see.

What's on your mind?




We are all adults here and capable of negotiating differences between ourselves. Although heated disputes have emerged in these conversations, they have as yet not led to violence. And the process of the community resolving conflict is one thing this conversation could exemplify. Remember Chris Anderson's insight:

"You need clear, open visibility of what the best people in that crowd are capable of, because that is how you will learn how you will be empowered to participate."

http://www.ted.com/talks/chris_anderson_how_web_video_powers_global_innovation.html

To posters: PLEASE DO NOT DELETE YOUR POSTINGS. If you are unwilling to allow your contributions to remain indefinitely, please go elsewhere. Let this conversation be an unadulterated record of human interaction.

+12
Share:

Closing Statement from Tim Colgan

Internet forums such as this have become the new "public space". As such, it is essential that users demand normal rights of free speech in the places that they congregate as in any other public space.

This conversation, though initially open-ended, was singled out by TED for early termination, despite the fact that it generated significant traffic and interesting conversations.

Transparency and openness is essential for the success of an endeavor such as the one TED conversations has claimed as its purpose.

This has become a dictatorial and closed environment.



"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (see Birdia's Leopold Kohr quote "The Power Theory of Aggression" below for the more elaborate version).



In memory of Pabitra (PBUH).




For when this gets expunged - an unexpurgated version of this conversation will soon be placed here:

http://tcolgan.freeshell.org/nothing

Googling "Nothing's off topic" should work soon.

And keep your eyes out for TEDanon. For those wishing to relieve the withdrawal pains from quitting TED.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jun 6 2011: Is a world government unlikely because it would not allow for alternatives?

    This thought has been on my mind. Is it possible that a single world government will not come about because without alternatives for comparison any government would simply devolve? Is competition between governments necessary to determine which approach is best?
    • thumb
      Jun 6 2011: I think a World Government is ultimately how our civilization will evolve - after many hundreds of years of evolution from today.
      As flawed and feckless as it is, the United Nations is a first step towards that end - So you see how far we have to go...
      Ive said it before and I'll say it again:I will die a happy man if this fragmented world saw the light and crystalized into one world. I think it will, but not in my lifetime.
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: That word ("supernatural") has been haunting me since starting with these TED Conversations!
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Tim, I agree!

          Supernatural to me use to be just "what is beyond the knowledge involved in nature" or "what is not understood yet in nature"

          Here on TED people stick it to ideas of religion too often and that is not where the word usage originated from.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Nicholas:

          Yeh, I really liked that concept:

          supernatural = "what is not understood yet in nature"

          Some how it gets turned into "what you can't understand unless you study Kaballah (or name your favorite holy literature) like me".
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: The dictionary definition leaves a lot of leeway!

          su·per·nat·u·ral   /ˌsupərˈnætʃərəl, -ˈnætʃrəl/ Show Spelled
          [soo-per-nach-er-uhl, -nach-ruhl] Show IPA

          –adjective
          1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
          2. of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to god or a deity.
          3. of a superlative degree; preternatural: a missile of supernatural speed.
          EXPAND4. of, pertaining to, or attributed to ghosts, goblins, or other unearthly beings; eerie; occult. COLLAPSE
          –noun
          5. a being, place, object, occurrence, etc., considered as supernatural or of supernatural origin; that which is supernatural, or outside the natural order.
          6. behavior supposedly caused by the intervention of supernatural beings.
          7. direct influence or action of a deity on earthly affairs.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: supernatural = "what is not understood yet in nature" is a very nice one!

          somebody supersmart = "somebody not understood yet by others"
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2011: this is the first time I have encoutered a deliberation of the supernatural on Ted. Where else has it come up?
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Lindsay,

          Pretty much any thread about "God" religion, and atheism.

          Edited: Bridia,

          http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supernatural

          Etymology of "supernatural" - From Latin supernaturalis, from super (“above”) + natura (“nature; that which we are born with”), from natus (“born”), perfect passive participle of nasci (“to be born”) + adjective suffix -alis.

          "Ghost" being related to the supernatural is a newer occurrence, but spirits.

