Re: [Futurework] Ideal world

[Darryl and Natalia]

Selma, You really do have the foundation for Ideal World. You just haven't fully put pen to paper, nor trust to your own humanistic approach. As you know, many people share a similar vision, and every culture is going to have its own variation on what is holistic, and what will encourage the individual to enjoy creativity.   Making it work, enlightening the insane self-centred oppressors to the point of admitting that short-term gain under current conditions will render even financially successful people very deprived of life's basic necessities, is the difficulty. It is not, however, impossible in a nation in which collective votes can legislate change. As you have stated, good laws were brought about in spite of tremendous opposition from the most influential sectors.   Retaining the right to vote, the right to demand accountability is critical, and must not be allowed to erode as it has especially since Bush II was positioned in the White House. As Mike Ruppert tried to illustrate, it will be almost impossible for the clear-thinking person not to mistrust the current digitized voting system, and the ability of BushCo to tamper with actual results. Prior to the 2004 election, credibility in the system must be re-established. Now, that's just the U.S., but it is the economic and cultural centre of the globe, and what takes place there absolutely bears directly upon all life. I'm presuming that life still has a chance if Bush is defeated, or is impeached, of course. If neither occurs, then Imperialism will be further strengthened from the flawed nationalist operative, and the current activist grassroots organizations will be forced into the highest gear possible. I know that most activists consider that now may be the only time there is, and are doing their utmost to expose BushCo, and establish trustworthy alternatives. From such new beginnings, the nation that established its superior economic and military force must initiate the first steps towards self-healing, and extend peace and good-will towards the rest.   The self-sensor kicks in when you try to accommodate a capitalist economy to work within the ideals. Capitalism has traditionally represented freedom of the individual & nation to pursue unlimited fortune, yet if you stop to think about its oppressive effect upon 80% of the world's people & resources, one has to think in terms of revision for Ideal World.   Arriving at the basic goals of an ideal world,  the how, via well-legislated capital/socialism???, can take form around the needs.  Ideally, this must result in the same thing: a humane and compassionate economy that fosters entrepreneurial process for the better- ment of all life. Sustainable and responsible industries.   I can't agree with you more that given a nurturing and supportive place people will pursue their innate strengths and talents by choice, and interest in the ephemeral and self-centred vapid diversions will phase out to be shelved as humanity's juvenile period. I definitely see a world that will be committed to the highest ideals, and united in its values to that end. This view is shared by most deep down, but still on the surface we cannot even begin to imagine setting aside our armour. If we all get to contribute, it will mean something to all of us, and we will en- deavor to protect it. Perhaps a global archive should be initiated, starting with historical concepts that have proven the test of time in terms of productivity, prosperity, creativity, ingenuity, cultural survival, etc. and be updated for today's needs. The emphasis would have to be on the individual, with the nation's well-being as an outcome of a peoples' happiness.   I believe that the conditions for peace must be brought about first before people can begin to reform the current economic standard to work for world betterment. Having a vision of loveliness so far reaching must in today's world appeal to the majority of people whose only knowledge of life has been that of war and oppression. Religion and communism, both significant in their impact, have not resulted in such an awakening. Most nations are ruled by brutal dictators. You cannot simply offer them a beautiful dream, and hope they'll catch on because it's brilliant. Yester year's hope of educating the next generation can't possibly work when we experience cutbacks to the system that negates the most significant aspects of learning, and reduces education to that of only the corporate goal.   I'm certain that it must be the U.S. that should take the initiative to offer the first olive branch because of its superior influence. This does not mean they should run the world, it just means that a smaller nation would never be able to pull it off. Power and influence are key. Such example would impact upon the world.   I think that first the West must redistribute its wealth within its own borders and to all impoverished nations; to feed and clothe, provide basics of life along with shelter, medical care, education,  to create sustainable job programs or support programs until such time that self-sufficiency is possible. This is a necessity, it is a debt to the exploited peoples both within and outside of its borders, and it can be done without the wealthy suffering any hardship or loss of existing fortunes. The U.S. particularly must honestly assess how its foreign policies, political and economic, have impacted on all nations, but especially those with which they have interfered and abandoned to bankruptcy or those whose holocausts they have chosen to ignore or encourage. I cited one example of money that would never be missed in the 3 trillion misplaced by the D.O.D.. Well, really, that is a drop in the bucket, when you take into account all of the bribe funds distributed to "friendly" nations, the amount spent on defence programs like nuclear/ bio/chemical weaponry. Which leads me to the second required step: No Nukes! No nuke testing. No bio/chem weaponry or testing. First, the olive branch of food, shelter, etc. to establish trust and true responsibility, then lose the weapons by U.S. led initiative. If these two steps are taken then global fear will diminish enough to help make peace possible. Only in peace can we initiate the programs of societal and global betterment.   Before we arrive at that place of a global minimum wage (or transfer payments as Barry coined it), and before we can even dream about a future with all children properly nourished and nurtured, we must address the 2.8 billion who struggle to survive on $2 per day, the 2.4 billion farmers & rural villagers who will have to wait several generations before aesthetics is a genuine priority in their lives, and today's 830 million starving people. Our happiness and creativity depend on our fellow humans' happiness. Our earth, without which we are nothing, depends upon organic and sustainable practices in farming, energy, industrial process, water & land preservation and use, health, transportation, housing, etc.   Out of peace, optimal joy & creativity are possible. Kindness is possible. The judgment that causes all the worlds sorrow starts to dissolve. The fears that generated out of the scarcity principle are seen as history, and abundance of health and spiritual fulfillment are realized. The armour is laid aside, and true knowledge of ourselves, our fellow humans and our earth home forges global commitment to happiness.   