We have outgrown government!

[RRR]

Government is only a necessity when humans behave in bastardy ways too often. If you could rely on everyone to be happy, we wouldn't need the government. If everyone had food, shelter, and love we wouldn't need the government. We wouldnt even need the concept of ownership if everyone got along. We could have an abundance of everything, and if everyone shared we wouldn't ever be without what we needed or wanted in life. If we adopted those as tenets of free choice we would be well off. And we could easily afford that with what we pay in taxes now. Cut all the money we put into defense. Heck, get out of the entire federal reserve system to start with. It was established in 1913 and it has been nothing but bureaucratic thievery since. There are tons of examples throughout history, especially from early American politicians, warning, pleading, not to give control to centralized bank institutions. Andrew Jackson actually halted a centralized bank when he was president. Andrew Jackson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia We simply have the resources, the land, the technology, and the maturity now to make this a reality. Peace on earth at our level of technology is now achievable through simple improvements of our environment. If we took the money, resources, effort, and time we focus on federal activities and applied that effort locally this project could be a sweeping success.

[schola]

Old Hickory was bad ass fa-sho.

[silicon toad2000]

I'd have to disagree. I believe we will always need a government of some form. There will always be a need to manage infrastructure and to do things that noone else wants to do or that we couldn't agree on.
I would suggest that the function of government needs some reform. We should look at the govt as a kind of strata management. Sometimes they will need to dictate things that some tennants don't like, that grump in appartment 12c doesn't want to pay the fee's for keeping the lobby clean...

[fountainAtlas]

RRR,

Do you like:

electricity, roads, cars, modern health care, computers, public education, ect ect..... (Without government these would not exist in the way they do now)


The proceeding not withstanding, we as a society are no better than the Romans. We steal, cheat and go after what we need. Few are enlightened. You may be so, but it has been my experience that people will do whatever they can to survive. And I, do not believe that is a bad thing.

I truly enjoy this forum, for I do not encounter people who have views such as yours, it is mind expanding (in a way).

-FountainAtlas

[ar81]

It looks like you were brainwashed by the Zeitgeist Addendum conspiracy theory. It is very impressively convincing, but it has failures.

Resource based economy is another name for communism in Russia. I asked a Russian about this documentary. He says that resource based economy was tested and failed in Russia.

If you have technology based regime, you have a technocracy and whoever controls technology, controls you. So indeed you have a government, a technocracy.

Without government, you will end up with a regime like Somalia.

Zeitgeist Addendum puts Chaves like a valiant man who set free from IMF, as Venezuela has no medicines (which are supposed to be free) in hospitals, blackouts that rots food of poor, food imports from Colombia, 30% of poverty, after having abundant petrodollars with high prices. Costa Rica instead has 18% of poverty, and one of the most advanced health systems in the world, no blackouts, and it has no petrodollars, but a huge bill of oil imports.

Try to put all ideas to the test, before you believe in them.

[Thomas H]

I'll back you up and agree.

Physically we've outgrown government. Our governments are no longer capable of keeping up with the rapidly changing conditions of our everyday world. However, mentally we (as a society) are not ready to give up government. Too much fear.

Continuing to raise awareness and eliminating irrational fear is the best we can do to catch up mentally.

Originally Postedy by ar81:
Resource based economy is another name for communism in Russia. I asked a Russian about this documentary. He says that resource based economy was tested and failed in Russia.

Am I supposed to believe that because the person you asked is Russian?

Zeitgeist Addendum presents an intriguing ideal, certainly it projects a world better than what we have now, giving us something to strive for, but it's not a reachable scenario overnight.

[RRR]

I'm sure it looks like I've been brainwashed, but I was thinking this way long before I watched any zeitgeist

A resource based economy might not work well in Russia, it is very very cold there and from what I can understand they had a massive abusive federal government. I am talking about literally going back towards a barter system, but we take the time to improve our environment first. If we took out every fast food restaurant, grocery store, lawn, and unused piece of land, and planted an environment which grows food, we would have enough food to feed people without work and without trade. Certainly centralized cities might be a problem, Dan Linehan posted about tall verticle greenhouses in another post of mine, that could be a solution to cities.