          "English-speakers use the word "spirit" in two related contexts, one metaphysical and the other metaphorical." (Wikipedia)

          Etymology of "spirit" - Middle English spirit from Latin spīritus (“breath; spirit”). Compare inspire, respire, transpire, all ultimately from Latin spīrō (“I breathe, blow, respire”). Displaced native Middle English gast "spirit" (from Old English gāst "breath, soul, spirit").

          Depending on the school of philosophy will depend on the usage of "spirit".

          No "supernatural" did not begin through ideas and the words spirits and ghost, but through philosophies attempting to understand nature.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Nicholas, I don't think Birdia needs a lecture on the "Etymology of supernatural" when she can write about philosophy and political systems right off of her head. What made you think that she didn't have a dictionary at home and needed your guidance?

          I believe she posted her question as a challenge in response to your totally wrong definition of the word: "Supernatural to me use to be just what is beyond the knowledge involved in nature or what is not understood yet in nature"

          What?!

          Debra's definition is adequate IMHO.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: John,

          "Nic, what was the origin of the word "supernatural"? ghosts/spirits?"

          It was hardly a lecture, and I did not know how to interpret her question.

          Sorry John, I just simplified my interpretation, but it is not wrong as it goes into a few of the definitions in which Debra posted.

          –adjective
          1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal. (beyond the knowledge involved within* nature)
          3. of a superlative degree; preternatural (what is not understood yet in nature)

          If you interpreted it as a lecture, fine, otherwise, perhaps I mistaken Birdia's question. Again, I am not wrong. If you feel I am please by all means, debate.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Obviously, Birdia's question on the origin of the word was addressing to your claim: "Here on TED people stick it to ideas of religion too often and that is not where the word usage originated from."

          Her first comment: "I'm all for it as long as it is not haunted by the supernatural."

          I think the usage of the word 'supernatural' here is as a noun.

          Debra's post:
          –noun
          5. a being, place, object, occurrence, etc., considered as supernatural or of supernatural origin; that which is supernatural, or outside the natural order.
          6. behavior supposedly caused by the intervention of supernatural beings.
          7. direct influence or action of a deity on earthly affairs.

          How do your ideas of the word fit in there?

          What is there to debate?!
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: My comment was addressed to Tim about supernatural in which I was dictating my usage of the word as an adjective towards Tim, not Birdia's noun usage, so my definition was not "totally wrong" as you put it which was the grounds for the debate.

          Also the etymology was suffice, the word supernatural itself was originally the today's adjective interpretation and then made into the current noun (pertaining to ghost and spirits) was established around/during the modern English language consensuses, I should have actually lectured, supernatural meaning "beyond nature" predates "spirits/ghost" by 300 hundred years at least.

          Claiming me to be totally wrong and to be doing something I thought* was was asked to answer, seems immature, grow up sir.

          Edited: Apparently I indeed mistook Birdia's question, you were right that my reading of her question was misguided. Which is fine with me, lesson learned.
      • thumb
        Jun 7 2011: Jim: I agree that there is a need for international agreements on certain issues. But is a world government per se a good thing? Or are multiple nations necessary to experiment and determine the best working system?
        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: It's hard to envision the exact structure...

          It may be that the "World" government acts as an umbrella under which "Continental" (for lack of a better word) governments operate

          I'll try to use the US government as an analogy.
          Think of 3 layers of government:
          1) The the world government would be analogous to the federal government, with an executive, legislative and judicial branches.
          2) The continental governments would be analogous to the state governments
          3) Then there would be "cultural" governments that would be analagous to our local governance.

          Separation of religion and state would need to occur at the "World" and "Continental" levels, but "Cultural" governments would have the freedom to develop a government that was whatever the local customs, etc. are.

          I think we should do it....
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Why do governments exist :
          a. to protect the interest of 'investors' with force.
          b. to arrange basic conditions for the workers for 'investors', so their employees do not get sick and do not complain all the time.

          1. So yes the continental government, Though these continental governments will not function as the state governments. They have a different role. I believe there will be a ying-Yang situation of 11 continents, all having their SWOTs strengths/weaknesses/opportunities/threats though these 11 sit at a round table. Making the balance in "MeFirst-WeFirst" terms.

