Occupy Wall Street – Our Vision and List of Demands

Dear leaders.  We have heard complaints that our protest doesn’t have a clear message or list of demands and you don’t understand why we are unhappy.  Therefore we got together and developed our vision and list of demands for your consideration.

Vision:  If the below 20 point demands are met, we hereby agree to use our brains, free hands, creativity, and energy to innovate and build a beacon upon a hill for generations to come. 

 

 

  1. Abolish money, debt, Wall-street, banks, and investment “bangstas”
  2. Abolish incompetent government at all levels
  3. Abolish Lobby firms
  4. Abolish the commoditization of the human being
  5. Abolish mundane visions for the human being
  6. Abolish barriers to creativity and innovation
  7. Abolish poverty
  8. Abolish illiteracy
  9. Abolish ignorance
  10. Abolish poor education
  11. Abolish suburban sprawl
  12. Abolish poorly planned cities and infrastructure
  13. Abolish pollution of air and water
  14. Abolish destruction of wild life
  15. Abolish deforestation
  16. Abolish overpopulation
  17. Abolish nuclear weapons, missiles, bombs, and guns (swords, bow and arrows ok)
  18. Abolish use of oil, nuclear power, and coal
  19. Abolish excess waste
  20. Implement demands 1-19 throughout the entire world
Advertisements

42 thoughts on “Occupy Wall Street – Our Vision and List of Demands

  1. In all countries, including the USA, Greece, and Spain, there are considerable portion of the population of each generation that might be labeled as the “Half-wayers”. These are the unsuccessful but still they are grateful and defendant of the socio-economic system in place. They are mostly of older ages, but still you can find them in less ambitious youth.

    The Half-wayers are middle-classers who feel indebted to the unjust and corrupt system because deep in their hearts and minds they believe that they have achieved and acquired more than what they fairly and normally deserve. This kind of people might not be corrupt; but they assume that without such system they would have been ruined and abject losers. This is the only reason why they defend the system meekly and brutally; or at least fear and reject any movement that might bring possible change.

    http://tariganter.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/wall-street-half-wayers-of-generations/

    • That is a very insightful thought. I would add to that…those that get by with the system (no losers, no big winners), those that can fill their bellies and enjoy an occasional meal out or a trip to Disneyland…have resigned to the fact that this is the only way…this is life…this is…all we can be. I would place myself in that category…maybe a little better off at certain periods of time…but I always felt life could be better not just for me…but for man in general. My state of mind pre-“real” world was that of hope and excitement…it has evolved to dissapointment…not just in regard to my own situation…but for all of us…even for those at the top of the pyramid. We are the one species on this planet that could really change our own circumstances…but we just plod along as if this is all we can be.

  2. Regarding #10, I’m all about it but what do you define as good education. Often times, people see ‘rich’ (i.e., expensive, ivy league, etc.) education as great education. You probably have a post about this, I’ll look around. Great list of demands.

  3. “WingedPanther…I reply to your questions within your post. I can’t believe the owner of the blog can edit someone’s post like one is God…but it makes it efficient in this case:) Thanks for taking time to reply to each point. Impressive. My comments all in quotes.”

    I’ve got a few questions about your proposals:

    1. Abolish money, debt, Wall-street, banks, and investment “bangstas”
    Do you think this will eliminate greed, conflicts over limited resources, etc? Is the real purpose to eliminate trade, opportunistic behavior, or something else? I fear this will be an assault on the symptom, not the cause of the problems you wish to address.

    “It is just a theory or a muse…but if you look at every other animate creature on our planet…including Apex predators, they don’t use money or financial institutions to live their wild lives…and they have managed to survive longer than ourselves in our current state. The apex species…Orcas, dolphins, Chimps, Gorillas, Wolves…etc…cooperate in groups to live their lives. But we are superior to these animals in intelligence and tools…we, of all species, have the ability to create our own human reality. We don’t need money or these institutions to create that reality…assuming we start each generation off on the right foot. It all begins with our little beings…the babies….they will evolve into what we have defined. And…resources aren’t limited IF…we have a rational population size to take care of.”

    2. Abolish incompetent government at all levels
    May I suggest you start with the UN? It appears to be the most incompetent government agency on the planet. If you disagree, could you more precisely define what determines competency in government? In addition, could you more precisely define what the purpose of government is, and what boundaries it should have?

    “LOL…yes…the UN…great idea…accomplishments??? I believe, if man defines specific visions (which generations have the right to alter over time) that are worthy, government will play a very limited but important role. They will be the most gifted and intelligent among us…but they will also have day jobs.”

    3. Abolish Lobby firms
    Is the goal of this to limit the amount of influence corporations have on public officials, to increase the accountability of public officials to their citizens, or something else? If this were implemented, what would stop corporations from finding a work-around?

    “Lobby firms wouldn’t exist without money…but I had to throw my contempt for the concept in our demands:)”

    4. Abolish the commoditization of the human being
    The phrase “commoditization of the human being” makes me immediately think of human slavery. Since I’m pretty sure that isn’t what you’re referring to, can you be more precise about what you mean? This is especially important, given that you want to eliminate money.

    “Great masses of human beings today…perhaps 6.8 billion of us, are seen as an economic unit. What is each of the 6.8 billion people worth in terms of expected revenue for enterprise. We are also viewed as expenses or inputs of the enterprise (see “Muses on Capitalism (employees)”. My perfect symbol of the commoditization of the human being is the cubicle…LOL. I will be making a more detailed post on this…many will say…oh…he is communist…that is what Karl Marx said…they couldn’t be more wrong”

    5. Abolish mundane visions for the human being
    While I support this, I fear my vision may differ from yours. I’m a born-again Christian. I believe all people were created in the image of God, and that God loves us enough to send his Son (Jesus) to die for our souls so we can be with him. To me, the mundane visions for the human being are embodied by humanism, atheism, and secularism. I know, however, that there are many people who view Christianity as holding back people’s visions for human beings.

    “My idea of mundane visions is the current corrupted view of the American Dream…a house, a car, a picket fence, a big screen TV, and the ability to purchase any type of potato chip you can imagine.”

    6. Abolish barriers to creativity and innovation
    This sounds good, but what barriers are you talking about? What if we can’t agree on what things represent creativity?

    “Creativity and innovation should be embraced and explored by the culture…even nurtured…given the benefit of the doubt. It should, in my opinion, be taught almost like religion to little children in the schools. Currently, our schools are geared up as day care centers so both parents can work to pursue their corrupted American Dream and in turn prepare our children for the same corrupted American Dream. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…is that what we are currently enjoying?”

    7. Abolish poverty
    That’s a goal, not a plan. Seriously, if we get rid of money, does that get rid of poverty? What if we get rid of the concept of “owning” something? When Gorbachev came to the US during the Reagan years, he was amazed at the wealth in the US, despite the Soviets eliminating “poverty” by eliminating “ownership” of goods.

    “This is connected to so many issues…over population, poor education, handing down previously unsolved problems to the next generation…poverty breeds poverty and in greater numbers. See my post “Santa Clause or Srooge”. There is no reason for poverty if we have a manageable population, great schools, and no money. In my Utopia…ha ha…there is no such thing as unemployment…there is always work and hard work to be done. As long as someone has a brain, free hands, and energy, they can contribute something to the whole…and in return, they will recieve food, shelter…life.”

    8. Abolish illiteracy
    This, I can agree with. Lets start by failing any first-grader that can’t read at the end of first grade. I’d also like to abolish innumeracy, which is an even more common problem. Now, what happens if the person in question is mentally handicapped?

    “Despite what we might like to think…some humans given equal conditions from the get go are more talented…more intelligent, more artistic…more creative…etc…we are not all created equal. There will be opportunties and plenty of work for all levels of human beings that work towards greater visions and are in turn taken care of. Regarding handicapped individuals…there should be no problem caring for them if money and profit are abolished…they will merely give someone who is interested a reason to expend their energy for that purpose.”

    9. Abolish ignorance
    How? Seriously, what I consider common sense, many consider ignorance, and vice versa.

    “This will be addressed in early education…where many perspectives are explored…and I will expand on a post or two about early education”.

    10. Abolish poor education
    Again, how? Every proven proposal that has been offered is strongly resisted by public teachers. Would you suggest we eliminate public education? If education is privatized, what if the parents of a child are ignorant (see above) and don’t choose well? Also, there are a lot of definitions of quality education, which range from teaching the three R’s to teaching self-actualization.

    “I plan to do a post on education for the little people. It all begins with them after visions for the culture are established. Can you imagine what we could do to educate our little people without worrying about constraints of the status quo? I envision a traveling classroom…get them out of the prison…show them the world…explore. I will expand on education in upcoming post”

    11. Abolish suburban sprawl
    And replace it with what? Should we shift to rural living? Should everyone move to sky-scrapers? I live in South Carolina, in an area where cities have spread into each other making one, continuous, suburban region with very little urban or rural. However, it’s a lot of really nice places that I wouldn’t want to get rid of. Why should I be forced to, if the communities are quite nice?

    “this is linked to a reasonable population size. Have you been to Europe. Much can be learned from the old Eurpoean cities. One can be very content in condos with beautiful architecture, expansive and beautiful public parks for walks, markets that you can walk too to buy fresh produce and delicious meats.”

    12. Abolish poorly planned cities and infrastructure
    How do you determine what is poorly planned? What are the standards? What if my standards of well planned are different from yours? I grew up in a city where no building was allowed, by convention, to be more than 20 stories tall, and all roads were laid out on a grid. I think that was much better planned than New York City or Chicago, but many people might say I grew up in a city that was making poor use of space.

    “I leave that to the smart ones and creative architects…lots of experts and bright people that would work out solutions to this problem”

    13. Abolish pollution of air and water
    I thought we had already done that in the United States. Where does this need to be implemented?

    “Are you kidding me? We still spew shit into the air and water every single day”

    14. Abolish destruction of wild life
    There are several approaches to achieving this, ranging from conservationism to moving all wildlife to zoos.

    “I would abolish zoos. If the other demands met…you may see a dolphin, a whale, a bear, a bald Eagle more than once a decade”

    15. Abolish deforestation
    Again, where do you see deforestation happening?

    “Here in the Northwest I see logging trucks daily…take a hike up to the mountains and evidence is everywhere. I am sure it is occuring all throughout the United States…and as for the rest of the world…no comment.”