I want to explain clearly that we could expand our environment to make it functional. Consider your house your environment. Why should you have to pay for electricity? Isn't that like paying for air at this point? Why should you pay for food? Aren't we smart enough to get free food yet? What about living in society, is that free yet? Are we smart enough to live in a place where everyday behaviors are free? How much do you pay to sleep, eat, poop, and breathe? In this age shouldn't we evolve mentally to eliminate all the moronic bullcrap we have to do just so we can exist? Shouldn't the ability to exist without starvation, exposure, incarceration, and rejection be a reality by now? Don't we have the ability to create a society where they were innate rights? Wouldn't that be a better society? Wouldn't a society like that give us adequate leisure time to pursue love and creative self-expression? That is my dream.

[Brutha]

Why should you have to pay for electricity?

Because energy is a scarce resource and we will kill the planet if we use too much.

Putting a price on things creates incentives to waste nothing.
It makes sense to organize society in a way that reduces waste of physical things.

Especially when we think about peak everything, the idea of wanting to waste more sounds ineffective for the 21st century.

To argue that a given system of organization is bad you have to show that something better exists.
If you simply destroy structures the system that will emerge out of nothing often get their power through the use of violence. That's what you see in Somalia.

Don't we have the ability to create a society where they were innate rights?

Rights are pretty worthless when you don't have a government that guarantees them.

You don't get organization for free. Organizing systems is very hard and every system produces some waste that you don't intent to have.

[RRR]

governments don't gaurentee rights, they steal them.
screw organization. screw it. its not worth the 170+ million dead civilians of the past 100 years. Its not worth 50% of our income. Its not worth it. It is worse than nothing. Government is monopolistic violence.

People would volunteer to fill all the worthwhile pursuits of government without the coercive violence government uses to exist. There would be free market solutions without the state.

[ar81]

Originally Posted by Thomas H

Am I supposed to believe that because the person you asked is Russian?

Zeitgeist Addendum presents an intriguing ideal, certainly it projects a world better than what we have now, giving us something to strive for, but it's not a reachable scenario overnight.

Am I supposed to believe the ideas of Zeitgeist Addendum because the authors of that propaganda movie said so? Who are they? Resource based economy, antiIMF/World Bank statements, distorted pro Hugo Chaves comments, suggests leftist view, an ideological bias. I already showed you some facts on Venezuela. Costa Rica has debt and Venezuela does not.

Their ideas are not an ideal. It is just a theoretical model. Star wars has a theoretical model of physics, which unfortunately is incompatible with reality.

If you build trains that travel from California to Japan as Zeitgeist Addendum says, underground or under the sea, you have lots of problems. First, Japan and California suffer earthquakes. Imagine such an event with such a train. Pipelines would be very long, subject to salty water that would oxidize metal parts, material tensions and since it is too long it may suffer damage anywhere. Stainleess steel still have some degree of oxidizing. It would be extremely expensive and hardly cost-effective.

You are also ignoring that the way Zeitgeist Addendum presents Hugo Chaves is just wrong.
And future portrays the end of US geopilitical games: BBC NEWS | Americas | US global dominance 'set to wane'

So why Costa Rica has a better economy than Venezuela? You have not seen Venezuelan news. Chaves talk about feeding Latin America, but they need to import food from Colombia. Chaves talked about invading Bolivia to secure it if Evo Morales was put down, but he can't even handle Venezuelan crime (half of venezuelans have been directly touched by crime this year). TV channels broadcasted reactions of citizens and I recall one that said "president is concerned about magnicide, while we Venezuelans are being killed every day".

Chaves talk about "Bolivarian socialism" and Bolivar died when Marx was just a teen, so Bolivar could not have been Marxist. Also Bolivar was rich, well educated, follower of Russeau who was a liberal. So bolivarian socialism is like Kissingerian communism or jewish islam... ideological bullcrap.

Venezuelans have 30% of poverty while it had petrodollars, no medicines in hospitals, not even the basic supplies, and emergency rooms are filled with people who were victims of gunshots. Relatives need to buy medicines for patients, and when someone needs surgery you see TV channels offering the public service of having an add where people ask for donated equipment for surgery. The last one occured a few weeks ago in Globovision news.

If petrodollars were not used to solve the blackout problem, to solve the security problem, to solve poverty, to supply hospitals with basic supplies... where did the money go? It did not go to IMF or World Bank. And Costa Rica , which has a tighter economy, with debt and no petrodollars, has better health system (one of the most advanced in the world), has no blackouts, 18% of poverty, a not so serious crime problem...