          2. There is the region for survival, this is about 35km/22 miles to 150km/100 miles, depending on the population densities. This will be regulated by crowdsourcing principles, supply and demand is in balance because of technology. No government interference is needed as the basics of survival is arranged through computers, preordering food and resources will become normal, LESS WASTE, LESS STRESS, communitarian principles and common good thrive (best of capitalism and communism, leaving out biggest rotten eggs)

          3. On the continents there are several boards as continents are big and after each about 1400 km the temperament/culture is different. They also do the tax thingies.

          What I can see, the EU is already to big to handle and should be 3 different regions of 1400 KM radius, for practical-logistic and cultural reasons.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Paul,
          Very good thoughts...

          I think before something like we are talking about is viable much else needs to evolve... economies, a mixing of cultures, standards of living, health, education, etc. for lack of a better term, Globalization.
          Once this happens, the whole equation changes and the possibility of something like we are talking about becomes real.

          Paul, you said: "On the continents there are several boards as continents are big and after each about 1400 km the temperament/culture is different. They also do the tax thingies."

          "What I can see, the EU is already to big to handle and should be 3 different regions of 1400 KM radius, for practical-logistic and cultural reasons."

          This is why I think a 3rd level would be needed - Cultural governments that would have jurisdiction over, in EU's case, 3 different geographic areas.

          Does that make any sense?
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: First everybody should have the same idea on what we mean with 'culture', as the word has been used and abused everywhere.

          I believe there is nature for the body and culture for the mind.

          Culture vs tradition is used/abused
          Culture vs national is "/"
          Culture vs Art is "/"

          We need the mathematics of culture I guess, the basic rules, like http://www.ted.com/talks/damon_horowitz.html is talking about when referring to Plato. Basic ingredients of any local culture there can't be any misunderstanding/discussion about like 2 = 2.

          An analogy I like; You can't make soup without water. For the rest the soup is up to local ingredients and personal taste.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Culture = the minor differences that divide the world more than religion does.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Nicholas.

          "Culture = the minor differences that divide the world more than religion does."

          Don't blame culture if you're a victim of your own. It is racism, sexism and prejudice of all kinds, both blatant and subtle, that is dividing our world.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Assumptions, assumptions.

          Trust me, it is a lot more than just racism, sexism and other prejudices.

          It is the cultures that endorse prejudices that divide the world.

          I put the "more than religion does" as a denotation that religion also does divide us, but also that religion has a lot to do with cultures.
        • thumb
          Jun 11 2011: Exactly the trouble; as long as we do not have a common understanding of 'culture', on what it is and is for in essence, we have no starting point for progress.
        • thumb
          Jun 11 2011: Paul, (from your profile, which is great)

          "So my focus;
          SCHOOL : where to go?
          FOOD : where to go?

          If enough people care and focus, we can solve these two basics in survival together."

          Insightful, what do you feel are and can be a contributing factor towards what separate(s) the world? Which has more of a playing role, school or food, for making this altruistic perspective/viewpoints a reality?
        • thumb
          Jun 12 2011: great you take interest in my profile. according to your profile you must see the rebirth of the arts vs economics symphony in the future :) nice you have this vision/passion already.

          'contributing factor'; Google Fridays. Every person, every company should implement 1 day a week to work on something bigger than themselves like school or food challenges.

          'playing role'; School is most important to collectively address globally, and it can be pragmatically possible. It is to redesign the way we prepare children for the world by inspiring the leaders who have the means by actually doing so. There have been many attempts in recent 20 years, though (ofcourse) now it will work. This takes time, though there are some shortcuts at hand.

          Food starts with empowering yourself and countryside. And should be involved in schooling also ofcourse. Though we are with 6 billion people and mother nature didn't count on that. What is important is to start to see the duality in everything between 'survival' and 'luxury', if we understand that, globally we can start solving the food chain.
        • thumb
          Jun 12 2011: All teachers should be spreading these ideas of unification, no?
        • thumb
          Jun 13 2011: Current Teachers ( at least in europe ) have a work overload, growing each year due to the kids are more advanced each year when they enter school.

          We have tried to work with them, but as long as we don't offer instant ways of saving time and better results, we are off.

          So start with students learning to become a teacher, show them different ways, as they are fresh, open minded. By the time they get into schools they ofcourse are heading for the same daily overload, though have learned about an alternative.