    16. Abolish overpopulation
    This is a VERY dangerous road to go down. China is currently implementing a one child per family policy, and has resulted in families aborting girls far more than boys. The result has been a massive gender imbalance. A different approach is to put “excess” people into the military and send them into random wars. Finally, what if I think this represents a mundane vision for human beings? What if I think this is a commoditization of human beings?

    “This is a tough issue I don’t deny that. I myself have a son so can’t speak by example…although when my ex-wife and I die…population will go down relative to my output:) Over-population is in my opinion our number one problem. The only way to resolve this is by educating our new generation early on the impact that swarms can cause to the environment that keeps us alive. No other species has to deal with this problem…but…if interested…look at my post about “Ant and Human Colonies”…I don’t want to follow their example to survive…do you?”

    17. Abolish nuclear weapons, missiles, bombs, and guns (swords, bow and arrows ok)
    What is the purpose of this? What would happen if we required everyone over [pick your favorite age, say 16] were required to own a gun? What makes swords, bows and arrows OK?

    “If man needs to go to war…let them spill only their own blood in a noble fashion without killing evey other living thing in the blast zone”

    18. Abolish use of oil, nuclear power, and coal
    And replace them with what? Also, what’s wrong with each of these? Seriously, I like to have AC in my home, and the Internet works better with electricity. We don’t have ANYTHING that could replace the entire power grid, currently.

    “Population control, creativity, innovation…belief that there are some very intelligent human beings that if given the freedom and resources to solve the problem it could be achieved!!!!!!!”

    19. Abolish excess waste
    How do you define this? I think we have a lot of excess packaging, but what counts as “excess”? Who’s responsible for determining it?

    “The smart and intelligent people can help us with that. Have you noticed that the human being is the only animate creature on the entire planet that creates stuff that can’t be re-used by other creatures? Our current existence is merely a plague on the planet”

    20. Implement demands 1-19 throughout the entire world
    This is going to be a problem. For example, many countries have authoritarian dictators who do not want a literate populace. For them, literacy is a threat to their power. Further, if we disarm down to bows and arrows, and they don’t, we have no way to impose this vision on them. In addition, China and India are investing heavily in coal-powered electric plants. They view their economies as vitally dependent on coal power. Additionally, China has no interest in getting rid of money, since they currently hold most of our debt.

    Here’s my biggest issue with the above: I think you are starting from a view of humanity that is not based on reality. You seem to want to eliminate any notion of wealth, but I think people naturally understand that access to limited resources means not everyone can have some of everything. You seem to view people as naturally inclined to productive activity, yet I regularly encounter people who show far more inclination to idleness than labor. Finally, as indicated, many of them are not self-explanatory, at least to me.

    “I put #20 in there to point out 1-19 requires a word-wide solution…a human solution. Otherwise…forget it. We should just keep plodding along and let be what will be…become a Buddhist…or a capitalist philistine…or socialist liberal. I will continue to live my life and if I have the courage…when the time comes when I no longer find a purpose or joy in life and I am unable to hit a golf ball off the tee past 200 yards…I will kiss my son for an hour, make love if I have a soul mate, drink half a bottle of scotch, smoke a cigar, hug my ex-wife, embrace my dearest brother like a bear. spend time with friends and other close associations, write a final muse about the Human Direction…and walk up to the moutains to find a deep glacial crevice…free fall to the bottom and go into a pieceful eternal sleep….and with this final Roman like act…I will have offered a potential solution to our health care debt problem…LOL”

      • 17. Abolish nuclear weapons, missiles, bombs, and guns (swords, bow and arrows ok)
        What is the purpose of this? What would happen if we required everyone over [pick your favorite age, say 16] were required to own a gun? What makes swords, bows and arrows OK?

        “If man needs to go to war…let them spill only their own blood in a noble fashion without killing evey other living thing in the blast zone”

      • “WingedPanther…I reply to your questions within your post. I can’t believe the owner of the blog can edit someone’s post like one is God…but it makes it efficient in this case:) Thanks for taking time to reply to each point. Impressive. My comments all in quotes.”

        –My new comments are prefixed with two dashes. I haven’t responded to all points, because I didn’t have a response or your response was that we’ll work out the details later.

        I’ve got a few questions about your proposals:

        1. Abolish money, debt, Wall-street, banks, and investment “bangstas”
        Do you think this will eliminate greed, conflicts over limited resources, etc? Is the real purpose to eliminate trade, opportunistic behavior, or something else? I fear this will be an assault on the symptom, not the cause of the problems you wish to address.

        “It is just a theory or a muse…but if you look at every other animate creature on our planet…including Apex predators, they don’t use money or financial institutions to live their wild lives…and they have managed to survive longer than ourselves in our current state. The apex species…Orcas, dolphins, Chimps, Gorillas, Wolves…etc…cooperate in groups to live their lives. But we are superior to these animals in intelligence and tools…we, of all species, have the ability to create our own human reality. We don’t need money or these institutions to create that reality…assuming we start each generation off on the right foot. It all begins with our little beings…the babies….they will evolve into what we have defined. And…resources aren’t limited IF…we have a rational population size to take care of.”

        –Let’s consider, for a moment, the difference between what we do, and the apex creatures do. They cooperate in groups, as do they, but they seek to acquire a very limited variety of items. There are numerous groups of hunter-gather or limited agrarian cultures that function quite well on a similar basis of limited concerns. If our only concern was food, shelter, and sex, I’m sure we could forgo money without any issues. It’s when you want a few more things than what is locally available that it gets more complicated. The larger the scale, the more complicated. I find it interesting that China, for example, is moving from communism to capitalism, and accruing great wealth in the process. Ultimately, however, I think your belief in the ability to shape humanity into a purely cooperative society represents an effort to try, yet again, to implement theories that have never been successfully implemented.

        **At one point America exported more goods than it imported. Are you saying we can’t produce or create what we want within our borders? Are we not creative, innovative, hard working people? If we want a telescope…or Fruitloops, or a computer…a toy…why can’t we make it? I think when I pose the idea of a better world or better country and I propose ideas like no money…your mind goes to communism and socialism and images of everyone living in rags on a farm…that isn’t what I am thinking about or imagining. Again…every single thing man has created he created himself…money did NOT create it.

        4. Abolish the commoditization of the human being
        The phrase “commoditization of the human being” makes me immediately think of human slavery. Since I’m pretty sure that isn’t what you’re referring to, can you be more precise about what you mean? This is especially important, given that you want to eliminate money.

        “Great masses of human beings today…perhaps 6.8 billion of us, are seen as an economic unit. What is each of the 6.8 billion people worth in terms of expected revenue for enterprise. We are also viewed as expenses or inputs of the enterprise (see “Muses on Capitalism (employees)”. My perfect symbol of the commoditization of the human being is the cubicle…LOL. I will be making a more detailed post on this…many will say…oh…he is communist…that is what Karl Marx said…they couldn’t be more wrong”

        –I fear your industry has negatively shaped your view of how employees are viewed. I work for a small company where EVERYONE is viewed as a person, and not a commodity. Some people have been fired over the years, either because they performed their jobs poorly, or their skills became less relevant, but I’ve never seen an instance where anyone was viewed as anything other than a person. I worked for another company where management seemed to have the view you’re talking about. They also had enormous turnover in their employees, with the most talented being among the first to leave. It is my belief that their attitude towards their employees will ultimately result in them failing to be competitive, and failing as a company.

        **I was happiest at a smaller company no question about it. So, the solution is for me to work at a small company and be happy while the world keeps plodding along…in other words…I shouldn’t worry or write about things I can’t control and therefore should just try to get what ever I can out of life and be happy.

        5. Abolish mundane visions for the human being
        While I support this, I fear my vision may differ from yours. I’m a born-again Christian. I believe all people were created in the image of God, and that God loves us enough to send his Son (Jesus) to die for our souls so we can be with him. To me, the mundane visions for the human being are embodied by humanism, atheism, and secularism. I know, however, that there are many people who view Christianity as holding back people’s visions for human beings.

        “My idea of mundane visions is the current corrupted view of the American Dream…a house, a car, a picket fence, a big screen TV, and the ability to purchase any type of potato chip you can imagine.”

        –We agree, then. That is a truly mundane vision. With that said, I think it is a vision that coincides with the “instant gratification” mentality we’ve developed in the past few decades.

        **Economics has become our religion…in my warped mind…economics should simply be the starting point for the human progression.

        6. Abolish barriers to creativity and innovation
        This sounds good, but what barriers are you talking about? What if we can’t agree on what things represent creativity?

        “Creativity and innovation should be embraced and explored by the culture…even nurtured…given the benefit of the doubt. It should, in my opinion, be taught almost like religion to little children in the schools. Currently, our schools are geared up as day care centers so both parents can work to pursue their corrupted American Dream and in turn prepare our children for the same corrupted American Dream. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…is that what we are currently enjoying?”

        I guess I view it as the parents’ responsibility, rather than the schools’, to promote creativity. I learned far more creativity from my father than I ever learned in school. My creativity expresses itself most prominently in mathematics, games, and computing, but my parents also encouraged artistic expression, including piano lessons and art classes. I suck at musical instruments, and am only barely competent at drawing. Despite that, I am quite skilled at board games 🙂

        **parents don’t have much time to work with their kids…both adults usually work…I would expect a higher education to emphasize creativity and innovation and the parents to have more time to spend with their kids and nurture them

        7. Abolish poverty
        That’s a goal, not a plan. Seriously, if we get rid of money, does that get rid of poverty? What if we get rid of the concept of “owning” something? When Gorbachev came to the US during the Reagan years, he was amazed at the wealth in the US, despite the Soviets eliminating “poverty” by eliminating “ownership” of goods.

        “This is connected to so many issues…over population, poor education, handing down previously unsolved problems to the next generation…poverty breeds poverty and in greater numbers. See my post “Santa Clause or Srooge”. There is no reason for poverty if we have a manageable population, great schools, and no money. In my Utopia…ha ha…there is no such thing as unemployment…there is always work and hard work to be done. As long as someone has a brain, free hands, and energy, they can contribute something to the whole…and in return, they will recieve food, shelter…life.”

        –I think there is plenty of work available to be done right now. The problem is the ability to effectively convert the fruits of those labors into the requirements for life. If we scale back to subsistence living, then there will be no shortage of work, but we’d also be back to the days when life was “nasty, brutish, and short”.