Does Zeitgeist Addendum presents an intriguing ideal? Or an alienated perception of reality?

[Brutha]

People would volunteer to fill all the worthwhile pursuits of government without the coercive violence government uses to exist. There would be free market solutions without the state.

Right, the people in Somalia found a free market solution for preventing overfishing by huge fishing fleets.
I made another thread about discussing their solution: Somali as the Libertarian dream
If you don't like those solutions that people find for problem like that, you need a state that guarantees rights.

In addition free market principles don't produce free food. If resources are free, you don't have any market for them.
If you follow the ideal of Zeigeist Addendum which praised Venezuela system you certainly don't move into the free market direction.

Chaves talk about "Bolivarian socialism" and Bolivar died when Marx was just a teen, so Bolivar could not have been Marxist.

That argument assumes that you have to be a Marxist to be a socialist which doesn't happen to be the case.
Marx (and the events of his time) splitted the socialists into two fractions: Marxists and Social Democrats (which formed the SPD in Germany).
Last year there was an internal debate within the SPD whether to drop the ideal of "Democratic Socialism" from the written party platform. Some people (among them the most of the people behind the Schoeder administration) believed that it was outdated while a lot of people at the base thought it's worth to keep that ideal.
Before Marx those two groups weren't seperated and they were all socialists.

Russeau who was a liberal.

Russeau is more or less every political label that we have today.
Nearly new every political movement that happened past his demise can be called as "following Russeau".

screw organization. screw it. its not worth the 170+ million dead civilians of the past 100 years.

Those parts of the world were there is least organization suffer from civil war.
If you want to archive something you need a way to organize resources to archive your goal. Free markets provide one form of organization that has benefits in some areas but doesn't work well in others. The areas where they don't work well are areas where a tragedy of the commons can appear.
In those cases you need additional organization to avoid the tragedy. Overfishing is a classic example for the problem of the tragedy.
The Somalians have found a free market based solution, but I like the goverment solution better.

[RRR]

I have driven through my city recently and I'm amazed by my new thinking. All wasted land. All the lawns, all the parking lots, all the empty grass land, all the non-useful trees, if all of this were turned into fruit bearing trees, shrubs, if all of this were permacultured, there is my solution. That is my solution. I don't need to explain my argument beyond food. I don't have a great explanation beyond food. I see the solution as free abundant local food. Distribution? Grab an apple. There are plenty for everyone. End of conflict. Have a nice day.

[Brutha]

all the parking lots,

You basically want that all other people don't drive cars that require them to have a parking place somewhere.
I don't think that people who aren't forced to give up their cars, will magically give up their car because you ask them.

That is my solution.

You haven't explained who should do the work of actually planting those trees. That also happens to be one of the main problems.

[Thomas H]

Originally Posted by ar81

Does Zeitgeist Addendum presents an intriguing ideal? Or an alienated perception of reality?

Good Question! Both. Whenever you envision a moment beyond the present you have to alienate your perception of reality because you're projecting something that isn't current reality. You have to use your current reality as a tool in order to project a future.

Is what the film projects possible? Sure. Is it a better alternative to what we have now? Yes again. Does that mean there isn't potential problems with the model presented? Nope.

[Thomas H]

Originally Posted by RRR

I have driven through my city recently and I'm amazed by my new thinking. All wasted land. All the lawns, all the parking lots, all the empty grass land, all the non-useful trees, if all of this were turned into fruit bearing trees, shrubs, if all of this were permacultured, there is my solution. That is my solution. I don't need to explain my argument beyond food. I don't have a great explanation beyond food. I see the solution as free abundant local food. Distribution? Grab an apple. There are plenty for everyone. End of conflict. Have a nice day.

Hahaha, I totally feel the same way. So many of our created environments serve suboptimal purposes.

[Lauxa]

Originally Posted by RRR

If we took out every fast food restaurant, grocery store, lawn, and unused piece of land, and planted an environment which grows food, we would have enough food to feed people without work and without trade.

You don't have a garden do you? Food doesn't just grow itself without work. I know that you are talking about diverting the resources used by government into farming, but it will still require a lot of work by a lot of people.

