TED Community » Don Traub

More About Me

I'm passionate about

I'm passionate about spreading the message of love, peace and freedom.

People don't know that I'm good at

Singing, writing/arranging and multitrack recording music.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +2.60 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A reply on Conversation: Let's Create a Global Declaration of Loving Intention

  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.

• A reply on Conversation: Let's Create a Global Declaration of Loving Intention

  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.

• A comment on Conversation: Let's Create a Global Declaration of Loving Intention

  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. :(

• A reply on Conversation: Let's Create a Global Declaration of Loving Intention

  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."
• +1

  A reply on Conversation: How do we get corporations out of government.

  Jan 21 2012: Joanne, thank you for the truly unnecessary apology! I never took personally your apparent hostility. My reference to appreciating an apology from you was based on a comment you had made about if you found out that your presumption about me was wrong, you would apologize. I should have said it was unnecessary, but again, thank you.
  
  I will continue to share. I'm happy to have the opportunity. I am a big believer in the power of ideas. In fact, I arrived at the understanding that it is the most accessible power on Earth a little while back. My formula for expressing human potential is: Ideas x personal commitment = impact.

• A reply on Conversation: How do we get corporations out of government.

  Jan 21 2012: @Justen Robertson Joanne seems to want to fight when she reads certain concepts. My theory is that some of the concepts you and I, and some others are talking about, don't fit into prepackaged social systems. I believe what's happening is that when she hears one idea, that is a core tenet of a particular system she is aware of, she assumes that the other facets of that system are assumed to apply to the writer. While initially a little painful for me, this has been good for me because in 'defending' myself from her, I have discovered at least one system that I know doesn't describe me.
  
  I have always called my philosophy Traubanism because I had never (until recently) discovered anyone else who seemed to posses so many of the same thoughts. Also, exposure to other people's ideas over these last 10 years has cemented or challenged many of my ideas, to the point where I can be sure that I only a few certainties about what everyone should agree on. Three cheers for the internet!

• A comment on Conversation: Let's Create a Global Declaration of Loving Intention

  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.

• A reply on Conversation: Let's Create a Global Declaration of Loving Intention

  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.

• A comment on Conversation: How do we get corporations out of government.

  Jan 20 2012: @Joanne Donovan, I just looked up "homestead principle" because I had no idea what it meant. This should give you a good idea of how new I am to openly discussing, in a public forum, or even reading other people's ideas on this subject most dear to my heart. My motive for engaging in this forum (and others on the net) now, is that for the first time in my life, thanks to the confluence of many factors, I feel like I can participate in a much bigger way towards making the world a more loving, and especially, less hostile place.
  
  After reviewing a few definitions of the "homestead principle," abridged here: "…one can gain ownership of a natural thing that currently has no owner by putting it to use or building something out of it." I can tell you without hesitation, I don't agree with the principle. There are so many ways that this concept fails my internal test of what seems right. I guess I can cross libertarian off of my list of possible, personal philosophies. I have always had a problem with the idea of land ownership. How can anyone claim they OWN a piece of land when the land they claim to own was likely originally obtained through murder or hostile expulsion, as is the case with many colonial nations, including the United States. Even the concept that anyone ever owned the land to begin with. I kind of thought that my sentiment on this issue would be easily gleaned from my description accompanying the idea for a global constitution http://tinyurl.com/7dnjmvy
  
  Joanne, I think I have now made it unequivocal how I feel about property. I'm not sure what reference to the 'wild west' you're referring to. I don't remember writing those words anywhere here other than my last sentence. I would appreciate your apology but what I would appreciate more is a suggestion from you on how I can share my ideas better while avoiding provoking hostility out of anyone else like you in the future. Thank you in advance.
  
  @Justen Robertson, thank you.
  @Anthony Bingham, thank yo

• A reply on Conversation: How do we get corporations out of government.

  Jan 20 2012: Tim, I guess I'm just an old-fashioned question everything guy. I can't get past the 'idea' that it is wrong to force anyone to do anything. I have always said that every person's life is their own personal experiment on how to live. I find the idea that anyone, or any group has the right to dictate to me how I should run my 'way to live' experiment untenable. As far as I know, this life may be all I get at conscious, proactive engagement with the universe. If it is, I want to be part of allowing mankind to experience it in the most meaningful and fulfilling ways possible. Therefore, I seek to abolish any unnecessary boundaries to my opportunities for personal exploration and expression.
  
  I should also point out that for me, and possibly other people who think like me, this fight for freedom from external control is not something I do just for fun (though I do enjoy the discourse among other intelligent people, and the opportunity to open people's eyes), I'm fighting because I strongly feel the wrongness of it and know that it is at the center of a deepening, dark cloud smothering mankind from its potential. I have also observed that the pace of those working against this consciousness expansion has accelerated. If we don't fundamentally change our thinking soon, it will be much more difficult in the near future. Protect the internet. Protect the internet. Protect the internet!