        **My image of a new world isn’t subsistence living as I mentioned above…in fact it would make us look like chimps

        9. Abolish ignorance
        How? Seriously, what I consider common sense, many consider ignorance, and vice versa.

        “This will be addressed in early education…where many perspectives are explored…and I will expand on a post or two about early education”.

        –I think you dodged my question here, though not intentionally. As an example, I’ll use myself and Richard Dawkins. He has a doctorate in physics. I have a master’s in mathematics. I think that, from an educational background, it’s fair to see we are both intelligent enough, from an academic sense. I’m an Evangelical Christian who studies Christian Apologetics, he is a committed atheist who writes books on the folly of Christianity. Regarding our attitudes towards religion, each of us (me and Dr. Dawkins) would consider the other to be espousing an ignorant position. How do we resolve such issues? Note: both parties reached their positions through careful study and thought. Further, I used to be an atheist, so I can’t be accused of not understanding his position.

        You could say that what I have described above is honest disagreement, but Richard Dawkins is not so generous towards my beliefs. How do we determine what represents ignorance, and what represents honest difference of opinion?

        **You two should sit together and use the Socratic Dialogue to debate…in this way, you are in fact working together to find the truth. Nothing wrong with differences of opinion as long as those opinions are debated and discussed…that is how we learn…it would be a verbal and logical boxing match.

        15. Abolish deforestation
        Again, where do you see deforestation happening?

        “Here in the Northwest I see logging trucks daily…take a hike up to the mountains and evidence is everywhere. I am sure it is occurring all throughout the United States…and as for the rest of the world…no comment.”

        –Logging companies also do reforestation, so they will have forests to harvest in the future. Are you saying this is not happening in the Northwest?

        **Suburban sprawl is in fact de-forestation…Logging companies destroy old growth forests and the habitat…simply replanting little pine trees doesn’t replace what existed before. Deforestation is major issue outside U.S.

        16. Abolish overpopulation
        This is a VERY dangerous road to go down. China is currently implementing a one child per family policy, and has resulted in families aborting girls far more than boys. The result has been a massive gender imbalance. A different approach is to put “excess” people into the military and send them into random wars. Finally, what if I think this represents a mundane vision for human beings? What if I think this is a commoditization of human beings?

        “This is a tough issue I don’t deny that. I myself have a son so can’t speak by example…although when my ex-wife and I die…population will go down relative to my output:) Over-population is in my opinion our number one problem. The only way to resolve this is by educating our new generation early on the impact that swarms can cause to the environment that keeps us alive. No other species has to deal with this problem…but…if interested…look at my post about “Ant and Human Colonies”…I don’t want to follow their example to survive…do you?”

        –It’s worth noting that the current population of Earth, which doesn’t perfectly feed it’s population, but not do to lack of food production, is far higher than was thought possible a short time ago. Farming technology makes it possible to feed more people than was ever thought possible. Our ability to live underground or in skyscrapers also makes it possible to have a huge number of people living in a very small amount of land. Overall, the concept of “maximum sustainable population” is dependent on technology, so is not a fixed value. We could approach it the same way Apex Predators do, and breed until starvation imposes a population cap, but I think there’s a better way. Another concern is religion. Some religions, or sects/denominations within religions, mandate having as many children as possible. While you may view that as an example of ignorance, pushing the issue is likely to be problematical, and failing to push the issue means it will only be a few generations before their ideas outnumber ours.

        **Yes, we have made great advances to take care of huge numbers of people…but is it desirable and an intelligent goal? Do you like that people are stuffed into skyscrappers and many work in cubicles? Do you like traffic jams? Do you like what we do to the planet to sustain our enormous population? What religions are you talking about that encourage a mass orgy?

        17. Abolish nuclear weapons, missiles, bombs, and guns (swords, bow and arrows ok)
        What is the purpose of this? What would happen if we required everyone over [pick your favorite age, say 16] were required to own a gun? What makes swords, bows and arrows OK?

        “If man needs to go to war…let them spill only their own blood in a noble fashion without killing evey other living thing in the blast zone”

        –Back in the days of feudal knights, this worked well. WWI and WWII changed that. We have tried, with the Geneva Convention, to avoid civilian casualties, but that immediately makes hiding behind civilians a valid and useful tactic. It’s cowardly, but when you lack numbers, it’s also smart guerrilla tactics.

        **remember…I said abolish nuclear weapons, bombs, missles…see video attached by Dragonstrand

        –Final note: I really think you have great intentions, and are a nice guy. What scares me is that your solution for many “how?” questions is population control. This has a huge potential to become a form of oppression. What happens when, not if, the ability to reproduce becomes the scarcest resource of all? The ability to impose reproductive punishments and rewards could be the worst commoditization of humanity of all.

        **Aren’t you terrified of our current condition? I am. See Dragonstrand’s reply to Cathy…I think he makes a great point and I will merely be mirroring much of what he has outlined. You can also read my post “Santa Clause or Scrooge”…where I address this issue on freedom of choice.

    • 5. Abolish mundane visions for the human being
      “While I support this, I fear my vision may differ from yours. I’m a born-again Christian. I believe all people were created in the image of God, and that God loves us enough to send his Son (Jesus) to die for our souls so we can be with him. To me, the mundane visions for the human being are embodied by humanism, atheism, and secularism. I know, however, that there are many people who view Christianity as holding back people’s visions for human beings.”

      WingedPanther: So . . . . . the work/vision of Heraclitus, Sophocles, Sappho, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Buddha, et al was/is “mundane”? The entire cultural movement of the Renaissance (literally the “rebirth” of pre-Christian antiquity, or “humanism”) was/is “mundane”? The work/vision of Goethe, Nietzsche, Camus, Sartre, Hesse, was/is “mundane”? You don’t actually imagine that a higher, more spiritual vision of existence is the sole province of Christianity and Christians do you? Seriously?

      And this will likely segue into a discussion about how you can possibly imagine that a barefoot, ascetic desert sage could ever be mistaken for being an advocate of Capitalism and Social Darwinism.

      • You have cited a huge number of philosophers and religious leaders, who have a dizzying array of ideas and philosophies, many of which are contradictory. These range from Plato’s idea of the world being a shadow of “reality” to Buddha claiming that the world is an illusion. We have Nietzsche’s rebellion against Christianity and humanism. We have the Renaissance, much of which was driven by a celebration of Christian ideals in art.

        With all that said, yes, I believe Christianity is superior to them in expressing truth. I also would like to note that your characterization of Jesus is inaccurate. He wore sandals, was not an ascetic (he was criticized for hanging around with moneychangers and other wealthy people), he endorsed the Islamic law, which was about small government and preservation of property rights, and had nothing to do with Social Darwinism.

  4. “Abolish incompetent government at all levels”. I would like to see that even more that I would like to see the barriers to innovation abolished. And I have faith it will.

    • Winged Panther: Speaking of “noting” things, I find it the pinnacle of ironic folly to be getting lectured by a Christian about the “inaccurate characterization” of Jesus. Your religion has transformed him from the actual human being that he was into the “one and only son of God” that he wasn’t, thereby smuggling away the entire actual content of his humanity for the sake of making him an unreal figurehead in your dogmatic formula. Jesus “wasn’t an ascetic”? Then just what exactly was he doing fasting for forty days and nights in the desert? I have a hard time imagining that he (or John the Baptist for that matter) was “wearing sandels” during this time. And exactly where is his “endorsement of small government and property rights”–coming from a man who owned nothing (and for a very good reason), that strikes me as a rather bizarre stance to take. He implored people to renounce their possessions so as to be “reborn” and “enter the Kingdom of Heaven” with him. That doesn’t sound like an adovacy of “property rights” to me. No, of course Jesus had nothing to do with Social Darwinism–that’s my whole point. You do. You claim to be living the life that is mandated to you by Jesus–you have made it clear in your comments here that you are a Capitalist and Social Darwinist. Therefore it follows that you must believe Jesus approves of your position regarding these matters, that this is the prescribed and officially sanctioned manner in which you should live and look at life. If this were not the case, then you would hold other viewpoints on these matters and live accordingly.

      You have of course dodged my actual question, however. I have cited examples of human beings–like Jesus–who were possessed of clearly higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted states of being. Some of them were athiests. Some of them were humanists. None of them were Christians. This was to expose the fallacy of your claim that such states of being are the sole province of Christianity and Christians. You have done nothing to counter that truth other than to make a characteristically subjective statement to the effect that for some reason “Christianity is superior to them”. Based exactly on what criteria? Please be objective for a change.

      You also dodged the actual issue at stake with regards to the Reniassance, which as you know derived its name from the “rebirth” of Antiquity. That was the real driving force behind it, not the “celebration of Christian ideals in art”. It was the celebration of the rebirth of Antiquity–Christianity limped along behind this celebration and benefitted from it through inspired works of art which depicted Christian imagery alongside imagery of classical and noble antiquity. The Renaissance was split right down the middle, like a being torn in half, rediscovering a part of itself that had been lost–the unChristian part.

      • My take on Jesus: he made it clear he thought he was God, unless you believe the Bible has been corrupted. If that’s your belief, I would refer you to the many people who have written far more about the legitimacy of the Bible than I could hope to go through. “Evidence That Demands A Verdict” or “The Case for Christ” are two such books. As far as not being an ascetic, yes he fasted for 40 days, but he also went to parties with the rich and had the audacity to pluck fresh grain on the Sabath because he was hungry. While he owned nothing, his disciples had money, and he never chastised them for it. I do consider myself a Capitalist. That does not, however, make me a Social Darwinist, which covers a huge range of ideas, many of which I vehemently disagree with. I believe that Jesus gave us, as individuals, clear instructions on how we were to conduct ourselves in relation to other individuals, and in relation to society. I also know that nobody is able to live up to those standards 100% of the time. Given that everyone, saved and not, will behave in a greedy manner from 1% to 100% of the time, it makes more sense to me to use that as the starting point for an economic system than to fight against it.

        I disagree with you that the people cited possessed higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted states of being. Some of them came up with very interesting theories about reality, some of them came up with very complicated ideas to explain reality. The majority of them, however, I believe were wrong. Given that they offer contradictory explanations of the nature of reality, the source of suffering, etc, they simply cannot all be right. If you refuse to believe that there is such a thing as absolute truth, then you are claiming a theory of reality. If you believe it, then you have no basis for disagreeing with me, due to your ability to accommodate my truths along with your own, despite the apparent contradictions. If you attempt to force me to follow your path to knowledge, you are denying that my path can be equally valid. If, on the other hand, you do accept that there is absolute truth, I ask you which of the various belief systems you proposed represents it? For me to debate the superiority of Christianity when you haven’t offered what you believe is superior could easily result in me tilting at windmills.

