[ Add Tags ]
[ Return to General Discussion | Reply to Topic ] |
steve.sojo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 14:09 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | Hello CS folks, I have been following this forum for a little bit now and enjoy the debunking it's fun to read. I myself am not a part of TZM/TVP for my own reasons which some what resonate in here as well. What I am curious to know is the majority of people here against the so called RBE system or is it just TZM/TVP for understandable reasons. While I don't consider myself a CT kind of person I do believe things aren't quite as they seem and their are things going on which we just don't know about and can't possibly know one way or the other. What I'm getting at is that I do believe an alternative system is coming, it is part of societal evoloution and it will be along the lines of "RBE" and by that I mean more specifically where the resources will have to be put to better use on a one world system and consumerism will be phased out and the inequality that it breeds. But I do agree that many of the things that TVP advocates will take generations before it happens if it happens. What are some thoughts on this? | |||||
#1 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
advancedatheist | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 14:51 |
| ||||
Level: 3 CS Original | Fresco's Resource-Based Economy involves a lot of hand waving, and it ignores the role of spontaneous, unanticipated outcomes in the economy. Nobody planned the whole Twilight fad, for example; that nuisance emerged organically through the choices made by millions of immature female brains. | |||||
#2 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
steve.sojo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 14:58 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | Yes but I do not mean Fresco's RBE for it is not actually his, and his version is specifically his speculation. I was more so talking about a general guide line of the RBE format. | |||||
#3 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Sky | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 15:21 |
| ||||
Level: 3 CS Original | The main reason I don't think the RBE would work is because they claim to want to use the Scientific Method to solve all problems instead of politics, but science cannot make value jugements or opinions. Science is a tool that can be used to help make decisions, not an authority. For example if you wanted to decide in the future society weather people should be allowed to use a certain drug, how would anyone be able to prove scientificlly that it is "right" or "wrong" to let people take the drug? Right and wrong are value judgements, not something that is determined by science. Science could provide all sorts of information about the drug, such as how unhealthy it might be or it's effects on crime, and information like this can be used to help make a political decision. What science cannot do is authoritativly make all decisions in the society. | |||||
#4 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
steve.sojo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 15:30 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | Maybe this is just my opinion but the simple answer for myself is nobody actually knows the exact specifics of an "RBE". I agree with your statement about science and my issue with Fresco's main stream RBE is that it attempts to answer things that cannot be proven and cannot even be decided upon until the transition shapes up a little more. At this stage the main ideal/concept cannot and will not be shaped until the time comes. So for nitpicking at the concept which can have a long list of questions and skeptism which is understandable cannot be concluded nor verified until a later date. Its all just one big (actual research project) which will need to be tested over time. | |||||
#5 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Muertos | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 17:38 |
| ||||
Paid Disinformation Blogger Level: 14 CS Original | I really don't care about a resource based economy because it will never happen. It's sort of in the same league as "pure Marxism." It's just not workable in the real world, so it's pointless to argue about it. Are there some good ideas contained within it? Sure. Are those ideas worth trying to implement? Yes, at least to some extent. But should we be working toward them with the notion that a RBE is the ultimate goal, and will eventually happen? No, because it's an illusion. The distribution of resources has been unequal throughout human society for its entire existence. As soon as the first caveman picked up a rock that his neighbor didn't have, we had a "non-resource based" economy, if you will. I don't see one old guy tinkering in his garage, or a bunch of other people who may agree with him on some conceptual level whether they accept his precise formulations or not, changing that. I hate the Zeitgeist movement because it promotes conspiracy theories, not because it (supposedly) endorses a resource based economy. | |||||
#6 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
steve.sojo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 18:04 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | This post was not about TZM/TVP and their was no argument. Yes an "RBE" type structure is possible. You can probably never reach a true RBE (Fresco's vision) it's the process that counts and if we did reach one some new system will appear to work towards it's the process of time and knowledge. | |||||
#7 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Muertos | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 18:10 |
| ||||
Paid Disinformation Blogger Level: 14 CS Original |
Maybe on a small scale, within a small commune of like-minded individuals...but not in society at large. Utopian systems like Marxism and an RBE depend on the collectivity of altruism to maintain themselves, especially when you start talking about decisions being made about who gets what resources. Show me any large society in history that has demonstrated collective altruism. | |||||
#8 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
steve.sojo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 18:48 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | This is the future though. Things are different now. Its not a Utopia it's an upgrade on a decaying infastructure. | |||||
#9 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Muertos | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 18:55 |
| ||||