Also, I'm not sure I would want to grow food in my front yard, in the backsplash of gasoline fumes produced by the cars going by.

What might be a nice idea would be the planting of orchards in public parks and greenbelts. But I am guessing that orchard trees require more maintenance than, say, pine trees. Or maybe they are more expensive and take longer to mature.

its not worth the 170+ million dead civilians of the past 100 years. Its not worth 50% of our income. Its not worth it. It is worse than nothing. Government is monopolistic violence.

I think you should take a look at this:
Edge: A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE By Steven Pinker

[RRR]

Could we make machines that tend to our gardens? Could we make robotic roomba type food gathering machines? Mechanical chimps? I'm not sure we would need this kind of technology...

If you've never been to a bad city..there are stores that aren't open. We have a giant for sale Meijer in a suburb around here, been closed for a long time now. Many offices have giant parking lots which are hardly ever filled. All the suburbs have big open green lawns where food could easily grow. What happens if there is a depression? How many stores will be closed then? What will be done with stores where no one can afford to buy anything? What will be done with the land? What will we do with those in debt? What will do with our indebted federal government? How would we survive? Who will own the property? Who will own the land? How will we eat if all the stores go out of business? Depression is a very serious sociological condition. What would we do if our money was worthless in a suburb? How would you get around? What could you possibly do? The environment can't handle it.

There are ways to simplify agriculture to the point you require less effort than gardening. It wouldn't be so bad to have a population willing to volunteer for a reason to lose weight that was in the public interest. There are certainly a number of people who might choose to do so if the interest was more than self-interested. Instead of running on a tread mill, try gardening, try permaculture, plant a tree. Machinery may be required to increase productivity of this process. Spend some time in the fresh air, its good for you. We need more fresh air in our environments, no cities stinking of urine, office buildings with air conditioning, or stuffy apartments and houses. We could even use cleaner water. Stop getting your water from a tap full of chemicals. If the land was abundant again, if society started to retract instead of expand, people could make these kinds of projects. Its all about population density and the worth of land.

What is nearly mind boggling is even I think to myself, why can't government do this? Government is not your friend. Governments throughout history have abused their citizens. They are inefficient and demanding, they throw their countries in debt and enslave them, they begin to become pyramids of power. America was a recent decent country, but even from the beginning it was run by a bunch of rich white slave owners. We as a species can do better. To pretend government is becoming more friendly is absurd. Do you realize America has more citizens in prisons than China? Most for non-violent crimes. Into our federal rape rooms. Many of those for carrying the wrong kind of vegetation. We can do better. Why would anyone vote for this system? We can immediately start to change this, but we have to change the medium. We have to change statism by changing the planet. By changing the way we view nature, by changing our nature, we can return to the species we once were. Before we complicated our lives beyond recognition. Before we started enslaving ourselves to jobs, schools, factories, through debt, through an expensive environment. Life as a hunter gatherer is not that compicated. Being born you are in debt. You don't get to choose your life. You are coerced by the power of other people into your life until you reach the age of power. You are bullied by your parents, your schooling, your society, and your government. The way to escape this is to embrace nature, and make it a tolerable place to be. Make it a functional environment.

In sixteenth-century Paris, a popular form of entertainment was cat-burning, in which a cat was hoisted in a sling on a stage and slowly lowered into a fire. According to historian Norman Davies, "[T]he spectators, including kings and queens, shrieked with laughter as the animals, howling with pain, were singed, roasted, and finally carbonized." Today, such sadism would be unthinkable in most of the world. This change in sensibilities is just one example of perhaps the most important and most underappreciated trend in the human saga: Violence has been in decline over long stretches of history, and today we are probably living in the most peaceful moment of our species' time on earth.

Factory farming is worse and widespread.

Some of the evidence has been under our nose all along. Conventional history has long shown that, in many ways, we have been getting kinder and gentler. Cruelty as entertainment, human sacrifice to indulge superstition, slavery as a labor-saving device, conquest as the mission statement of government, genocide as a means of acquiring real estate, torture and mutilation as routine punishment, the death penalty for misdemeanors and differences of opinion, assassination as the mechanism of political succession, rape as the spoils of war, pogroms as outlets for frustration, homicide as the major form of conflict resolution—all were unexceptionable features of life for most of human history. But, today, they are rare to nonexistent in the West, far less common elsewhere than they used to be, concealed when they do occur, and widely condemned when they are brought to light.