        The Renaissance represented a rebirth of the arts, sciences, mathematics, and prosperity. Fortunately, Christianity had preserved many of the documents that facilitated that rebirth, and both private merchants (capitalists) and the Catholic Church funded much of the Renaissance activities.

      • Reply Part One
        WingedPanther: You haven’t had much exposure to or experience with the discipline of Philosophy, have you? That is evident in the above reply, which is a jumble of rapidly fired assertions with little if any logical coherance. It’s interesting to note that by my count you use the word “believe” or “belief” eight times, but the word thought is used only once–and that refers to someone else other than yourself. This is the “subjectivity” that I referenced in the previous passage. I’d be much more interested in what you think than in what you believe. But the fact of the matter is that thought for you is secondary–you argue from the position of “blind faith”, and thought is merely a handmaid that dawdles along beside it like a tapping cane, propping it up. This is MO of all Christians and I’ve yet to meet the exception. Since you have made it clear in another post today that your desideratum is “comfort” and “contentment”, you might consider just not getting into it with me any further, because I assure you that you will get nothing but discomfort from doing so. Right now I can’t complete this reply (hence “Part One”), but trust me I will–point by point. It will take a little work and discomfort to decipher and disjumble your reply, but I’m down for it. Speaking of “comfort” by the way–imagine the discomfort of fasting for 40 days and 40 nights in the desert. It doesn’t seem like your master shares your idea of “living the dream”. Gethseme and Golgotha weren’t exactly very “comfortable” experiences either. Apparently Jesus was not too into “contentment”, else he would have found it. DId you miss this part of his “clear instructions” on how you are to conduct yourself? More later . . . . .

      • Reply Part 2:
        “My take on Jesus: he made it clear he thought he was God, unless you believe the Bible has been corrupted. If that’s your belief, I would refer you to the many people who have written far more about the legitimacy of the Bible than I could hope to go through. “Evidence That Demands A Verdict” or “The Case for Christ” are two such books.”

        I’m not exactly convinced that Jesus “thought he was God”—perhaps “one with God”. A subtle difference. Nonetheless, let’s assume for the moment that he did “think he was God”. So did many others in Antiquity. As Nietzsche wrote: “In antiquity, Sons of Gods were a dime a dozen.” And frankly, if someone thought or thinks that, I’m not really in a position to say otherwise. Such a thought or claim is their experience of themselves—that thought or claim may not be true for me with regards to my perception of him or her, but that does not mean that it isn’t true for him or her. Ultimately, the issue here isn’t whether Jesus “thought he was God”—it’s that you believe he was not only “God”, but the one and only incarnation of “God” on Earth admitting of no other. The issue here is what you believe, not what Jesus allegedly thought. How did you arrive at this belief? Because you have been told by others that it is “true”, and because you believe your interpretation of the New Testament supports what you have been told. Regarding the Bible, if only it were so simple as it being a question of whether it is infallible or corrupt—unfortunately, the complexity of interpretation is a part of the equation. Two different people can see the same passage in two entirely different ways. Who is to say which one of them is “right”, and which one “wrong”? Then there is the whole problem of hearsay. That old exercise comes to mind: You have a room full of people sitting in a large circle—you whisper a story into the first person’s ear instructing him to whisper the same story into the next person’s ear; so on and so forth. Then at the end, you have the last person tell the story out loud—the story hardly resembles the original story that was told to the first person. People have changed it, added their own embellishments, left things out, exagerrated unimportant parts, put things in that were never there to begin with. The fact that two of the four authors of the canonical gospels along with Paul never even personally knew Jesus says a lot about how the New Testament is far from being exempt from this process of the erosion of actualilty and accuracy. Your citing of “books” that merely support your subjective belief system under a specious veil of being “scholarly” is ridiculous. It’s like being a fish in the ocean who believes that the Universe is entirely water and cites other fish in the ocean who have “proven” your belief. One has to get out of the water to achieve an objective viewpoint on the matter. Finally, I left out the whole question here of what is meant by the word “God” to begin with. Honestly, I have no idea what this word means or refers to, and I’ve yet to meet a Christian who can tell me. Define what “God” is. You will answer with “words, words, words,”; in the end however, you will be forced to admit that none of the words can describe the “indescribable”. In other words, you don’t know what “God” is—it is just “something” that you believe in but can’t describe or define. How, then, if you don’t know what “God” is, can you claim to know that Jesus was “God”?

        Bottom liine: You can believe whatever you want to believe, but the real question is: Is it really true? To want to know the truth, to really know the truth, is the key here—and searching for truth is certainly an uncomfortable enterprise. It comes back to Socrates: Asking oneself in earnest, as if for the first time: What do I really know? This requires setting aside beliefs and hearsay, and digging deeper into the layers of oneself and others like a detective trying to “get to bottom of things”.


        “As far as not being an ascetic, yes he fasted for 40 days, but he also went to parties with the rich and had the audacity to pluck fresh grain on the Sabath because he was hungry. While he owned nothing, his disciples had money, and he never chastised them for it.”

        You seem to think that “ascetic” is a frozen concept whicn prevents an ascetic from have interactions with the world. A couple of quotes:
        2. Asceticism (from the Greek: ἄσκησις, áskēsis, “exercise” or “training”) describes a lifestyle characterized by abstinence from various sorts of worldly pleasures often with the aim of pursuing religious and spiritual goals. Some forms of Christianity (see article Monastic life) and the Indian religions (including yoga) teach salvation and liberation and involve a process of mind-body transformation effected by exercising restraint with respect to actions of body, speech, and mind. The founders and earliest practitioners of these religions (e.g. Buddhism, Jainism, the Christian desert fathers) lived extremely austere lifestyles, refraining from sensual pleasures and the accumulation of material wealth. This is to be understood not as an eschewal of the enjoyment of life, but a recognition that spiritual and religious goals are impeded by such indulgence.
        3. Those who practice ascetic lifestyles do not consider their practices virtuous in themselves, but pursue such a lifestyle to encourage, or ‘prepare the ground’ for, mind-body transformation

        4. Self-discipline and abstinence in some form and degree are parts of religious practice within many religious and spiritual traditions. A more dedicated ascetical lifestyle is associated particularly with monks, yogis or priests, but any individual may choose to lead an ascetic life. Shakyamuni Gautama (who left a more severe ascetism to seek a reasoned “middle way” of balanced life), Mahavir Swami, Anthony the Great (St. Anthony of the Desert), Francis of Assisi, Jesus, and Mahatma Gandhi can all be considered ascetics. Many of these men left their families, possessions, and homes to live a mendicant life, and in the eyes of their followers demonstrated great spiritual attainment or enlightenment.

         I thnk these quotes suffice to refute your ludicrous assertion that “Jesus was not an ascetic”. Like all Christians, you completely de-emphasize the most important biographical fact of all with regards to truly understanding the human being Jesus: the forty days and forty nights of fasting in the desert. This is because it is irrelevant with regards to your “belief” that Jesus was not “really” a human at all, but merely “God on Earth” incognito dropping hints and threats about the afterlife and giving “clear instructions” about how to live a life that is, ironically, the antithesis of an ascetic life while one is loitering around in the world waiting to die and be jetted away into Paradise. Jesus, just like the Buddha, “left the world”, renounced everything and went into the wilderness in search of “enlightenment”. And as many ascetics do, once it was attained, they both returned to the world in order to communicate to others their experience of that attainment. Of course Jesus, like the Buddha, had interactions with the world, “went to parties with the rich”, et cetera. Why? Recruitment. They went wherever they went, and wherever they went, they had a message: “Do as I have done and you will attain to the state of being and enlightenment I have attained to.” This kind of “witnessing” to the unenligthened ones seems to be a huge driving force or motive for such men. Their experience of enlightenment is so profound and life-altering that they want to share it with others and motivate others to “follow in their footsteps”.

        Let me ask you this: Do you think maybe you’ve missed the message? Is it possible that you got it all wrong? Perhaps this little fairy tale you’ve been told about Jesus doing everything for you so that you could be ‘saved” is all just a big misunderstanding. Has it ever occurred to you that Jesus didn’t want you to “believe” that he was the one and only incarnation of “God” on Earth, but that instead he wanted you to become his equal, to reach a state of mind and being, through the same kind of ascetic path he walked, in which you “think you are God”? Possible? I’d be willing to bet that it is probable. Not a very comforting thought, is it?

        To be continued . . . .

      • Reply Part 3 (Are we having fun yet?)

        “I do consider myself a Capitalist. That does not, however, make me a Social Darwinist, which covers a huge range of ideas, many of which I vehemently disagree with.”

        The only reason you don’t want to be associated with Social Darwinism–which is as much of a perversion of the actual scientific teachings of Darwin as Christianity is a perversion of the actual spiritual teachings of Jesus–is because you don’t want to be associated with Darwin and Evolution, which you know is subversive of your belief system. However, the foundation of modern capitalism is Social Darwinism, and in many of the comments on this site you have expressed ideas that are clearly in alignment with the Social Darwinian viewpoint. You have expressed support for the perverted interpretation of the “survival of the fittest”, making it clear that you believe Capitalism is the “best system” because it justly rewards the “strong” and “capable” who “rise up” within it while also punishing the “weak” and “lazy” who are “kept down” by it. You have expressed support for a “King of the Mountain” scenario, the mountain itself made up of “human beings” climbing upon one another in order to “reach the top” of the mound so as to become the Alpha Superchimps. Remember your statement: “More power to them!” The question I ask: Does a truly higher or superior human being engage in such an ignoble enterprise? Would Jesus climb such a mound of dead flesh? One entertains some serious doubts here. But you have no problem with it–to you, it is the “best model ever”.

        ” I believe that Jesus gave us, as individuals, clear instructions on how we were to conduct ourselves in relation to other individuals, and in relation to society. I also know that nobody is able to live up to those standards 100% of the time. Given that everyone, saved and not, will behave in a greedy manner from 1% to 100% of the time, it makes more sense to me to use that as the starting point for an economic system than to fight against it.”