Paid Disinformation Blogger Level: 14 CS Original | To me, a utopia is a system where everything is perfect and people are always awesome and nice to each other and everybody has everything they need. You know, kind of like that Bette Midler song "From a Distance." I live in the real world. In the real world people are greedy, selfish, stupid or sometimes unethical and evil. In the real world people are also kind, noble, altruistic and compassionate. Utopian ideals like a resource based economy can't happen unless one-half of human nature is completely abolished. That will never happen. Those two halves of human nature can't exist without one another. Take away one half, and we cease to be human. Personally I find the Venus Project revolting and dehumanizing. But I don't worry about it because it's total fantasy anyway, and the possibility of it happening doesn't even make it worth fearing a world that resembles the one they want to create for us. | |||||
#10 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
steve.sojo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 19:12 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | Because something is better doesn't make it Utopia. The Venus vision is what it is. "RBE" is the next step to a more advanced system. | |||||
#11 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Muertos | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 19:37 |
| ||||
Paid Disinformation Blogger Level: 14 CS Original | I seriously doubt that the next step toward a more advanced system will be a move that's planned by one person or a group of people. History doesn't work that way. Our modern economy did not develop as the result of a plan. It was done ad hoc by millions of different people not acting in concert. I'm a historian, and I'm not aware of a single example in history of a large-scale societal change which has proceeded along the lines of a single plan developed by a single person or small group of people. It's just never happened. And saying "it's the future, not the past" is meaningless, and jettisons everything we can learn from the past (and present) about how to achieve social change on a large scale. You can't start with a totally new model. It just won't work. You have to build on something that exists. | |||||
#12 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
steve.sojo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 19:50 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | It will be brought about by Groups of people not just one, I don't disagree with anything you said otherwise. It's about "RBE" not TZM/TVP. Call "RBE" yellow donkey transition for all I care it's about moving forward. | |||||
#13 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
jimbo | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 21:53 |
| ||||
Level: 0 CS Original | @ Muertos: I'd like to know your views on human nature. In the Jacque Fresco lectures on youtube (not just in Zeitgeist addendum), he gives a very convincing argument against the traditional ideas of what we call 'human nature'. | |||||
#14 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
anticultist | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 22:38 |
| ||||
Brainwashing you for money Level: 15 CS Original | I made this post many months ago but i'll paste it here to assess, its aimed at TVP/TZM but is perhaps worth considering in all RBE situations. The Venus Project claims that we need to conduct a survey of all the worlds resources, now while the technology to scan into the depths of the earth exists, this will prove to be a hugely difficult, immense and highly coordinated task. The idea that we can know what resources we have available at any one time and where they are located would be useful, but there is a side to this which I feel the project has not considered. Consider the following points: First: they do not have the availability of researchers and field tools to carry out the survey themselves, therefore the venus project is reliant on any data made available to the public, this means they are reliant on the potentially out of date or flawed data. The only realistic survey this group can conduct is searching through public domain resource maps and data. Second: the surveys that are currently being conducted are by multi national conglomerates with special interests in the field of resource capitalisation, this data uncovered is unlikely to be made available to the general public without a fee or a delay. The possibility that these companies will freely hand over this lucrative and much sought after information to the venus project is minimal to none. Third: should the venus project manage to glean any information on resources then this information will be stored in their data banks, made public and then will simply be available for other multi national companies to capitalise on it should they wish, and can the venus project stop them ? Fourth: should they pull the survey off, what resources are they looking for, and do they have contingencies for what they may need as resources in the future? could it be they have no idea what the future holds therefore the database will only be a limited one of certain resources, not everything necessary. Fifth: what if the resources are held by national companies or countries who wish to maintain ownership regardless, or wish to keep their resources hidden and protected, these may be essential resources, this basically pulls the entire resource based economy down in one action, this is also a potential for economic hi-jacking or resource based terrorism. Sixth: if you are attempting to spread equal wealth and allow everyone to reach the same equity level, is there a possibility that using all the earths resources may put strain on and thus have an adverse effect upon the earths ecological system? | |||||
#15 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Diane | Posted: Apr 17, 2010 - 23:31 |
| ||||
Level: 1 CS Original | Muertos wrote:
That being the case, you're in an excellent position to write authoritative popular books debunking what I call grand conspiracy ideology: The idea that major world events have been orchestrated by some centuries-old or even millenia-old cabal like "the Illuminati" or "the Elders of Zion." Have you considered writing such books? | |||||
#16 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Sil the Shill | Posted: Apr 18, 2010 - 02:49 |
| ||||
Level: 9 CS Original | You are really proud of coining that term aren't you Diane? :P | |||||
#17 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Diane | Posted: Apr 18, 2010 - 06:57 |
| ||||
Level: 1 CS Original | If you're aware of someone else who has used the term "grand conspiracy ideology" before me, please let me know. But my main concern, regarding that term, is not personal pride, but precision. For reasons I'll explain in a future post, I don't like the term "conspiracy theory." | |||||
#18 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |