TED Conversations

Don Traub

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

Let's Create a Global Declaration of Loving Intention

If we truly want to make the world a better place, we need to make radical changes now. Tinkering with our broken system isn't going to work because there's a race on between those implementing a one world government, ruled by them through their financial system, weapons and various methods of mind control, and the rest of us participating in a massive, global awakening. The good news is, all we have to do IS put our attention on the solutions and the awakening will spontaneously ignite to encompass the entire globe in short order.

The first step we need to take towards accelerating this global awakening is to understand that what is holding us back is not THEM, it is our own collective beliefs in the old systems and institutions that shaped our beliefs and values. We are our own jailers. If we want to unleash the boundless creativity and love that exists in us all, we need to clear away the old thinking that directly or indirectly supports the institutions and systems that block our unrestrained thinking.

Geographic boundaries are a perfect example of one of those old ideas. According to our current global system of geographic, territorial boundaries, your lot in life is predetermined by how lucky (or unlucky) you are to be conceived in a particular mother's womb. According to theory, anyone can scratch and claw their way to a good (or great) life (plenty of food, water, shelter, education, clothing, meaningful relationships, leisure time, etc), regardless of where they happen to be born, but try and tell that to a resident of North Korea or Zimbabwe or Liberia.

How about the idea that the natural resources of the planet are private property as if god decided to make certain families the heirs to the world's resources? No way!

How about the idea that it's OK to force people to pay to kill and maim other human beings as is the idea of wars funded by income taxes? No way!

So how can we possibly address this and all the other obvious injustices? Change yourself.

+2
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb
    Jan 23 2012: I am in spirit with you, but I think that the difficulties in making a global constitution with a consensus of support is overwhelming. Why not allow each small area (like a watershed) design their own system of government and pass representatives and resolutions to larger drainage areas to make the system for that level, on up till you have representatives from every place in the world who can work on a global form of government.

    As far as declarations of intention and ideals: I like Love thy neighbor, Judge not lest ye be judged yourself, First do no harm, Violence is the refuge of the incompetent, my way is just my way not the right way, never to old to learn and never to young to teach , all living things on Earth and its life supporting resources are linked to each other, do not create now without considering the future,
  • thumb
    Jan 22 2012: and then?
    • Jan 23 2012: …and then, we examine the biggest world's problems and discuss the best proposed long term solutions, or come up with our own, if we're not satisfied with what's been proposed to date. After that we recruit people to participate in the implementation, raise money for things that require money to get started, and we spread the message of our plans for lasting peace to the world.

      Russell, I have few real answers. I can only point out the obvious flaws and underlying false beliefs that maintain things in such a horrible state. I know that the most powerful thing anyone can do is clean up their own thinking and their own actions. Everyone has a different part in making the world a better place, but it all starts with looking at yourself and holding yourself to a higher standard every day. This declaration, constitution (or whatever you want to call it) is a jumping off point and nothing more. It will serve as a reminder to those who pledge to it, that any course of action must be judged by whether it violates these simple commitments. By doing so, we can avoid carrying the seeds of failure within whatever action we take.
      • thumb
        Jan 23 2012: I am in spirit with you, but I think that the difficulties in making a global constitution with a consensus of support is overwhelming. Why not allow each small area (like a watershed) design their own system of government and pass representatives and resolutions to larger drainage areas to make the system for that level, on up till you have representatives from every place in the world who can work on a global form of government.

        As far as declarations of intention and ideals: I like Love thy neighbor, Judge not lest ye be judged yourself, First do no harm, Violence is the refuge of the incompetent, my way is just my way not the right way, never to old to learn and never to young to teach , all living things on Earth and its life supporting resources are linked to each other, do not create now without considering the future
  • thumb
    Jan 22 2012: I love the idea. I have something similar here: http://www.wesolver.org/wiki/Universal_rights_and_responsibilities
    based on the idea of a universal constitution.

    Please consider adding your idea(s) to the WeSolver.org site and promoting them further.