        My first question here is: What about creating your own ideas and standards about how to conduct yourself in relation to other individuals and society? Why succumb to being a mere follower of someone else’s “instructions”? But I have some suspicions as to why. First, because you do not trust yourself and are convinced that you would only “do evil”. Second, perhaps because you are not even capable of coming up with such ideas and standards. And finally, of course, because once again you “believe” that Jesus was not “really” a human being, for if he was you could not just take his “clear instructions” and blindly obey them–instead you would find yourself in a position of being forced to create your own ideas and standards on these matters. You imagine you are getting “instructions from God”. This contributes to your misunderstanding of the actual message of the actual human being that Jesus was. For seriously, how do you arrive at the misconception that Jesus, an ascetic, is “instructing” you to live a materialistic, capitalistic life of “comfort and contentment”? Or that he would be a supporter of the conventional and conformist economic system of Capitalism itself? Or that he would want you to “relate to other individuals” the way people within Capitalism relate to each other, which is so very unlike the way he related to others. The world of Capitalism strikes me as very far removed from the Mount of Olives.

        And then there is this notion that “nobody is able to live up to those standards 100% of the time. Given that everyone, saved and not, will behave in a greedy manner from 1% to 100% of the time”. This is once again based in the misconception that you are dealing with the “one and only incarnation of God”, with whom you and no one else can ever be equal–because you are mere human beings. And so, “saved or not”, you are saved from having to truly do as Jesus did. This gives you a license to “live like everyone else”–to live a kind of Pagan life that falls far short of the perfection that Jesus attained to and demanded that his true followers attain to. But not to worry, for you are “saved”, so it is “okay”–you’ve taken out your insurance policy on the afterlife, and in the meantime in this life you are spared the severity, suffering and self-overcoming of an ascetic life and can live a life of Capitalistic “comfort and contentment”.

        Almost home now . . . . .

      • Reply Part 4
        “I disagree with you that the people cited possessed higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted states of being. Some of them came up with very interesting theories about reality, some of them came up with very complicated ideas to explain reality. The majority of them, however, I believe were wrong. Given that they offer contradictory explanations of the nature of reality, the source of suffering, etc, they simply cannot all be right. If you refuse to believe that there is such a thing as absolute truth, then you are claiming a theory of reality. If you believe it, then you have no basis for disagreeing with me, due to your ability to accommodate my truths along with your own, despite the apparent contradictions. If you attempt to force me to follow your path to knowledge, you are denying that my path can be equally valid. If, on the other hand, you do accept that there is absolute truth, I ask you which of the various belief systems you proposed represents it? For me to debate the superiority of Christianity when you haven’t offered what you believe is superior could easily result in me tilting at windmills.”

        It’s silly of you to disagree with me on this of all points. One cannot produce the abundance and kind of work that Nietzsche and Goethe created without possessing a higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted state of being. One cannot incorporate the kind of wisdom that enabled Socrates to hold the kind of discourses he engaged in with his followers and enemies without possessing a higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted state of being. One cannot sing the epic poems that Homer sang, or compose the sublime music that Beethoven composed, without possessing a higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted state of being. One cannot have the impact on people around one that the Buddha and Jesus had without possessing a higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted state of being. Where do you imagine all of these things come from, if not from that state of being? Do they just kind of appear out of nowhere like a hiccup? The real reason why you disagree with me on this point once more comes down to the fact that you believe Jesus is the “one and only incarnation of God on Earth”—therefore, all these other “mere mortals” cannot be allowed to “possess a higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted state of being” because only he is allowed to exclusively possess it. You cannot allow them to be his equal, because if you do your entire belief system collapses like a house of cards—therefore, you deprive them of that state of being they obviously possessed so as to keep that house of cards standing. This is also once again the pinnacle of irony, because it is clear to me at least that it is precisely the opposite lesson that Jesus was trying to impart to his fellow human beings—he wanted human beings to equally possess that state of being or even to surpass him in the possession of it (“and greater things than I have done you shall do”). To turn Jesus into a kind of impenetrable wall that makes it impossible for human beings to enter into such a state of being is truly to turn everything upside down and literally negate the very meaning of Jesus’ life, struggle and message.
        But depriving these individuals of that state of being isn’t enough for you—you have to go still further yet, and say that you “believe” they are “wrong” as well. This, however, is not the point for me. I do not ask myself whether they are “right” or “wrong”—probably in all cases, including Jesus, it is a little of both. What concerns me is that these people—all of them—possess value, precisely because they all strove to attain and did attain that higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted state of being. This is what is significant, not whether they were “right” or “wrong” in the process. You bring up the question of “superiority”—how would such a thing be determined objectively? Who is to say that Jesus is “superior” to Beethoven, or Nietzsche “superior” to the Buddha, and what is the basis of being in such a position? Here again you would like to juggle away the reality and complexity of this problem with the easy, readymade answer of the dogmatic formula you swallowed in your conversion. “Jesus is God”—case dismissed. Jesus is “superior” to them all. What is the basis of this conclusion? A blind belief—essentially, a conceit. Not to mention a misunderstanding of Jesus himself. For again, you have not understood the inner content of the human being Jesus—that too has been dismissed in your dismissal, in your blind belief that he is just “God” incognito. This relieves you of having to undertake the understanding of that content. He’s just “God”—don’t worry about what he really was. And indeed, the only way to really go about attempting to determine which one of these human beings is “superior”, to try to establish some kind of hierarchy of values among them, would be to enter into their states of being, to as much as possible experience what they are experiencing and then compare those experiences. Even then, it would be difficult to arrive at any definitive conclusion—for it remains impossible to remove one’s subjectivity from the matter. You might find being the Buddha “superior” to being Jesus, and I might find the opposite. The question I ask here—instead of trying to make such a determination, or worse, to just blindly assert a superiority based on an equally blind and inexperienced “belief”, why not set about entering into your own unique higher, more spiritual, intellectually exalted state of being? But I know your answer to that too: You can’t, because you aren’t “God”. You are just a mere mortal, a comfort and contentment seeking capitalist climbing up the mound of flesh. And to top it off, Jesus has “saved” you from having to be anything else, anything higher than that. And—here’s the icing on the cake—you get to go “Heaven” too! It’s a “win win”! It may also be a Paradise Lost. Partcularly if one understands Jesus’ “Kingdom of Heaven”—as I do—as being a reference to a state of being, a condition of enlightenment in this world, and not a “place” in the beyond “after death”.

        I have to add an aside here: In an earlier post you discussed the difference between yourself and Richard Dawkins, and stated that you could not be accused of not understanding his position because you were “once an atheist”. It is necessary for me to point out that your experience of Atheism is not the experience of Atheism itself. This is a common error among Christians—they imagine their experience of Atheism is Atheism. Atheism is a wide open door—for some that door leads to horrible things, for others, to a cornucopia of blessings.

        Next up: The Question of “Absolute Truth” . . . .

      • Reply Part 5

        ” If you refuse to believe that there is such a thing as absolute truth, then you are claiming a theory of reality. If you believe it, then you have no basis for disagreeing with me, due to your ability to accommodate my truths along with your own, despite the apparent contradictions. If you attempt to force me to follow your path to knowledge, you are denying that my path can be equally valid. If, on the other hand, you do accept that there is absolute truth, I ask you which of the various belief systems you proposed represents it? For me to debate the superiority of Christianity when you haven’t offered what you believe is superior could easily result in me tilting at windmills.”

        The first question that comes to mind with regards to this question: Do you believe there is such as thing as absolute truth is: regarding what exactly? Did you have something specific in mind? However, I realize that what you are really referring to here is an “absolute truth” that is a kind of abstract thing unto itself that exists as a frozen object in space. So, to answer this question, no–I have no concept of what such a thing would look like exactly, where it would come from, what its nature would be, or how one would ascertain it or come into possession of it, or know for certain that it really was true. It does not follow, however, as you illogically attempt to assert, that because I do not think such an “absolute truth” exists, I therefore have to “accommodate” every other viewpoint in existence, including yours. If a lunatic comes up to me on the street and holds up an orange and tells me that is in fact an apple, or points at the sky and insists that it is pink not blue, it does not follow that because I do not think some kind of “absolute truth” exists that I must therefore “accommodate” his views. Likewise, if a lunatic approaches me on the street and assures me that he is in possession of “absolute truth” and that if I don’t agree with it and submit to it then I am “damed to Eternal Hell”, it does not follow that because I do not think some kind of “absolute truth” exists that I must therefore “accommodate” his viewpoint. Instead, I am free to use my reason, my experience, and my judgment to decide to the best of my ability whether I think this viewpoint has any truth and validity to it, or not. You seem to imagine that my denial of some kind of “absolute truth” makes me a prisoner to every viewpoint in existence–this denies my intellectual freedom to sift through ideas and freely determine what I think possesses truth and validity and what I think doesn’t. Understand this: I’m not bound by your illusions–you are. Nor does this reduce what I do think is true and valid to a mere “theory”. Is it a “theory” that the sky is blue, or that an orange is an orange? One can use reason, experience and sound judgment to establish certain things as reasonably true and valid without the blind faith in an “absolute truth”.

        Of course I understand that what this is all really about is your will to assert that your interpretation of the Bible and of Jesus is synonymous with “absolute truth”–if there was ever an example of subjective hubris, this is surely it. That old problem of subjectivity keeps rearing its beautiful head, doesn’t it? You imagine that “absolute truth” is being dictated to you “from God”–the only problem is that this dictation has to be interpreted, and not everyone is receiving the same message. Which message, then, is the “right” one, and which the “wrong” one? Who is in a position to determine this? This is the blind spot of “absolute truth”. One can’t just say: “The Bible says this”.–because one is saying what the Bible is saying. So much for “absolute truth”.

        Regarding trying to “force you to follow my path to knowledge”, why would I want to do that? It is Christianity along with Islam that are infamous for such coercion, for extorting people’s submission to their paths by claiming to be in possession of “absolute truth” and threatening them with “eternal damnation” if they don’t “believe” that “truth”. I do not deny your path–you can walk whatever path you so please. What I deny is that it is the “one and only true path”, with all other paths being “false” and “leading to Hell”. That isn’t “absolute truth”–it is absolute tyranny.

      • Final Reply:

        “The Renaissance represented a rebirth of the arts, sciences, mathematics, and prosperity. Fortunately, Christianity had preserved many of the documents that facilitated that rebirth, and both private merchants (capitalists) and the Catholic Church funded much of the Renaissance activities.”