The death penalty for misdemeanors doesn't exist, but we have hundreds of thousands of prisoners (if not millions) in jail for non-violent crimes. They are routinely kept in a violent community with rapists and murders. This spreads violence. The government throwing you in a rape room for 10 years for a non-violent crime is a form of violence. It is bullying. It is the ultimate form of bullying next to killing you.

But the phenomenon does force us to rethink our understanding of violence. Man's inhumanity to man has long been a subject for moralization. With the knowledge that something has driven it dramatically down, we can also treat it as a matter of cause and effect. Instead of asking, "Why is there war?" we might ask, "Why is there peace?" From the likelihood that states will commit genocide to the way that people treat cats, we must have been doing something right. And it would be nice to know what, exactly, it is.

[Eric Revelin]

Humanity isn't ready for a world without government. You wanna know why people get arrested for carrying the wrong kind of vegetation? Because people are prejudiced against druggies. About half of this country would vote against the legal right to possess weed because it would go against their traditional family values. Also, people like modern society. They like skyscrapers and supermarkets. If there were a depression one of the primary concerns would be how to sustain what we can of our current structures. We wouldn't start thinking about a completely different mode of existence unless circumstance forced it on us.

The government is ultimately a reflection of us. It can't do anything the people strongly oppose, and it can't oppress us unless we want to be oppressed. Government is inefficient because people waste so much time bickering that it takes a lot of time to address their problems. Government bullies us because we're convinced that bullying each other is the best way to ensure that only those living morally upright lives are free to walk the streets. Government fails in its aims not because people have differences of opinion but because we don't agree to the most sensible way of resolving those differences.

I'm an optimist. I'm an idealist. I think there's a lot of good in humanity, and we've got the potential to be a very noble species. In fact there are many noble people alive today, and many are recorded in our history books. However, on the whole, we're very childish. I think that can and will change, but if you tried to instate Anarchy in our current environment it would result in chaos and not an order-by-choice society.

[RRR]

I've seen very promising behavior by my generation. I know a lot of very very intelligent people, and I believe on the whole our generation is more intelligent than prior generations. I heard on a podcast tonight that in 1987 they discovered IQ in the youngest generation had increased 25% since the 1930s in that generation. That is a drastic increase, absolutely drastic. My hope is that my generation, or the generation which follows will begin to become intelligent enough on average to begin to study philosophy, psychology, sociology, and understand these disciplines. If we educate our intelligent generations we can begin to voluntarily impliment non-retarded solutions.

[Eric Revelin]

Originally Posted by RRR

I've seen very promising behavior by my generation. I know a lot of very very intelligent people, and I believe on the whole our generation is more intelligent than prior generations. I heard on a podcast tonight that in 1987 they discovered IQ in the youngest generation had increased 25% since the 1930s in that generation. That is a drastic increase, absolutely drastic. My hope is that my generation, or the generation which follows will begin to become intelligent enough on average to begin to study philosophy, psychology, sociology, and understand these disciplines. If we educate our intelligent generations we can begin to voluntarily impliment non-retarded solutions.

Now I agree fully on that. I'm fairly sure our generation is largely responsible for electing Barack Obama, and if that's the case that's a damn good start. It means race doesn't mean as much to us, and it also means that we choose intelligence over fear.

With the older generation still in the picture and still in charge there's a limit to how much we can accomplish. When we start taking over I could see drastic changes occurring.

[garentee]

Great thread! I raise food for a living and the OP has suggested that there is an easier way of raising our food.. It will always require a lot of care and attention to detail and human intervention. It also can only be produced in certain seasons. Here in the New england area there are six months with out food production at least..there are a lot of people to feed here. The reality is that right now there are not enough young farmers to take over after the older generation has passed the torch. The average age of a farmer in the states is 55. Before you start making claims that we can get by without government etc take a good long look at the inferstucture that is needed. Agriculture is in a bit of an interesting place right now. Local is becoming hip and most of us cannot keep up with the demand.. thats great.... but we are only feeding about 1% of the population. So for right now we do need the factory farms.. No way around it. The issue is that they are not making any more land. And very few are interested in farming because of the stigma that is attached to such an endeavor. I would say if you really want to make a change in all this.. get some agricultural skills and make a difference by being a farmer. I can respect your train of thought, but in my opinion it is far more realistic to change the system by working with in the system. The laws of nature dictate this.. as in.. water does not flow upstream.

