Generation Skip — (draft preserved for comment section)

This is a follow-up post from “Gridlock”.  Generation Skip is a radical concept that most likely won’t appeal to many folks in our current society.  I am not sure it even appeals to me.  But, desperate times call for desperate measures.  Generation Skip is an idea that acts as a stop-gap to our current insane treadmill – bringing more children on-line within a society that has a multitude of unsolved problems which become further exasperated by more and more human beings coming on-line.  For example, poverty is a horrible unsolved problem, yet often within these poverty pockets more children are brought on-line in greater numbers than more fortunate pockets of society.  One doesn’t even need to point to poverty.  The average family in one of the richest countries in the world makes just enough money to squeak out a living.  Is it desirable to bring children into this hand to mouth environment?  Generation Skip sidesteps the cogs and in essence begins the process of a new human reality within the context of reality – that reality being all that exists outside of the human domain, the inhuman reality from which we came and are ultimately subject to.

Generation Skip is steeped in short-term sacrifice for long-term gains and rewards. 


I am putting this post on hold as well as intended follow up posts related to Generation Skip.  I would trash the post but I want to preserve the comments and I believe they provide more food for thought and contemplation.  After reading through the comments and composing my own comments in response, I really wasn’t comfortable with post below the above line.  I find it easy to observe and critize the status quo, but developing a vision or more detailed utopian-like solution to pull us out of Grid Lock is beyond my comprehension at this point.  It may in fact remain beyond my comprehension and I may not return to the idea of Generation Skip.  I do like the above picture:)

21 thoughts on “Generation Skip — (draft preserved for comment section)

  1. Fascinating to consider — theoretically, of course. The first and most obvious flaw I see here is that it seems to propagate John Locke’s notion of ‘tabula rasa’: that we are born innately good, and society taints us. I am not sure I have ever agreed with this; I have seen too much evil, selfishness, and meaningless violence to believe we are born good and rendered corrupt. Whose to say those children wouldn’t end up even worse than we already are?

    • Great points Ms. Penn…keep the bullets coming. I am not comfortable with Utopian concepts and enjoy crticism and challenges. You bring up a great point that has often crossed my mind…nature versus nurture. I don’t have an answer. I certainly don’t want to get into genetic engineering in which we isolate the evil genes and remove…too much like Brave New World. I do believe however, that the society at large encourages and rewards certain behaviors and can possibly trigger or more possible excite and accentuate certain genes. Currently, the shrewd gene seems to do quite nicely in our society.

      Indeed, these children could grow into absolute monsters. But then again, if the project fails, we still have our wonderful world fully functioning. Also, for those that mis-behave frequently, there is always the option of casting them out of Generation Skip…afterall…it really isn’t much of a punishment…for they would simply be forced to live amongst you and I:)

      I doubt you are a big wikpedia user as you are so well read, but this little summary on the background of Tabula Rasa has some interesting high-level points and arguments. For the record, and this will be covered in later posts possibly metioned in Fiat Lux, I believe we aren’t all created equal. I believe some people are born with more potential…those that have the capacity to evolve into genius…or on the other spectrum…the dunce. Any ideal society or educational construct must be flexible to deal with these two extremes and lift both individuals up from where they begin to enable them to reach their full potential.

      • I definitely agree with you, Tincup, about a lack of inherent equality in individuals. And I think this difference is something that really frightens and disturbs most Americans, because they long/need to believe in equality. I am really not sure how any educated person can believe we are all born equal when some children clearly are born with high IQ’s and others with learning disabilities, or on a pettier level, we as a society judge people on obviously disparate physiques everyday. But because equality is such an integral part of American values, we close our eyes, forget all these things, and repeat again and again “all men are created equal”. If you’ve read Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America” he does a wonderful job of objectively discussing the innate conflict between America’s two favorite pillars — freedom and equality. And Tom Robbins said perhaps my favorite quotation pertaining to equality — “Equality is not in regarding different things similarly, equality is in regarding different things differently.”

        Sorry for the tangent. I suppose ever elusive “equality” in America has always fascinated me.