        There is little more annoying and repugnant to me than this redundant attempt by Christians to hijack the Renaissance and falsely foist themselves into it as the “cause” of its harvest. Let us return to where we just left off:

        ‘Regarding trying to “force you to follow my path to knowledge”, why would I want to do that? It is Christianity along with Islam that are infamous for such coercion, for extorting people’s submission to their paths by claiming to be in possession of “absolute truth” and threatening them with “eternal damnation” if they don’t “believe” that “truth”. I do not deny your path–you can walk whatever path you so please. What I deny is that it is the “one and only true path”, with all other paths being “false” and “leading to Hell”. That isn’t “absolute truth”–it is absolute tyranny’.

        Surely you understand that the “arts, sciences and mathematics” represent an encroachment upon and ultimately subversion of the “absolute truth” of Christianity? And where did they come from? Pre-Christian Antiquity. And please don’t speciously sling this notion that “Christianity” and Christians “preserved many of the documents that facilitated that rebirth”. First of all, it would primarily be the Arab scholars that preserved the attacks upon the remnants of Antiquity the Christians were hellbent on destroying so as to brand their “absolute truth” upon the world and erase any record of any type of alternative viewpoint to it. And second of all, it is hardly a “virtue” to be a mere errand boy of these treasures. And you yourself know these treasures of Antiquity were indeed the undoing of Christianity and it’s “absolute truth”. This has been borne out. Every real advance towards actual, not theoretical, truth has been made not because of but in spite of Christianity and Christians. And that is precisely why science and the arts have progressively deconstructed and dismantled Christianity and its absolute lie to the point where Christianity and Christians now have to deny and decry everything that science and the arts have discovered and created. You foolish errand boys were delivering your own destruction. Maybe you should have looked more closely at what was inside the package.

        To conclude this reply: As you may have noticed, I have a great deal of respect for Jesus the human being. Without hesitation I list him among the most elite human beings I have encountered, though I am unable to establish with any objectivity or certainty his “superiority” over the other such human beings I have likewise encountered. However, when you start talking about how he was the “one and only incarnation of God on Earth”, you completely lose me . . . and him. As I understand it, this is not only a complete misunderstanding of him and who/what he really was–even more it is a criminal disrespect of it. The only way to atone for that crime is to really understand as best as one can who and what he really was . . . and then decide whether one wants to truly “follow in his footsteps”, or strike out on a path that is of one’s own creation.

        ~DS~

  5. “Hello Cathy. I think Dragonstrand in his comments below hits the nail on the head…but I will try with my limited intellectual capacity to answer some of your questions…and for the record…these aren’t the demands of Occupy Wall Street protesters…I figured you would have understood…but apparently not…although these should be demands from the human being. The reason I posted this was folks on Fox and other groups…like some bloggers…ask…what are they protesting about? I don’t understand why they are unhappy. Life is great…the world is great…everything is the way it should be…it is just how God imagined it would be for us…LOL…WAKE UP.”

    Tinman/Tincup
    Well I looked at your blog and was fascinated by the intellectual capacity of true thought…..
    SHEEPLES UNITE!
    Based on your comment, your blog and the actual definition of words I have some intellectual questions…..
    (This is what you state that those on Wall Street and elsewhere, including you are looking for)

    1. Abolish money, debt, Wall-street, banks, and investment “bangstas”
    Intellectually what will you use – is everyone going to offer you food, clothing and shelter because you exist? Is all of humanity changing overnight and becoming perfect saints?
    Or are you offering services (creation or production) in turn for those offerings?

    “I refer you to my post The “Human World” with Money, Debt, and Financial Institutions. But if you can’t find time to read my childish post…I will give you cliff notes. Do Orcas get free handouts…dolphins…wolves??? No…such a transition would have to occur slowly…kind of like us…two legged chimps evolving into man. Everything man has created was created by man…not money. Money does not build a city…money doesn’t build a ship, money does not create a computer or its software, money doesn’t harvest food…man does. Do you understand that?”

    2. Abolish incompetent government at all levels
    Does this mean all government will be abolished? Government/Bureaucracies are by there
    nature incompetent. In place of all government will there be anarchy? Or are we going
    back to the belief in sainthood for all?

    “Why are Government’s by their nature incompetent? That doesn’t make any sense…you must be talking about how government is today…rather than what could be. I don’t have a detailed plan of what would replace what currently is to be honest…perhaps the best and brightest from various fields would assemble (assuming approved or voted on by the people) to work on government issues…but they would have other pursuits…in other words…they wouldn’t be professional politicians”

    3. Abolish Lobby firms
    So freedom was also abolished?

    “Do you honestly think Lobby firms represent freedom? Do you work for one?”

    4. Abolish the commoditization of the human being
    Again freedom was abolished as human actions/desires are the reason for commodities?

    “A human being is currently viewed as an economic unit…as an input and output…just talk to an expert in the field of marketing or finance and you might understand my position…but I will be elaborating in an upcoming post…I am sure you can’t wait:)”

    5. Abolish mundane visions for the human being
    Still wondering what this means – probably because I have mundane visions and can not
    conceive of yours – maybe with your intellect you could clarify for us plebeians.

    “I like the old vision of the American Dream…Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…now it is own a house, a car, and lots of money and lots of things…and you can have it all today at x% interest…and the government will help you get it even if it can’t afford to…cause they can just print more money or sell more treasuries. What would be inspiring…that is for a higher culture to define…I am not the one to define the visions…but to name a few I find inspiring…space exploration, knowledge of the universe and all that is around us…figuring out how we can live wild lives without making the Earth look like crap…We invest some resources in NASA…but a lot more resources go to military spending or Fanie Mae and Freddie Mac…or Healthcare…Social Security…all things that could be accomplished with the human brain…hands…and energy.”

    6. Abolish barriers to creativity and innovation
    Exactly what barriers currently exist to creativity and innovation? Do you mean money?
    Well again I must ask who decides what things are to be created and innovated? Anything anyone conceives?

    “Example…alternative fuel…alternative energy…are you so naive as to think those Lobby Firms don’t prevent innovative and creative progress in these realms? Could we not give our best and brightest all the tools and resources they need to make it happen? But no…what would such innovation do to the “old” economy?

    7. Abolish poverty
    Let’s see – how will we go about that? How is poverty defined? Will everyone have shelter? What kind of shelter as we do not wish to cut trees? Does everyone deserve a particular kind of clothing and how will it be produced and provided? Everyone should have nutritional sustenance – so how will that be decided as to what that is and how will that be produced and provided? A little more clarification is needed here.

    “Look up Warren Buffet…he is forking out lots of dough to build “purpose built communities”. I know it is hard for you to imagine…but he has an idea”

    8. Abolish illiteracy
    How exactly would this be accomplished because I can assure that the majority of people on the planet would be in agreement with this one. Could it have something to do with people being in situations where they believe that other things are more important such as living, eating or maybe their religion discourages literacy. I believe that there are some religions (the largest growing currently) that prefer its people to be illiterate or they might questions its teaching. Are you going to abolish religion? So does that mean that you are going to tell people how to think? Interesting – again I would need more clarification.

    “an illiterate or un-enlightened populace is easy to manipulate…is this not happening before our eyes here in America without those religions you are attacking? All one needs to do is watch TV to figure that one out. And I put myself on spot for this…for I watch lots of TV…but often I do find myself laughing…especially at the “news” and commercials. My wish is to eliminate illiteracy…is that hard for you to understand why?”

    9. Abolish ignorance
    I actually kind of thought this would be taken care of with abolishing illiteracy. Maybe you again mean that all people should think a certain way. Where exactly are you taking this?

    “Being able to read doesn’t cure ignorance or arrogance. I would employ the Socratic Dialogue method in schools at an early age…that should help”

    10. Abolish poor education
    Again everyone is in agreement with this one – how are you accomplishing this? Probably when you accomplish 8 & 9 this will just fix itself!

    “Innovation and creativity in education would probably be top priority for a higher culture…don’t you think?”

    11. Abolish suburban sprawl
    There goes that freedom thing again. We are now going to be told where to live. Well I guess all that land can be used to produce that food you will need – or but then trees would need to be cut down for all the farmland needed. We also have to figure out how to get all that water there for the plants (as I assume you just made us all vegetarians or maybe we will try the Solient Green system).

    “I assume you haven’t been to Europe…beautiful architecture…well planned out cities…people walking places to shop…not hard to imagine…all vegetarians…hell no…I love a good steak with reduction sauce…smaller population enables us to enjoy a world of plenty without depleting all the resources”

    12. Abolish poorly planned cities and infrastructure
    Who is deciding what an appropriately planned city and infrastructure is? How are we going to do this – use the current bombs to destroy what currently exists or are the people going to tear it all down and rebuild it? And again I need to ask what materials are we using and how are they produced?

    “yes…tear it all down and re-build over several generations…imagine all the jobs it will create”

    13. Abolish pollution of air and water
    Great – are you stopping the winds (because it causes pollution also) and what about those animals are you teaching them how to conduct themselves around water? Seriously how are you doing that?

    “Do you see any waste created by animals or their existence that isn’t re-used by nature? We are the only species that can’t figure out how to reduce our waste…why don’t you carry all your garbage around in a bag for a year…do you think you could still plod from point A to point B?”

    14. Abolish destruction of wild life
    Again Great! Since again I am assuming that we are all vegetarians are you now going to let nature take its course and let animals kill each other? What about an animal that is going to attack a human being – can we defend ourselves with the swords, bows and arrows? Can we then not waste the poor animal and use its skin/fur and meat?

    “I don’t view cows as wild life…and with reduced population wild life we enjoy chewing on…which I enjoy chewing on…will have ample ability to maintain or expand their populations…thus we will always have yum yums for us and future generations”

    15. Abolish deforestation
    Except for the Rain Forrest (not sure how long that will take to return) I am not actually aware of deforestation going on – I live in America so maybe it is occurring in some other country. I know as an intellectual you are aware that good forest management requires removing dead/dying trees? And I know with your intellect you know that even the Native Indians would set the forests on fire occasionally for good management. Currently they replace trees almost 2 to 1 for everyone they remove in the US.

    “Suburban sprawl demolishes trees…forest management is concerned with trying to restore what was already destroyed…do you think tree replacement replaces old growth forests and related habitat…think again bright one”

    16. Abolish overpopulation
    I really love this one – are we murdering people, I am sure abortion is used but is someone deciding who gets to have children and how many? That has worked so well for China!