[RRR]

If we shut down the factory farms countless industries would be without food and there might not be enough non-meat to go around. I'm not sure if meat is valid as food, if you can truly sustain yourself on it and consider it much better than not eating. I suppose it does have a lot of minerals.

Results of the CARDIO2000 case-control study indicate that frequent red meat consumption significantly increases risk of "acute coronary syndrome," a label which includes greatly increased risk of unstable angina, plaque rupture, blood clot formation and heart attack. (Kontogianni MD, Panagiotakos DB, et al., Eur J Clin Nutr)

In this research, involving 848 patients and 1078 healthy age- and sex-matched controls, eating more than 8 servings of red meat a month was associated with 52% increased risk of a "cardiac event," e.g., cardiac arrest and sudden death.

Eating white meat more than 12 times a month increased likelihood of having a cardiac event by 18%.

Study participants who ate 8 or more portions red meat or 12 or more portions of white meat each month had 4.9 and 3.7 higher odds of having a heart attack, respectively, compared to those with low meat intake (less than 4 portions of red meat and less than 8 portions of white meat per month, respectively). Practical Tip: Limit your consumption of red meat to once a week and white meat to twice a week.

Simply put, we eat too much red meat, its expensive, bad for you, bad for the environment, and you kill a lot of animals.

A transition away from our current cultures mobility and food quality problems would be an excellent solution. I believe it would work, and I enjoy the feeling of novelty. I'm looking into moving away right now, I'm unsure if I'm capable of moving to a farm during the winter, I'm unsure how best to plan my move or how to try a 30 day trial of my ideals. What is it like being a farmer? Is there a way I could be a farmer, a writer, a speaker, perhaps doing 1 acre of farming. I've just been introduced into the concept of permaculture, its basically a layered version of agriculture where you combine many different plants in a small area, size efficiency. I believe one man lived entirely on 1/2 acre in the video I watched. He had a house in california which was surrounded by his permacultured environment.

[RRR]

A Life Without Play

Whitman had been raised in a tyrannical, abusive household. From birth through age 18, Whitman’s natural playfulness had been systematically and dramatically suppressed by an overbearing father.

A lifelong lack of play deprived him of opportunities to view life with optimism, test alternatives, or learn the social skills that, as part of spontaneous play, prepare individuals to cope with life stress. The committee concluded that lack of play was a key factor in Whitman's homicidal actions – if he had experienced regular moments of spontaneous play during his life, they believed he would have developed the skill, flexibility, and strength to cope with the stressful situations without violence.

Dr. Brown’s subsequent research of other violent individuals concludes that play can act as a powerful deterrent, even an antidote to prevent violence. Play is a powerful catalyst for positive socialization.

If you equate government with violence, with force, then we could say that: Dr. Brown’s subsequent research of other violent individuals concludes that play can act as a powerful deterrent, even an antidote to prevent government. Play is a powerful catalyst for positive socialization.

[garentee]

A transition away from our current cultures mobility and food quality problems would be an excellent solution. I believe it would work, and I enjoy the feeling of novelty. I'm looking into moving away right now, I'm unsure if I'm capable of moving to a farm during the winter, I'm unsure how best to plan my move or how to try a 30 day trial of my ideals. What is it like being a farmer? Is there a way I could be a farmer, a writer, a speaker, perhaps doing 1 acre of farming. I've just been introduced into the concept of permaculture, its basically a layered version of agriculture where you combine many different plants in a small area, size efficiency. I believe one man lived entirely on 1/2 acre in the video I watched. He had a house in california which was surrounded by his permacultured environment.[/QUOTE]

Whats it like being a farmer? It depends what you do as a farmer and how much you actually farm. I grow about two acres of vegetables and it is quite rewarding. It is pretty darn labor intensive and requires a lot of energy. I understand where you are coming from, but the reality is until there are more young folks willing to assume the risks and trials of farming.. the factory farm model is how we are going to feed ourselves. Right now I think that in my area the small local growers feed 1% of the population.. and that is not even full time. Need more farmers, need more farmers, need more farmers...