      • Oh, and yes I read a lot, but I still use Wikipedia all the time. It is so useful for background information and summaries, so thanks for the link!

      • Beverly, I was going to do a post on equality and the idea of all men are created equal…but I will probably cover it in these painful posts on Utopia. I appreciated your tangent and thanks for the suggested reading material.

      • I appreciate the discussion here of equality. I really take it as a given that the idea of equality is a delusional. In many ways, I see the whole question as irrelevant. I think the obsession with this question has the effect of retarding our development as a species. By this I mean that it should be understood as a given, and irrelevant.

        What I would like to see–and this certainly has some “Utopian” undercurrents–is a world in which a relative “equality” is achieved on a material or economic level, so that while the question of “equality” and “inequality” can be dismissed as irrelevant, actual inequality in the things that truly matter can thrive without being censored or subverted.

        I think we are slaves to the idea that inequality has to be represented materially or somehow we will lose consciousness of it’s reality–this is where the whole American paranoia of “Socialism” originates. If we could get over this misconception, and instead–of everyone’s free will–create a world in which material wealth was guaranteed to all (provided that all contribute to the very best of their ability to the whole), then we could set this whole question aside and begin focusing on profoundly and unashamedly developing the natural inequalities inherent in our natures.

        This scenario would also free up the higher types from being enslaved to the lower endeavors of base survival at the expense of their natural and more exalted callings. At bottom what I am saying here is that we could create a world that could set aside base necessity for all by providing a kind of platform or foundation of necessities for all so that the grand task of ascending to higher creative, spiritual, and intellectual levels might become the primary focus of the human existence.

  2. I’m very intrigued with this latest trend of subjects. In some ways I feel like you are making your “closing arguments” in preparation for moving on to your next poetry/photography blog.

    If that is so, I just want to weigh in by saying that I have experienced this current blog as a noble enterprise–and perhaps by that very fact, doomed to fail. This present post serves as a perfect case in point. If even someone as intelligent, enlightened and progressive as B. Penn is skeptical of this concept, much more its materialization, what does that say?

    This, juxtaposed to the images I just posted of the Black Hole Friday human stampedes, leaves one asking: How could such a thing ever even begin to take a single step from the realm of in abstracto to that of in concreto?

    Of course, I understand that this is the whole point. Everything turns on this pivotal point. In my youth I used to think that changing the world could be so easy–I used to think that the forces involved could just be overturned through sheer idealism and willpower. I completely underestimated the gravitational hold of ignorance and negligence.

    I don’t anymore. With every passing day, I more and more experience their burdensome weight, the seeming impossibility of ever overturning their despotic grip and seeing the human being becoming (en)lightened.

    I guess I just don’t have the answer here, except to become more and more enlightened oneself–and to try to disseminate that as much as possible and in every way possible to others in the hopes that they too will find their own way into some form of enlightenment. I realize of course that this too is perhaps as much of a pipe dream as your concept of Generation Skip; and we’ve seen plenty of examples in concreto of its failure–such as Jesus’ colossal failure to import humanity into his enlightened state aka the “Kingdom of Heaven”.

    Yet I just don’t know what else there is to turn to. I often think of Dante’s Inferno, how perfectly he envisioned not some kind of perverted Christian torture chamber in the “afterlife”, but the Hellish trap we find ourselves seemingly irrevocably mired in–in this present moment and world, as if it is immortalized and forever unchangeable. I hate that thought, and yet, all I have to do is look around me to see its truth. The Gates of Hell are raised, and in a screaming frenzy of burning desire for negligence, empty material and death, the hordes rush in.

    • I truly appreciate the skepticism and doubts put forth by you and Beverely. In fact, I would be disappointed if either one of you were to jump for joy at such a post. Your post was heartfelt, direct, and somewhat sad. I took a Rhetoric class in undergraduate that focused on Utopian literature. I always felt more comfortable with those authors that mocked or illustrated the utter folly of trying to fabricate an ideal society. Often the attempts at a positive Utopia didn’t sit well with my being.