    “Wear a condom…take a pill…insert a sponge…I am not abolishing one of the great pleasures…educate kids early on that swarms eat up large resources…people can still have kids…just less of them…has nothing to do with murder…see my post “Santa Clause or Scrooge”…it deals with freedom of choice.”

    17. Abolish nuclear weapons, missiles, bombs, and guns (swords, bow and arrows ok)
    I believe this one demonstrates your true intent – we will all return to the dark ages. Who exactly will be in charge? I forgot though all mankind is becoming saints so there will be no problems or issues in our new one world government.

    “See video posted by Dragonstrand…maybe you will get the idea…then again…maybe not”

    18. Abolish use of oil, nuclear power, and coal
    And just like in #17 we are returning to the dark ages. Wind power only works where there is wind, solar only works where the sun occurs most often – what else is out there currently to replace all of these??? So you won’t be blogging anymore as electricity and light will be at a real premium. And who ever it is that makes these decisions will need to allot what little is available to – oh yes how are we deciding that again?

    “Well…build your cities where it works and come up with other ideas beside wind, solar, and water power…use the brain…hands…energy to make it happen.”

    19. Abolish excess waste
    Again I am stymied – what does this mean?? The decision makers are deciding what we can have and since that will be only the necessities I guess we won’t be throwing anything away. Or are we now going to figure other uses for all those items that were using oil, nuclear power and coal because we do not want to waste them. Or is this to imply that we need to recycle better? With such great intellect it is difficult for us plebeians to follow your thought patterns. Keep in mind that the computer you have has some plastic parts in it and can not be produced now that oil is abolished. By the way what are shoes made out of – can’t use animals, can’t use plastics – I am not real big on wood shoes – Oh wait we can’t use wood – maybe one of plants??

    “Create, innovate, energy…brain…hands…look at all we have created so far…100 types of potato chips…50 types of soda….do you think we might be able to figure out how reduce waste…”

    20. Implement demands 1-19 throughout the entire world
    How is this occurring???

    “hmmmmmmm”

    You were not clear are we going to war to make a one world government? So we are not going to swords, etc. just yet?

    “no…I imagine many different cultures…trial and error good…and when cultures disagree…there is always the sword”

    Did we destroy America and the Constitution?
    “We re-wrote it”

    Who decides what are the basic needs for all people?
    “we do”

    Who decides what is to be created and or produced?
    “we do”

    Who decides how your brains and hands are to be used?
    “we do”

    Are those of us who do not wish to live in your Utopia going to be murdered?
    “no…you can debate and try to obtain support of the people or you can pick up a sword and do as you please”

    There are hundreds of questions and information that needs to be thought out and provided for each of these statements. I am sure as intellectuals you will be able to provide those answers and plans – maybe you could share?

    “Since you are incapable of thinking how to solve them…then I guess we do indeed need to leave the problem solving to the dreamers and intellectuals…apparently you like the world the way it is and believe it is perfect and nothing can be changed because it is the way it is”

    Mostly you are promoting Communism – has always worked so well before….
    With your intellect tell me how a Utopia that requires that people be enslaved until they reach sainthood is anything but evil???

    “You view it as communism…I look at it as believing in the human spirit to reach for more…not to reach for communism…you don’t believe in the human being or that the human being can achieve more”

    In regards to your recent post on another blog – I am not sure if your understand the meaning of words you use:
    phil·is·tine
       noun
    1. a person who is lacking in or hostile or smugly indifferent to cultural values, intellectual pursuits, aesthetic refinement, etc., or is contentedly commonplace in ideas and tastes.

    “this sounds like someone who is content with the way things currently are”

    What cultural values were used in determining these 20 points?
    What intellectual activity was used in determining these 20 points?
    I can see the aesthetic refinement but how do you pragmatically apply it?
    How do you elevate to your Utopian ideals from the commonplace without out using acts of evil??

    “Why does evil need to come into play? Was Ancient Greece, Rome, the Renaissance evil?”

    • Hola Cathy. I will edit your comment and put my replies in quotes as I did for another poster…although you can probably find answers to many of your questions there. I must say I am suprised some bloggers don’t get the humor…but it is true there are many serious tones contained in that humor so I will reply as such.

    • Cathy: Sarcasm is sometimes an unconscious confession–and the sarcasm in your above reply (which has a strikingly similar tone to the rabid, smug, conceited sarcasm one encounters on Fox News) is certainly one example of this. You make excessively numerous contemptuous and sarcastic references to the “intellect” and intellectualism of the person to whom you are replying, while making equally excessive and numerous sarcastic references to your own lack of intellect and “plebeian” stupidity. As such, it will come as no surprise to you–for you already know this deep inside and have confessed to it through the veil of sarcasm–that the hallmark of a mediocre mind is the utter inability to envision anything other than what “is”, along with a fanatical fear of anyone who can. Terrified of the prospect of change, aren’t you? There is nothing all that radical or insane in the above list of proposals–nothing anymore or less radical than “points” we live with today on a daily basis. For instance, conventionally accepted point 16. Allow overpopulation to continue unchecked until the Earth is overrun with unsustainable numbers of people. That doesn’t bristle up your pubic hairs? How about conventionally accepted point 17. Develop and stockpile weapons capable of destroying the Earth and annihilating the human race. No problem for you, eh? But bows and arrows??? OMG!!!

      Your real problem with the above proposals, besides the fact that they tax your very circumscribed plebeian “mind”, is that they involve change–something other than the world around you as you know it. I wonder if you realize that if it were up to people of your ilk this very world as you know it would not exist or be possible. It was people like you who when some “intellectual dreamer” posited the idea of abolishing slavery replied: “Abolish slavery? But how? You can’t be serious? Who, then, will do all the work? How will anything get done? Above all, how will I continue to live the labor-less life I have always lived, loved and known?” People like you were the nay-sayers to the American Revolution. “What? Are you kidding me? A land where everyone is free? How is that possible? How can everyone be free? But all my life I’ve known that only a few people can really be free and everyone else must be enslaved. This is the way it is. How could it ever be different? And what about the evils and horrors they will inflict in order to free everyone? NO! We must stop them!” Now you live in that “impossible world” and derive the benefits from it. You are nothing more than a cog in someone else’s Utopia. However, since it is conventionally established, you take it for granted–once again, it is now “the way it is” and “can be no other way”. It doesn’t particularly matter what “system” it is–if you were brought up in a Socialist world you would resist just as vehemently the “utopian” ideas of laissez-faire capitalism and freedom of religion. Such is the nature of the limited, conventional, mediocre mind–also known as “conservative”. “Whatever the established form is, conserve it at any and every cost!”–no matter how insane that form is, and how high are those costs.

      Your primary concern ultimately seems to be the paranoid belief that something or many things are going to be “forced” upon you against your will. Stop for a moment–really stop–and take a look around you what is being forced upon you against your will every day and by whom. The only difference is that you are “used to it”–you are used to living with nuclear weapons; you are used to living with terrorism; you are used to living with overpopulation; you are used to living with pollution; you are used to living with perverse pop culture. If you lived in another world, a more sane and sensible world, and someone tried to describe the world you live in now, the world that is being forced upon you, you would likely think they were describing a nightmare. But if someone in this world suggests you try to wake up from that nightmare, you resist . . . . and sleep on.

      But then, what else would one expect from a sedated, unintellectual plebeian such as yourself? Just keep getting your daily Fox fixes, and “everything will be fine.” Take the blue pill, and believe whatever you want to believe.

      • I wonder what happened to “Cathy”? Not at all surprised by her disappearance. I doubt she even bothered to return to this site and read the responses to her miasmic regurgitation of Fox garbage. After all, only hearing the shrill sound of their own fanatical voices is the Modus Operandi of such babbling buffoons. She’s like a monkey dropping in and taking a shit on the steps of a temple, and then running off into her Social Darwinian jungle.

  6. There is a good chance that Ron Paul will not win the Republican ticket. And even before that I would advise him to quit the Republican Party and run as an independent after negotiating deep reforms program for his presidential campaign to create the New USA with all the different components of the Occupy Wall Street movement. People have to remember and appreciate his clean and strong opposition record. If he succeed then the new government of new USA will be formed from among the 99% and they will bring the real changes.

  7. “WingedPanther…I reply to your questions within your post. I can’t believe the owner of the blog can edit someone’s post like one is God…but it makes it efficient in this case:) Thanks for taking time to reply to each point. Impressive. My comments all in quotes.”

    –My new comments are prefixed with two dashes. I haven’t responded to all points, because I didn’t have a response or your response was that we’ll work out the details later.

    //for my replies to your ** items

    I’ve got a few questions about your proposals:

    1. Abolish money, debt, Wall-street, banks, and investment “bangstas”
    Do you think this will eliminate greed, conflicts over limited resources, etc? Is the real purpose to eliminate trade, opportunistic behavior, or something else? I fear this will be an assault on the symptom, not the cause of the problems you wish to address.

    “It is just a theory or a muse…but if you look at every other animate creature on our planet…including Apex predators, they don’t use money or financial institutions to live their wild lives…and they have managed to survive longer than ourselves in our current state. The apex species…Orcas, dolphins, Chimps, Gorillas, Wolves…etc…cooperate in groups to live their lives. But we are superior to these animals in intelligence and tools…we, of all species, have the ability to create our own human reality. We don’t need money or these institutions to create that reality…assuming we start each generation off on the right foot. It all begins with our little beings…the babies….they will evolve into what we have defined. And…resources aren’t limited IF…we have a rational population size to take care of.”

    –Let’s consider, for a moment, the difference between what we do, and the apex creatures do. They cooperate in groups, as do they, but they seek to acquire a very limited variety of items. There are numerous groups of hunter-gather or limited agrarian cultures that function quite well on a similar basis of limited concerns. If our only concern was food, shelter, and sex, I’m sure we could forgo money without any issues. It’s when you want a few more things than what is locally available that it gets more complicated. The larger the scale, the more complicated. I find it interesting that China, for example, is moving from communism to capitalism, and accruing great wealth in the process. Ultimately, however, I think your belief in the ability to shape humanity into a purely cooperative society represents an effort to try, yet again, to implement theories that have never been successfully implemented.