The topic of Ideal World obviously inspires many to contribute. This was the best I could think of in a day's time, in mourning for our little cat, Saint "Spankey"--the holy terror who we buried in the consecrated soil of the old manse grounds where we live. (The Episcopalians-- who stole it from the Native People who considered  it a sacred spot for the coming of age for women, would be mortified.)     Natalia     ----- Original Message ----- From: Selma Singer To: Darryl and Natalia ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 9:24 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] Ideal world   ----- Original Message ----- From: Darryl and Natalia To: Selma Singer ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 3:25 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] Ideal world Natalia wrote:   Selma, you don't ask for much, do you!?   First, I think you're off to a good start already. A world solution. If government legislation were enacted to constrain capitalism, initiate work fairness and raise the minimum wages, in addition to ensuring that all children and adults had basic needs including medical and dental, plus childcare... access to education which included the arts, credits for educa- tional and work related needs such as computers, work or school clothing and transportation, compasses and canvasses and violins...   Selma:   I would go beyond what you have here, Natalia for a couple of reasons:   I believe the level of technological development available, when ultimately used for the benefit of the whole planet, will bring about a situation in which there will not be 'work' in the sense we presently think of it, available for everyone and this, I believe, will be a very good thing. While there will still be some of the routine, basic jobs to be done by humans, most of the boring and tedious work of the world will be done by robots and other such contrivances. That, of course, brings up a whole pandora's box of issues about human nature, how humans are motivated, etc.   If, as we have already suggested here, ALL human babies are born into an environment in which they are fully supported physically, psychologically, emotionally, aesthetically, my contention is that the majority of humans, allowed to develop their natural talents, will want to spend their lives doing whatever it is that they love to do. Whether that is baking pastries, playing the violin or engineering new environments for 'good' living, everyone's talents will be used for everyone's benefit.   Again, ridiculously idealistic and unrealistic? Maybe not. Anyway, as I've already said, if we don't have an idea what it is that we want to aim for, we cannot figure out how to begin to set our feet on that road.   I do know that the idea of minimum wages is connected to a way of thinking that does not allow for an environment in which ALL humans are provided with the basic necessities of life which, for me, includes violin lessons and visits to the best museums and full access to the knowledge of all civilizations. It does not, however, include a diet of lobster and steak, fancy cars, houses or clothes  But, do you agree that a person allowed to develop their best talents won't need the trappings of power and glory or the constant stimulation of consumerism to be fully happy?   It is only because of the high level of technological development that all of this is possible for everyone in the world.   I think the very nature of capitalistic entrepreneurship would change drastically under these circumstances. It might just be the arena for testing out things to see what works or not in the way of new products. I'm not sure. I do believe there is lots of room for creativity in the area of developing new products and devices that might be of use to humans and that there needs to be some way to find out which ones work and will be used, and which ones don't. So that might be a place where capitalistic ideas would come in handy. I'm not sure about this. I think much about it needs to be thought through very carefully.   I am thinking that all those material things that are basic for human survival would be controlled by agencies representing the public: first and foremost, as Ray has often mentioned on this list, this society would realize that fundamental to all human development is aesthetics and that would always be the first consideration and would be basic to all education without which nothing else would matter;  provision would also be made for food, basic housing, basic clothing, basic transportation, energy needs, etc.  There is no reason why there could not be room for creative individuals to develop, as I mentioned above, new and different kinds of housing, clothing, all manner of interesting products and devices that might be of interest and use in a healthy and always changing environment.   As I mentioned above, these ideas are based on a particular view of human nature. I would suggest here that there are generally (very generally) three basic views of human nature*, not one of which has any more scientific evidence to support it than either of the other two. One view is what one might call the negative view: based pretty much on ideas of men like Thomas Hobbes and Sigmund Freud in which humans are seen as battling a beastly nature that has to be tamed or contstrained or whatever. A second view is that of the behaviorists, notably represented by Skinner and Watson; I call this the neutral view which sees the human baby as a blank slate upon which the environment has total influence. The third view is what I call the positive view and is most notably represented by Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow.   *Please note that this is similar to but not the same as Maslow's three forces.     There is a great deal of evidence to support all three of these views. It depends on what questions one asks and what historical or scientific evidence one selects in order to support one view or the other. I don't believe there is more or better evidence to support any one view over the other two or any other view of human nature.   So my position is that when one attempts to talk about what kind of a society one believes is possible in the future, it is a matter of honesty and integrity to be explicit about which view of human nature one supports in order to make ones suggestions for the 'good society', or whatever society one believes can be developed from where we are now.   My view is clearly the positive view. I believe we can use much of the information developed by the behaviorists to help us understand much about the way human beings operate. I also believe that there is much in Freud and many of the 'depth psychologists' that is of enormous value in understanding human behavior and that all of that information can inform us about the details of how to construct the society we want to see. But basically, I personally 'know' (not a scientific 'knowing') in a very deep and spiritual place that basically human beings, given the kind of support I have described above, will develop into adults who want, more than they want anything else, to work (at work they love because they have been allowed to find out what that is) and to love others-because that feels so wonderful and is so satisfying and fulfilling, as is working at what one loves.   I loook forward to your responses.   Selma