    Regards,

    Armistral
  • thumb
    Jan 21 2012: Is your intention to actually pursue a global government? or just challenge people to think?
    • Jan 22 2012: My intention is to gather like minded people behind a commitment to pursue actions that directly address the imbalances of the world, beginning with cleaning up their own thinking and actions.
  • Jan 21 2012: It's amazing how much I am all over the place with this idea. I apologize for the lack of focus. I'm new to this and jumped the gun on a lot of my ideas. Sorry. :(
  • thumb
    Jan 21 2012: More concretely then you believe in the right to live and act as you wish

    "I also find fulfillment by interfering with other people's 'way to live' experiments when their 'way to live' includes hurting or controlling other people. That doesn't mean that the people who are hurting or controlling other people don't have the 'right,' it's just that in my 'way to live' experiment, I don't like that behavior, so I will do my best to stop it. Not because I have any more 'right', but because life is a contest of ideas and I'm rooting for the people who run their 'way to live' experiment the way I do, because that maximizes my chances of me getting what I want. More love. More peace. More fulfillment."


    within the limits of if you do what others dont like they can stop you?

    Seems like a dangerous mix. If there are enough people whose life experiment and fulfillment comes from eating you alive do you concede this is their right? The basis of rights then is strength in numbers or physical power?

    I won't argue with that I feel that human rights really only include the right to die, its the only thing birth guarantee you.

    However what we have come to call human rights are the basic rules of the social contract that we demand from it when we agree to live under the code of behavior that the contract encompasses.These are the rights I would expect to be enumerated in a constitution, your statement of rights sounds like anarchist maxim and what has that to do with a constitution?
    • Jan 21 2012: "…your statement of rights sounds like anarchist maxim and…"

      "…what has that to do with a constitution?"

      Nothing. The only reason I listed those thoughts about fundamental human rights was because you said you would like to hear my list?

      " I have a question posted asking people to list what they see as fundemental human rights I would like to hear your list."
  • Jan 20 2012: RIGHT: That which is morally correct, just, or honorable: "the difference between right and wrong".
    HUMAN RIGHT: A right that is believed to belong justifiably to every person.

    I believe everyone has the right to conduct their lives however they see fit. The success of their 'way to live' experiment will either yield fulfillment or failure from THEIR perspective. So, in short, I believe everyone has every right, to do whatever they want. It's their life. Their reality. They'll live, love and prosper, or they'll struggle, suffer and die as a result of their choices.

    I believe that life is a unique opportunity to perceive the universe and consciously participate in shaping and defining it, and that how we people define it is constantly updated. That everything from people to planets come in to and out of existence regardless of goodness or rightness.

    The way I choose to conduct my 'way to live' experiment, that provides me with the deepest fulfillment is by doing my best not to interfere with other people's 'way to live' experiments. I also find fulfillment by interfering with other people's 'way to live' experiments when their 'way to live' includes hurting or controlling other people. That doesn't mean that the people who are hurting or controlling other people don't have the 'right,' it's just that in my 'way to live' experiment, I don't like that behavior, so I will do my best to stop it. Not because I have any more 'right', but because life is a contest of ideas and I'm rooting for the people who run their 'way to live' experiment the way I do, because that maximizes my chances of me getting what I want. More love. More peace. More fulfillment.
  • thumb
    Jan 18 2012: The Issues of climate change, sustainable agriculture, and environmental

    hazards and habitat destruction from water pollution are all issues of great

    importance. In fact potable water is a diminishing resource which has already

    given rise to armed conflict.

    The rise of a Global Governing body is also seen by many as a

    desirable step in pursuit of Global change. How to generate or create such a

    governing body without meeting fierce resistance from the existing systems is

    a dilemma. We and our world cannot afford to waste time and resources in

    struggles for dominance.

    The creation of watershed based districts which would then elect and send

    to conventions delegates where resolutions would be voted up or down rules

    and penalties set enforcement arms established, representation to the higher

    level of global government nominated for general election in their districts..

    The fact that many of the large drainage's on the planet drain territory that

    crosses state and international boundaries, would make the actions of these

    watershed districts naturally weaken the perceived dependence on the nation

    states.