          There you have your start.
        • thumb
          Jun 13 2011: The work load should be in parallel with the "interest load" making the students more in an educating role.

          Consider,

          In response to fixing this "shit filled education system of academia" simply add one class "Critical Science-Fiction 101" - A class where sci-fi movies and books will be read, analyzed, articulated, and reflected upon the current times in which we live in. This can do a great deal of benefits for the world and for the children themselves.
          - More globally aware young citizens
          - More creative imaginations in reflection to the real world
          - A better understanding of bio-products, transhumanistic philosophies, and robotics.
          - More reason to be interested in science; not just seen as a bunch of definitions and math problems....
          - Perhaps even more interest into other fields of study also. Cannot have a future without history. Math is a universal language. etc..

          http://www.ted.com/conversations/2505/reading_science_fiction_for_a.html

          In response to a beneficial universal education system:
          - A democratic education, should be installed everywhere, immediately.
          - 3 months of summer changes. Ridiculous to maintain this value today... Just give more hours and less days OR less hours more days. Vote on it, but 3 months summers are where the youth get their education for getting wasted more than they are getting prepared for their futures.
          - Education systems that inspire all children to the fullest contention in each field of study. + When you study math, stop teaching yes or no answer, teach them what math is and can do for life! + Science, stop teaching it like a history lesson, get their hands dirty and blow something up! (Can go for academia also)

          We cannot start with the teachers... the teachers are already ready to get working on the "treadmill of anxiety" that is the 10 hour work day of school, lesson plans, and grading... The only thing that teachers need to change are their salaries.

          Systems need to change, all educations, not just public,
        • thumb
          Jun 13 2011: Yes for SF in school, 50% global imagination, 50% localized through solutionist method.
          Yes to change it tomorrow; show me the proof of some testruns to scale it up globally, and it is possible next week...

          Teachers, Parents and Children ask for change, a revolution, all 3 together is the first time in history. Though all are stuck in chicken-egg story.

          Nicholas, are you prepared to go beyond English and Philosophy?
        • thumb
          Jun 13 2011: English, is my joke major, I am only in it to be able to teach ESL in other countries. Philosophy, is just another interest of mine... truly if we lived in a society like the one I could imagine, I would be a cognitive scientist and study people all day.

          English itself is a joke major.... Philosophy is too broad.... they are both silly in my opinion. Just using them to get me our of this nation..

          I do not see a revolution for a few more years or a decade... depends on how angry our teachers get here in the states.
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: Paul: Are you familiar with Leopold Kohr ("small is beautiful")?

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_Kohr

        Your suggestions remind me of his thinking.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Noop, but great thinking this guy has! It's a pattern we are each about 100 years are in, and each time we miss the point and have to start over ;)
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2011: Always so much more to learn. The Kohr link was excellent for making me realize it anew.
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2011: haunting and deeply troubling quote Birdia..and would that mean that somewhere deep inside us we all have possibility to do ghoulish hideous heinous things.?.is Sado Masochism on the same axis?

          Or, and I prefer this possibility that those who crave power carry other traits about control and domination that co-occurr with pleasure in torture.

          I'd rather entertain the possibility of a ghost viisting than entertain the possibility that we are all somehow capable of such acts.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: a further quote from Kohr..he says it exists in all of us and is checked only by fearof being cheked..essentially

          "But what is the critical magnitude leading to abuse? The answer is not too difficult. It is the volume of power that ensures immunity from retaliation. This it does whenever it induces in its possessor the belief that he cannot be checked by any existing larger accumulation of power"

          chilling

          don't think I accept that
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Tim,I like the premise of "small is beautiful"

          .Buckie Fuller used to say" think globally act locally"

          We need the engagement of local community, neighborhood before we engage effectively as national citizens let alone global citizens. That loss of community and neighborhood sensibility, I believe. is part of the huge disconnect I think between "we the people" and "those folk in Washington".That was a premise of my undergraduate thesis many moons ago, although I was not aware of Kohls at the time.Others wrote about about it as well..Jane Jacobs, Oscar Newman