    **At one point America exported more goods than it imported. Are you saying we can’t produce or create what we want within our borders? Are we not creative, innovative, hard working people? If we want a telescope…or Fruitloops, or a computer…a toy…why can’t we make it? I think when I pose the idea of a better world or better country and I propose ideas like no money…your mind goes to communism and socialism and images of everyone living in rags on a farm…that isn’t what I am thinking about or imagining. Again…every single thing man has created he created himself…money did NOT create it.

    //The question isn’t whether we can create these goods, but can we do so more economically than other countries? Unfortunately, our minimum wage, along with numerous unions, makes the human cost of creating goods locally more expensive than creating them overseas and importing them. We can use tariffs to offset those differences and encourage domestic production, but that is likely to produce a tariff war making exports difficult or impossible. The result would be that we isolate ourselves from the global market. Whether that’s a good or bad thing is open to debate, but it would be a consequence.

    4. Abolish the commoditization of the human being
    The phrase “commoditization of the human being” makes me immediately think of human slavery. Since I’m pretty sure that isn’t what you’re referring to, can you be more precise about what you mean? This is especially important, given that you want to eliminate money.

    “Great masses of human beings today…perhaps 6.8 billion of us, are seen as an economic unit. What is each of the 6.8 billion people worth in terms of expected revenue for enterprise. We are also viewed as expenses or inputs of the enterprise (see “Muses on Capitalism (employees)”. My perfect symbol of the commoditization of the human being is the cubicle…LOL. I will be making a more detailed post on this…many will say…oh…he is communist…that is what Karl Marx said…they couldn’t be more wrong”

    –I fear your industry has negatively shaped your view of how employees are viewed. I work for a small company where EVERYONE is viewed as a person, and not a commodity. Some people have been fired over the years, either because they performed their jobs poorly, or their skills became less relevant, but I’ve never seen an instance where anyone was viewed as anything other than a person. I worked for another company where management seemed to have the view you’re talking about. They also had enormous turnover in their employees, with the most talented being among the first to leave. It is my belief that their attitude towards their employees will ultimately result in them failing to be competitive, and failing as a company.

    **I was happiest at a smaller company no question about it. So, the solution is for me to work at a small company and be happy while the world keeps plodding along…in other words…I shouldn’t worry or write about things I can’t control and therefore should just try to get what ever I can out of life and be happy.

    //That’s for you to decide. I’m actually looking at finding a job with a larger company, so that I’ll have more opportunities for advancement. By the same token, I realize that is likely to result in more mandatory overtime, higher pressure, etc. It’s a balancing act. Working for a smaller company obviously hasn’t stopped me from writing, debating, or otherwise seeking to spread my ideas. I have learned, through personal difficulties, that identifying what I can change, and doing that, is far less frustrating than trying to change things that I truly have no control over.

    5. Abolish mundane visions for the human being
    While I support this, I fear my vision may differ from yours. I’m a born-again Christian. I believe all people were created in the image of God, and that God loves us enough to send his Son (Jesus) to die for our souls so we can be with him. To me, the mundane visions for the human being are embodied by humanism, atheism, and secularism. I know, however, that there are many people who view Christianity as holding back people’s visions for human beings.

    “My idea of mundane visions is the current corrupted view of the American Dream…a house, a car, a picket fence, a big screen TV, and the ability to purchase any type of potato chip you can imagine.”

    –We agree, then. That is a truly mundane vision. With that said, I think it is a vision that coincides with the “instant gratification” mentality we’ve developed in the past few decades.

    **Economics has become our religion…in my warped mind…economics should simply be the starting point for the human progression.

    //I think of economics as an attempt to describe the reality of how people transfer wealth. It’s far more similar to physics or chemistry than to Christianity or Islam, in my opinion.

    6. Abolish barriers to creativity and innovation
    This sounds good, but what barriers are you talking about? What if we can’t agree on what things represent creativity?

    “Creativity and innovation should be embraced and explored by the culture…even nurtured…given the benefit of the doubt. It should, in my opinion, be taught almost like religion to little children in the schools. Currently, our schools are geared up as day care centers so both parents can work to pursue their corrupted American Dream and in turn prepare our children for the same corrupted American Dream. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…is that what we are currently enjoying?”

    I guess I view it as the parents’ responsibility, rather than the schools’, to promote creativity. I learned far more creativity from my father than I ever learned in school. My creativity expresses itself most prominently in mathematics, games, and computing, but my parents also encouraged artistic expression, including piano lessons and art classes. I suck at musical instruments, and am only barely competent at drawing. Despite that, I am quite skilled at board games 🙂

    **parents don’t have much time to work with their kids…both adults usually work…I would expect a higher education to emphasize creativity and innovation and the parents to have more time to spend with their kids and nurture them

    //It’s interesting to note that two of the men I’ve worked with have children, and their wives don’t work. Having both parents work is a choice, not a requirement. Being in an area with a lower cost of living may facilitate that, but I watch shows like Extreme Couponing, and almost all of them feature a parent that stays at home.

    16. Abolish overpopulation
    This is a VERY dangerous road to go down. China is currently implementing a one child per family policy, and has resulted in families aborting girls far more than boys. The result has been a massive gender imbalance. A different approach is to put “excess” people into the military and send them into random wars. Finally, what if I think this represents a mundane vision for human beings? What if I think this is a commoditization of human beings?

    “This is a tough issue I don’t deny that. I myself have a son so can’t speak by example…although when my ex-wife and I die…population will go down relative to my output:) Over-population is in my opinion our number one problem. The only way to resolve this is by educating our new generation early on the impact that swarms can cause to the environment that keeps us alive. No other species has to deal with this problem…but…if interested…look at my post about “Ant and Human Colonies”…I don’t want to follow their example to survive…do you?”

    –It’s worth noting that the current population of Earth, which doesn’t perfectly feed it’s population, but not do to lack of food production, is far higher than was thought possible a short time ago. Farming technology makes it possible to feed more people than was ever thought possible. Our ability to live underground or in skyscrapers also makes it possible to have a huge number of people living in a very small amount of land. Overall, the concept of “maximum sustainable population” is dependent on technology, so is not a fixed value. We could approach it the same way Apex Predators do, and breed until starvation imposes a population cap, but I think there’s a better way. Another concern is religion. Some religions, or sects/denominations within religions, mandate having as many children as possible. While you may view that as an example of ignorance, pushing the issue is likely to be problematical, and failing to push the issue means it will only be a few generations before their ideas outnumber ours.

    **Yes, we have made great advances to take care of huge numbers of people…but is it desirable and an intelligent goal? Do you like that people are stuffed into skyscrappers and many work in cubicles? Do you like traffic jams? Do you like what we do to the planet to sustain our enormous population? What religions are you talking about that encourage a mass orgy?

    //With our advancing technology, we have more capacity to telecommute, reducing the need for traffic jams. In suburban areas, our idea of a “traffic jam” is often a minor slow-down while people rubberneck at an accident. Similarly, I don’t see that we’re destroying the planet as we sustain our population. I’m not sure if that’s just a side effect of the different parts of the country we live in, or what. Regarding religions, Islam encourages large families, as do several denominations of Christianity. I know two guys who each have 9 children. While I wouldn’t want to have that many children, they were both able to do that, while being the sole provider for the family.

    17. Abolish nuclear weapons, missiles, bombs, and guns (swords, bow and arrows ok)
    What is the purpose of this? What would happen if we required everyone over [pick your favorite age, say 16] were required to own a gun? What makes swords, bows and arrows OK?

    “If man needs to go to war…let them spill only their own blood in a noble fashion without killing evey other living thing in the blast zone”

    –Back in the days of feudal knights, this worked well. WWI and WWII changed that. We have tried, with the Geneva Convention, to avoid civilian casualties, but that immediately makes hiding behind civilians a valid and useful tactic. It’s cowardly, but when you lack numbers, it’s also smart guerrilla tactics.

    **remember…I said abolish nuclear weapons, bombs, missles…see video attached by Dragonstrand

    //And, as I noted before, this doesn’t work well if some people refuse to disarm. A bigger issue is the difficulty of “losing” knowledge. Gunpowder is a pretty simple formula. People can make a mortar with fairly simple tools. We have enough issues with fertilizer bombs, already. The desire to make a weapon is really all it takes, along with a little resourcefulness.

    –Final note: I really think you have great intentions, and are a nice guy. What scares me is that your solution for many “how?” questions is population control. This has a huge potential to become a form of oppression. What happens when, not if, the ability to reproduce becomes the scarcest resource of all? The ability to impose reproductive punishments and rewards could be the worst commoditization of humanity of all.

    **Aren’t you terrified of our current condition? I am. See Dragonstrand’s reply to Cathy…I think he makes a great point and I will merely be mirroring much of what he has outlined. You can also read my post “Santa Clause or Scrooge”…where I address this issue on freedom of choice.

    //I’m not terrified of our current condition. I think we are going in the wrong direction on many issues, but I think your proposals would be going further in the wrong direction. There are things in our current condition that make me nervous, but they have far more to do with what’s going on in the Islamic world that what’s happening in US economics.

  8. Ron Paul is implementing a good strategy. If things keep going the way they are he is going to force the neo-con Republican party to reject the Constitution out in the open where all can see.

    Then his forces can start new drive to elect Dr. Paul as the people’s Independent candidate, putting the burden on the phony left and the phony right to not only attack one another but the Constitution and the people at the same time.

    No matter what lies they try to put forth through the mainstream propaganda machine they cannot change the fact that the protesters are united as individual free citizens fighting for the re-institution of the Republic under the Constitution and as such they cannot be defeated.

    In short, Dr. Paul is using the Republican platform and the exposure it offers to get the message out for as long as possible.

      • Indeed Ron Paul is the only meaningful and trustworthy candidate out there.

        And Obama is not only an error but a big mistake.

        I assume that the Occupy movements have wide and deep roots in the average citizens not only in the USA and European states, but also in the whole World. Most of them are free citizens fighting for the re-institution of the system of their own countries, and Ron Paul fits in this lovely mosaic.

        That is why I support him.

  9. All corporations and businesses in general must be held accountable and be observed by consumers, employees, the community, and the state departments. For this purpose a tagging system shall be put in place to measure and publicize on any product and any service on the performance of the production business for the total and each of at least the following issues:
    Executive pay
    Excessive advertisement
    Unfair advertisement
    Labor welfare
    Unions’ participation
    Capital distribution
    Political leverage
    Environmental responsibility
    Social contributions
    Fair play
    Equal opportunities
    Financial transparency
    http://tariganter.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/ethical-corporatism-tagging-system/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s