    Additionally, people who have nothing but hostility to the idea of a transnational

    government or a government over powering their own,would have little or no

    complaint a bout a meeting of neighbors to resolve communal issues like water

    use pollution flood control ect.. Even if those neighbors were from other

    counties, states ,or countries. This would also llink very well with the proposal

    to begin widespread flood mitigation projects which I proposed elsewhere.
    • Jan 18 2012: Russell, my motive for proposing a Global Constitution is to attract the greatest number of peaceful, loving people on Earth around a simple set of ideals that everyone can agree on. For example:

      We the People of Earth, in order to promote an everlasting global peace and maximize the opportunity for individual fulfillment and expression, personally commit to the following IDEALS of thought and behavior.

      1. Do no harm personally, or support IN ANY WAY, anyone else or any group – government or otherwise – doing harm, except in self-defense, or the protection of the defenseless.

      2. Never through force, deprive anyone of their freedom, or support IN ANY WAY, anyone else or any group – government or otherwise, to deprive anyone of their freedom, except in self-defense, or the protection of the defenseless.

      3. Commit our lives towards improving the human condition, first by making ourselves standard bearers of love-driven thinking and action, and second by seeking to apply our time, energy and talents towards solving the major challenges facing our world.

      Once this VERY BASIC constitution is completed, put it up to allow as many people who feel the same way to digitally sign on to it.

      Once we see the size of the group has achieved a certain critical mass, we can begin to work together to address #3.

      I think it's important to establish the basics of what we idealistically agree on before we address any attempt to solve the world's problems. If we don't, we run the risk of unintentionally defying these core principles. For example, even a democratic process still contains within it a component that violates the 1st and 2nd commitment, since it ultimately might force the will of one group on someone else. I understand that this complicates things, but I think that we need to ATTEMPT to address things from this foundation anyway.
      • thumb
        Jan 20 2012: I have a question posted asking people to list what they see as fundemental human rights I would like to hear your list.
        • Jan 20 2012: RIGHT: That which is morally correct, just, or honorable: "the difference between right and wrong".
          HUMAN RIGHT: A right that is believed to belong justifiably to every person.

          I believe everyone has the right to conduct their lives however they see fit. The success of their 'way to live' experiment will either yield fulfillment or failure from THEIR perspective. So, in short, I believe everyone has every right, to do whatever they want. It's their life. Their reality. They'll live, love and prosper, or they'll die as a result of their choices.

          I believe that life is a unique opportunity to perceive the universe and consciously participate in shaping and defining it, and that how we people define it is constantly updated. That everything from people to planets come in to and out of existence regardless of goodness or rightness.

          The way I choose to conduct my 'way to live' experiment, that provides me with the deepest fulfillment is by doing my best not to interfere with other people's 'way to live' experiments. I also find fulfillment by interfering with other people's 'way to live' experiments when their 'way to live' includes hurting or controlling other people. That doesn't mean that the people who are hurting or controlling other people don't have the 'right,' it's just that in my 'way to live' experiment, I don't like that behavior, so I will do my best to stop it. Not because I have any more 'right', but because life is a contest of ideas and I'm rooting for the people who run their 'way to live' experiment the way I do, because that maximizes my chances of me getting what I want. More love. More peace. More fulfillment.
  • Jan 17 2012: This is a lot easier talked about than done! It is true that our territorial natures are harmfull, but to eliminate political boundaries or even for citizens of one district to share in the advantages possible from all of their common land, is extreemly difficult. Every land owner would oppose it, becuase the gain which they receive through their speculation in the growing value of their natural resource is of importance to them. So what is needed to bring about this desirable change is a few examples of where it works and that when the advantage in fair sharing of the opportunities provided by natural resources, particularly the land, will there exist some modecum of hope. To answer you last question, we should look to such places as Hong Kong, where all the land is leased from the government and the prosperity resulting from its efficient and fair use is experienced by a large proportion of the population. The idea was first put out as a tax on land values. This allows people to own land but to return to the community what their holding it takes from the chance to best use it.