          The extreme that Kohls is pointing to in the quote Birdia shared below, as an end result of huge ruling enities accountable to no one, grows naturally from the disenfranchisement that comes from non engagement. ( iei no one is looking, no one is involved in carrrying it forward anchored in values of community and humanity)We have a saying in Maine. "You can't get there from here".Look what our disefranchisement allows now.. Look how we vote. Look how disconnected we are from what our governmnet actually is doing and has done for decades.our . It's a recipe for exactly the grim prospect Kohls presents in ever larger and ever more powerful government units
          .@ Birdia "Hope it makes you feel better"
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Lindsay : yes, what happened actually to the Bucky Wisdoms? Where is the movement? Now and than I googled a bit the last 10 years but I only see sustainable design things, not the broader view beyond architecture.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Just a further though on te Kohl quote Birdia shared with us..and contiuing from my post "Think globally act locally"...

          What Kohl is saying seems to connect up with gunatanmao in my mind..unimaginable that the U.S. would have created Gunatanamo and used the exceptinal challaenges of terrorism to pour holy water on the use of torture. I don't think that could have happened is we as a country ..we the people were not so disconnected from what our givernmnet is actually doing..

          It re enforces Kohl hypothesis that certainty of non retaliation is an ingredient to these horeenduous degradions of humanity . Th Us assumed that we would excuse it if we found out..there was no fear of retaliation or challenge ( they thought).

          Obviously many factors other than size play into governmnets undertaking these actions .my working theory at the moment is that it also requires whne a democracy unertakes these things a deep dinfranchisement of "we the people"
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Hi Paul..as a young planner Buckie was a very important touchstone for me.. ..and strangely my island home is right across the bay from his..I can paddle there. He was much beloved here and his family still live here.

          The main message for the world today from Buckie's work, what he would want us to remember and carry on is at the individual level. There is a wonderful essay at scribd which he wrote weeks before he died addressed to the world's youth...I will try to find it and bring it here.

          His suicide by drowining was interrupted by a voice that said "what are you doing, your life doesn't belong to you , it belongs to humanity" He stumbled out of the water went home to his cold water flat in chicago and went into complete silence for two yeasr to ponder what that meant and how that was possible tha tone life could mean anything to humanity.

          Hhe emerged not with a vision of dymaxion domes(that din't come til later as a class project at Black Mountain) but a sort of "rule of life" from which he knew somehow his life would make a difference to humanity.

          His essay reflects back to that moment in the lake and tries to speak to how that emanated how that became that his one life gave so much, inspired so many to "think globally and cat locally"..it is specifucaklly addressed to the young.Would be a great Ted Talk.".the power of one"..how one life can mean so much to so many and pass its value on through the generations.

          Buckie's story, the way he lived his life, even what he said in his last essay would have a high woo factor for the Ted atheist/agnostic community ..I'm afraid it would set Birdia's supernatural alarms off. But the core idea is universal and acessible and true. His life is proof that it is true.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: I am a great enthousiast on Buckminster, his spaceship earth and world game writings changed my mind on the 'world' concept. I all the time wonder why there are not more people with his type of inspiration.

          I would love to read his vision/kick under his butt. It is indeed hard to explain why 'my thoughts' are not mine and are for humanity, lately I refer to Stephen Pressfields book ; The War of Art... it made me laugh and made me understand this bigger 'in-spiration' picture and how it works (for me).

          I was in other discussions on the 'supernatural' and agree on old religions belong in museums not to be fought upon in material ways, though the essence should become immortal once again in new mythologies as we long badly for it and hollywood movies are not enough.

          Anyways, on buckminster fuller; my favorite quote; don't argue about something which is not good, 'simply' offer a better alternative.
        • thumb
          Jun 11 2011: @ Birdia..picture..thanks Birdia..not my taste at all..and am surprised that it's yours.a Rothko.would have made me happy...:>)))
      • Comment deleted

      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Lighten up = definitely. That suggestion can go your way too at times.

          Otherwise "origin" through me off, we have been in disputes before over poor communications, on both sides of our arguments. We are vastly different people Birdia.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: That's good advice, Birdia, Would be great if everyone followed that.
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: *Lighten up = definitely. That suggestion can go your way too at times.*
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Touche.

          Glad my confused misinterpretation was humorous.