      These utopian pieces are certainly not the conclusion to this blog or the pinnacle. I am not sure there will be a pinnacle once this blog or I have been exhausted. I don’t know where this little Utopian phase will lead. I may end up tearing it to shreds after I have finished the framework. I think my motivation for expending energy on the idea of a utopia is simply a means to struggle or come to grips with the feeling of being completely powerlessness to alter what I see before me as ultimately miss-guided and disappointing. I tire of blasting the status quo and sincerely want change for humanity. I feel like I have the flu and must vomit out the virus before I can move on to regain my strength and sense of individual purpose within the context of a rather purposeless human culture.

      I look at the picture on “Gridlock”, and the videos you posted in the comments, and I too see the comic juxtaposition between what is and what I am laying out in these Utopian posts. I believe and I am certain you do as well, that when looking at the past significant artists, poets, philosophers, that is is clear man has frequently been disappointed in the human direction. I also think man has often wished for a new beginning, a fresh start, the re-set button. Why else would such a fable as Noah’s Ark have come into being? More recently, Hollywood has been banging out all kinds of movies that depict the end of mankind. I think the sense of disappointment, the gridlock, has become so severe in modern times that we subconsciously hope for our destruction, or at least a mind jarring experience that forces us to change direction. The movie Moon Raker comes to mind here, where the villain is in fact, actually the visionary.

      I want to bring up an important point that spins off the Moon Raker idea. I could have taken a very extreme Utopian view that would absolutely horrify people, but I have chosen as best I can to outline a utopia that has a sense of choice, self willing participation, and some form of democracy. An extreme Utopia would incorporate aristocratic type ideals…concepts of horse breeding as it could relate to humans. It would employ the harsh but efficient laws of nature to mankind. It would be truly horrific. But isn’t this in fact what man has been attempting to do since he came out of the trees? Has man not tried to the best of his ability to escape the harsh laws and efficiency of nature? Could this indeed be the reason we find ourselves spinning our wheels in debt, inefficiencies, grid lock? Could it be that our efforts to insulate ourselves from natural laws through fabricated human society are in fact being rejected and proved to be unsustainable in the cold harsh reality that surrounds our beautiful little blue planet?

      I do take comfort in one thought and I have expressed this vaguely in other posts…I am certain nature will indeed deliver some powerful blows to our existence and in the short-term we may learn a thing or two and possibly experience an awakening should we survive. But more than likely, given historical results, we will forget, and find ourselves once again in a state of gridlock.

      I welcome further blows on this Utopian phase. See, I rather like the comment section here. Often the most value is created within the discussions.

      Ahhh…just adding this edit to this comment…aborting mission either temporarily or permanently. Need digest my above comments and those from you and Ms. Penn. Quite an impasse…tired of criticizing with no way out.

    • Penn: Trying to re-direct a Tsunami is not really a promising objective…perhaps all one can do is warn others of its arrival and to search for high ground. I have a Utopian category section where I touch on some key topics…and my first post on this blog about the Human World Without Money, Debt, and Financial Institutions is very utopian in nature toward the end of the post. I have never really gotten around to education for the young…that might perhaps be an excellent topic for you and your boyfriend to confront:) The problem with seriously trying to construct a Utopia is that you in essence have to become a tyrant…and claim you know what direction to set. I am not sure the most intelligent man or woman in the world could chart the right course for humankind and ensure we stayed the course. But we might be able to offer slices of insight and some guidance.

  3. I also suggest that you bring back the original post in its entirety. Don’t second guess yourself my friend–you are venturing into some rather uncharted territories, so you are bound to lose your way at times; but you also discover things along the way.. The original post proved very fertile for me, even though my response to it was one of pessimism and skepticism. This must be seen as a process–and sometimes the actual value is found in the process itself, not always in the projected goal at the outset. I hope you reconsider your decisions. Then again, you have to do what is best and most fruitful for your own development.



    • I really didn’t like the original post. This is a serious topic and I didn’t put much thought into how I was going to frame the argument. I need to think about it for a bit and experiment to see where it goes before posting anything. I loved both of your comments and the piece led me to write down some important thoughts on my above comment. This needs to be taken into account.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s