    My other comments on this channel about where the US government made its biggest error may help you (the reader) to appreciate what the taxing of land values instead of incomes, purchases and profits, will bring.
    • Jan 18 2012: David, I am not proposing to jump into resolving big problems like resource allocation. Please read my response to David Chester. Incidentally, I spend several months out of the year in Hong Kong.
      • thumb
        Jan 18 2012: Hi Don, weighing in.

        1) I think that written declarations will be de-emphasized as the market will favor functionality and the mission statements of sites/companies that put forward that functionality. What I see coming is a world with nations of ideas rather than walls.

        2) There's SO much reading to sift through on this thread! D =
        It's easier to absorb information via text in short bursts.

        3) The global enlightenment has already begun. We are at the beginning of a Galactic Renascence. Between now and the time when we start colonizing space, there is only progress or doom.

        Thank you Don. I hope you'll follow @Planet_Victory as we build up a developers community to build a single open source site to expedite the resolution of all Earthly ills.
        • Jan 19 2012: Benjamin, what I'm proposing is simply codifying a core, kernel of ideals from which to measure all proposed solutions. "What I see coming is a world with nations of ideas rather than walls." This is exactly what I'm suggesting. Well put.
      • Jan 19 2012: Don. I think there is some confusion here. The idealogy about which you write should surely be on a level where nations share a common means for government, without any one of them setting the others at a disadvantage by trade laws or by allowing the speculation in land values to raise their operating (production) costs. Yet the current wave of investment in foreign land by the Chinese and other far-eastern countries will soon cause the price of the available land to rise and for that speculation in the land value to transfer sums away from the home country to the far-eastern one that is speculating in the land value. Thus the basic concept that your good ideas propose must include some of the "big overall effects" of the kind you seem to want to shy away from!
  • thumb
    Jan 16 2012: I would love this I dea I keep pushing for the organization of the world by watersheds. It is a scientifically definable environmentaly based concept of boundary that would cross national and state boundaries as they exist now.

    One thing I would like to see changed in anynew constitution from any existing constitution is that the enumeration of righhts and responsabilities of citizens must be laid out in the body of the document not in amendments
  • thumb
    Jan 16 2012: It's funny coz I've met more men than women who support moms as moms. And they do this not to oppress women, but to empower women "as is."
    I think that the traditional role of a mom is simply the greatest ever force there is against capitalism and exploitation-rot, etc., and to undervalue this job is a grave mistake. It kills me that Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan once called housewives "parasites" and "children." Moms are not housewives, but they do take care of the house. I also don't think anyone should think lowly of housework............if we do that then the next thing you know, we are hiring poor immigrant women to do our housework in the name of women's liberation, and that's just wrong. We all need to rely on ourselves as the smallest unit of society, the family unit.
    Also, it's a fact that the women's movement of the 60's was significantly funded by the CIA, so much so that Ms. magazine didn't even need advertisers. Why? Because women getting paid for working means doubling the tax base. Also, it supplanted women's influence, compelling us to eat fast food and use schools for childcare, breakfast, lunch, snacks, eye and hearing tests, clothing, fluoride supplements, etc This created broad government dependency where there once was none at all....
    At least one sociology department is trying to quantify the economic benefit of mothers. I believe the M.O.T.H.E.R website puts the average mothers salary at $110K/year---which is computed using the very low wages of domestic work. I have no idea what the real economic value of a mother actually is though.
    The world has yet to see a good documentary on mothers, and the relationship between moms and our mother the planet. I am chewing away at this as an idea, but so slowly that I think someone could steal my idea at any time! I think a documentary is the way to go, one picture tells 1000 words.
    The greatest predictor of human behavior is values, which are learned in the home.
    Out of space to write!
    • Jan 16 2012: The American Express commercial comes to mind: The love, time, attention and guidance of a mother? Priceless. Truly.
  • thumb
    Jan 16 2012: Don,
    Your idea looks similar to what Karen Armstrong, TED speaker has presented. Did you watch her talks (Revive the golden Rule & Charter for Compassion) and read the conversations that were generated? Have you looked at the "Charter for Compassion"?