          P.S. - This conversation is perfect.
    • thumb
      Jun 7 2011: No money in one world government Tim
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: Preaching to the choir Nicola!

          "Now, and for a long time the USA has been becoming a Socialistic-Semi-Capitalist-Fascist Nation. China has become a Socialistic-Semi-Capitalist-Fascist Nation."

          A republic is a form of government that adopts many systems in which runs the systems. China and the U.S are republics today, definitely.

          I agree with all you have to say, but my pessimism in the topic of uniting the world under one government still remains. While the ideals of money = wealth/power, those who own all the wealth and power will keep it to themselves...

          "I would say no money = union"

          **No money in one world government Tim**

          Nice conclusion :-P (maybe, I am misunderstanding you though)
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: Is it the Hegelian dialectic at work (which may must be another name for yin/yang)?

          A thesis gets established. It has shortcomings. An antithesis is proposed. The two battle it out. A synthesis emerges. Rinse and repeat.
        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: birdia, i suggest the world government to has 7 billion members, and all have the jurisdiction on his/her own property.
        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: people can roam through others' property with permit. you would be welcome to my piece of land anytime.
        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: I vote for freedom to roam:

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam
        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: if the cave or mountain is not inhabited yet, they can take it.
        • thumb
          Jun 7 2011: Tim, I agree and thanks for article.

          Birdia + Time + Kris, you are welcome to stay on my property let alone visit! It is rare for me to find those who enjoy philosophy, art, and worldly issues in my area of living.

          Kris, I know you have a distaste for the following, but I still think it is valuable for considering how the world would work united... you guessed it...

          Venus Project - is an organization that advocates American futurist Jacque Fresco's visions of the future with the aim to improve society by moving towards a global sustainable social design that they call a "resource-based economy". Such a system incorporates sustainable cities and values, energy efficiency, collective farms, natural resource management and advanced automation, focusing on the benefits they claim it will bring to humanity. (Wiki)

          http://www.thevenusproject.com/
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: nicholas, we totally agree that the v.p. is a perfect example of those movements that aim for centralizing decision making under one superpower. all what we have today, the eu, the un, the imf, the wto, all these organizations try to control large chunks of the globe. if you want to analyze what would happen under total central control, v.p. is a good case study. you can also study the already realized versions of such systems, in the former eastern bloc. an experiment stopped abruptly when their economies collapsed.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Mind giving me some references Kris? websites, articles, links, and what not)

          I just find this quote more and more true as I see the world what it is and what it could be/

          "When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: references to what? what would happen? or that v.p. seeks control? or that wto seeks control? or that the same caused the downfall of the soviet bloc?
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Sorry,

          references to "you can also study the already realized versions of such systems, in the former eastern bloc. an experiment stopped abruptly when their economies collapsed."

          How would V.P want to control exactly? lol
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2011: you really need a reference to how and why the eastern bloc collapsed? i would start with a mid level material "economic calculation in the socialist commonwealth", written in 1920. you can also watch some talks of yuri maltsev, you can find some on youtube.

          v.p. wants to control everything with a giant computer. even the idea of a "good" distribution of resources indicate that they think they can show us what is "good". and if something is definitely good, i see no reason why to allow different approaches. destroying money also points into this direction. money is required for participants in the economy to distribute information. without that information the economy can't function on its own, it needs central planning.
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2011: That's why all the leaders of the scientific communities of the world need to tell Jacque Fresco "Good job, now step aside!" and take his inventions, put his name on some, and get to work!

          My history class probably wasn't like yours Kris. We learned all of the American wars - 3 times a piece - before we were allowed to choose a world history class...which was Europe instead.
        • thumb
          Jun 9 2011: nicholas, the socialism experiment was described a lot of times as something fundamental, spiritual, whatever. but the real essence of it, apart of propaganda, was central planning. a central planning board decided what to produce, and how. harvesting machines were rusting on the field, because there was no gasoline to run them, and there were no buildings to park them in. meanwhile, people stood in queues to get a loaf of bread, because there was not enough food. in the plant producing natural gas, there were quotas how much to produce. not meeting the quota meant bad to managers. producing more was also bad. so if they produced more than the quota, they released it out to the air. even in the 90's, some western economists raised the question whether the superior soviet economy is the better, or the free western. little they knew about the empty shops, the queues, the black markets, the outrageously low life standards, the dysfunctional factories, the forged statistics, the systems of lie. this all ended near 1990, when socialists finally had to admit that they have no clue how to get things work. it was not a revolution. socialists simply gave in. they failed miserably. things just refused to work under their reign.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Kris,

          Ever since you argued with me original on V.P I did do research on socialism, and there are always flaws with a system who wants equality but no one is willing to share wealth...

          Pure socialism and communism can work, but without central banking.

          The fact they haven't worked means they cannot work in alliance to Capitalism or Republic-ism ideals.

          However if altruistic qualities were placed into the central design of socialistic society, there would be a lot more room for improvement. "The bakery co-op is also significant because its assembly-line workers earn over $65,000 a year." http://www.axiomnews.ca/NewsArchives/2009/October/October21.html

          The bakery employees make over 65k a year, because their bosses are all the employees, that is pure socialistic ideologies.

          I know it is not the same to have seen and lived through the experience of a collapsing system. However the system collapse because of the people. The people need to be blamed more often. They should have rioted, they should of have destroyed the banks and protested at the government buildings.

          The middle east is now an example of how and why people should start taking charge of their governments. So that equality is not expected but taken.

          Again, it is hard for me to talk, I been privileged not to see these awful events, however find yourself lucky you were able to pull through and can live through such challenges and be able to be free in thought like you are, the world's poor beats the world's rich a million to one. That is not right, and that is because of money being seen as more than a tool for trade.

          Sorry for the rant, but, we need to start figuring out how to eliminate culture, eliminate extra, and focus on what matters for all. That is socialistic-communism, but not in the political manner but in the true manner.

          Politics involve military and money. Money shouldn't be cared for over humans, and our only enemy should be aliens who want our resources, not one another!
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: nicholas, this does not make sense: "Pure socialism and communism can work, but without central banking.". in socialism, *everything* is central. all banks are operated by the government. it is purely an organizational choice whether they create a central bank or not, since every decision is ultimately made and state level.

          people can be blamed if they have the responsibility and the power to make decisions. in socialism, they didn't have. everything is decided centrally, people just have to comply. socialism didn't fail because people refused to comply. socialism failed because the central decisions were awful. and i claim that nobody can do better. not even the envisioned supercomputer. only the distributed knowledge of the 7 billion can.

          btw don't think my life was so disastrous. when i was born, in the late socialism, things were much better, as they continually stole technology and methods from the west. so we had food (bread is bread, no brands. 2 types of milk, such variety of everything), we had cars (trabant, wartburg, dacia and lada), we had flats to live in (provided by the state), we could travel (inside the bloc, outside of it once in every 3 years, only if you behaved well). meanwhile, the government borrowed money like crazy to be able to provide even this.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: Sorry, a central banking system is what I meant Kris!

          Then I must rephrase, democratic-socialism through technology. Would also comply to 7 billion being the leaders. Education all people how to be a citizen of the world, and the world would be one citizen. Do you think that is brainwashing or just altruism?

          I like the respective you gave me, it was insightful! Glad you did not find it too terrible.

          You know, from talking to you a few months ago and now, you seem to have considered a lot of different view points (opinions and thoughts) from then until now. Am I thinking correctly or is it just my imagination playing tricks on my consciousness?
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: democratic socialism is an oxymoron. if people can vote, they don't vote on socialism. only when they don't know the consequences, but then they will soon learn it the hard way, and never again vote for them. you can maintain socialism only with shooting significant percentage of the population. as the soviets did.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: So Kris,

          Simply, dictate to me, how you begin to start your ideal government, and then tell me how it would maintain itself.

          A brevity of an answer would be suffice, but it would be interesting to hear what you would do with your own system to dictate over, for an experiment.
        • thumb
          Jun 10 2011: dictate? i'm not sure what do you mean by that. my ideal government can not be formed today. not before the people realizes some basic truths. at that point, governments become unnecessary.
        • thumb
          Jun 11 2011: Well articulated.

          I meant dictate as to describe what you would want in a government!

          However, since this is your standpoint (which is brilliant).