    By your profile, it looks like you joined TED conversations 4 days ago....welcome:>)
    • Jan 16 2012: Thank you Colleen. I have not reviewed her presentation or her material. I'll do that now! Thanks for the direction.
    • thumb
      Jan 16 2012: I'm going to look at those conversations in the next few days, thanks for pointing it out. If I see a way to invite Karen into this current conversation, I will do that too--

      In the meantime, "clarity" is on my mind, being that there are so many diverse types of constitutions which can be written. Definitely rich material to draw from...

      We are all only on average six degrees away from whoever we need to connect with, and the internet is only bringing us all closer.

      I am just giving my thoughts and I hope they're useful.
  • thumb
    Jan 16 2012: I agree with you completely, except that I cannot help at this moment coz I'm too wrapped up in my current projects.

    A good place to start would be in studying existing constitutions.

    I believe that an ultimate constitution should be a composite of the many, but also a revision, which emphasizes parts that need more emphasis-development than they did when the original constitutions were written.

    It seems like the internet could help, using the concept of tag clouds or something like that. It would help decipher the common themes of constitutions around the world.

    A good constitution will model human thought-logic in some way, and so people in that field (what would one call the field of human thought?) could help.

    I think a handful of determined people should get this started, and I think that philosophers and writers, and the survivors of atrocities should chime in heavily.

    The creative process requires four steps, 1) gathering all info-material on the table; 2) analyzing the inter-relationships between the different things; 3) cutting and pasting, deciding what to keep and throw out; 4) honing.

    Right now we're at the first step. I think that info, along with bodies-people need to be gathered together now...........
    • Jan 16 2012: "I think…the survivors of atrocities should chime in heavily." Very good point! I read your "idea worth spreading" about mothers and I have to say, I have always been amazed at the incredible sacrifice the average mother makes to rear children. I am so saddened that the traditional mother's role has been so incredibly undervalued. MOMS RULE! I believe myself to be generous and charitable, and I've tricked most people who know me into believing the same thing, but an average GOOD mother smokes me on the: willingness to make huge personal sacrifices of time, scale.
  • Jan 16 2012: The global constitution might read something like this:

    We the People of Earth, in Order to seek global Tranquility, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the planet Earth.

    We, the undersigned, as ambassadors of planet Earth pledge to:
    1. Devote our lives to improving the human condition, first by making ourselves standard bearers of love-driven thinking and action.
    2. Do no harm personally, or support by voice or payment anyone else, government or organization, to do harm in our name, except in self-defense, or the protection of the defenseless.

    Further, we realize that everyone on Earth is a member of our extended family, and will treat them as such, regardless of their degree of personal evolution, or aberrant thinking or behavior.

    We understand that the best way to improve the human condition and promote peace is to commit our lives to helping as many people achieve a minimum standard of living including: Sufficient water, food, shelter, education, and love.

    This constitutional concept is about reorienting our thinking towards ideals that bring people together and away from the divisive ideas of geographic tribalism.
    • Jan 19 2012: This happy idealism should receive a somewhat practical treatment by ceasing the private territorial claims to land. By taxing land values the speculation in its value would cease and the costs of production reduce to the point where competition and trade would not be as one-sided as it tends to be as globalization takes full stage.
  • Jan 16 2012: If we each take responsibility for policing our own lives, and our own behaviors to ensure that we're not violating our own code of conduct purposefully or unintentionally, the collective affect will be that the world WILL be a better place wherever WE are. Those of us who have signed on to this constitution can share the idea with everyone around us until it reaches a critical mass where enough people become the new system.

    The constitution would serve as a reminder of what is truly sacred and what behaviors are NEVER acceptable, and what thoughts and behaviors we are committed to in our own lives. Taking responsibility means not willingly paying taxes without a commitment from the people who are supposed to represent us that they will not use the money to go kill people preemptively for example. Remember redress of grievances? The right to redress grievances includes the right to withhold taxes until our grievances have been addressed.

    By educating ourselves and working together to preserve the freedom of the internet, we can win this battle and start the next, exciting chapter in human evolution unencumbered by the ideas that have stunted our development to date. I personally pledge to make the world a better place by policing my own thoughts and behaviors to ensure that they reflect my love for everyone in my family of humanity.