          Describe your ideal education system to help people be citizens and not to be followers of a system then!
        • thumb
          Jun 11 2011: it is called the internet, and thanks, we are fine!
        • thumb
          Jun 11 2011: I wanted your perspective of education.

          "we are fine!"

          I think there was a miscommunication.
        • thumb
          Jun 12 2011: i thought you are asking about education about government. if you talk about basic education of kids, my position is, not at all suprisingly, freedom. in the simple way: abolish all regulations at once.
        • thumb
          Jun 12 2011: Democratic education-like?

          No not about government, sorry a mis-translation through context. Sorry.
        • thumb
          Jun 13 2011: democracy is a form of regulation. we don't need that either. we need freedom.
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 9 2011: Jimi was an interesting person. Interesting in diverse ways.

          But, his messages were imaginative.
    • thumb
      Jun 7 2011: The EU is an excellent model for how world governments might work..a better one than the UN.
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: I doubt it. In fact the EU are taking example on the US. Look at France and the laws being passed on every months(especially regarding social security and retirement) while the French people are completely oblivious to what's going on, hypnotized by the mass-media and their beyond-mediocre entertainment, with a President whose main concern is to make sure photographers do not forget him while 'trying' to stand next to Obama.
        Or look at Italy, whose prime minister still believes that women belong to the kitchen, and claims loud and clear:" better cheat on your wife with a gorgeous 19 year old than being gay".
        Then we have Merkel, to whom I wouldn't even give the keys of a kebab shop by fear of having to file for bankruptcy the following year.
        Let's not forget about the UK, one time colonizer today colonized by the 'demons' of the excelling US foreign policies. And those are the nations of the G8...

        I really believe we're all on the same bag right now, and that bag is on its way to the landfill unless we redirect the course of our Evolution. Am I off topic? ;)
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: i agree with lindsay on that one. the eu is a perfect example how the world government would look like. to describe this, i would like to introduce the term "fractal disaster". it means a situation which is disastrous on every possible level, no matter if you look at the big picture or a small detail, personal, local, regional or global. economy, culture, law, whatever aspect you choose, it will be a hopeless incoherent mess, and nothing will show any sign of functioning.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Krisztian – “’fractal disaster’. It means a situation which is disastrous on every possible level, no matter if you look at the big picture or a small detail, personal, local, regional or global. economy, culture, law, whatever aspect you choose, it will be a hopeless incoherent mess, and nothing will show any sign of functioning."

          Where does the term “fractal disaster” come from? Is that term referring to how you feel the EU is showing signs of becoming? It sure feels at times like we (USA) are on that road... and then sometimes I think it is bigger than that; that it is a global “fractal disaster”; and then sometimes I think it’s not a disaster, it’s just the way one epoch ends and another begins.

          I don’t think the world is anywhere near ready for a One World form of governance. It will be a long time before we are evolved to the point where economies, cultures, and the many other things you mentioned will be ready for it. A long, long time.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: the term "fractal disaster" is a variation of the internet-born "fractal wrongness".

          and it explains my frustration with the eu.
        • thumb
          Jun 12 2011: The problem is there is EU and there are nation states. The big progressive/protection things are decided on EU level. As nation state governments are 'undressed' so to say in hard currency, they become social nationalistic to legitimize their existence.
    • thumb
      Jun 9 2011: Ok thanks. If it's any consolation, I have the same feelings for the most part about our situation here in the US. I really think we are in the midst of an epochal change.
    • thumb
      Jun 14 2011: I used to think that a one world government was inevitable. I also thought that this could only lead to a corrupt oppressive power with no one to monitor the beheadings. I thought this because my mom is obsessed with the rapture and my childhood was filled with scary stories about what trials we would face before Jesus took us home. Now, however, I am a young adult (24) that thinks for herself, and I honestly believe that the ebb and flow of things; the natural order, will continue to knock prosperous societies down a notch, if not entirely, before world government can lay foundation. And if it does happen, rather than the book of Revelation scaring me, I still worry that Brave New World, 1984 and A Clockwork Orange are prophecies. So to conclude my long winded answer - I think any government will devolve before a OWG rises, but not because of a lock of choice, because of the natural order of things.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.