What is The Free World Charter?

silkfield · 05-03-2011 11:54am #1

Have a look at this exciting new initiative based on the work on Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project:

http://www.freeworldcharter.org

"The Free World Charter is an initiative to resolve global suffering with the removal of all money, debt and trade, which are now outdated and unnecessary through modern technology."

~ This essentially means we can make everything FREE, and in a way that protects our planet too. Check out the vid.

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 12:08pm

I am not a cynic. Trust me, I'm as idealistic as the next poster.

...But ah come on now...?

WeeBushy · 05-03-2011 12:13pm

There is a reason it only has three signatures.

What tripe.

johngalway · 05-03-2011 12:19pm

Words fail me to express the deep stupidity of that idea.

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 12:24pm

And, with hope in my heart I checked the venus project website, which is a set of nice slogans and pictures of funny buildings like out of a 70s sci-fi-futurist-otherplanet sort of film. Being too dosed up to reach the crackpipe doesn't seem so bad any more...

silkfield · 05-03-2011 12:27pm

Just be a little slower to dismiss... You might miss something important here - and I invented cynicism BTW!

WeeBushy · 05-03-2011 12:31pm

silkfield wrote: »

Just be a little slower to dismiss... You might miss something important here - and I invented cynicism BTW!

I sincerely doubt that.

silkfield · 05-03-2011 12:32pm

WeeBushy wrote: »

I sincerely doubt that.

Why?

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 12:39pm

Love nor Money wrote: »

I am not a cynic. Trust me, I'm as idealistic as the next poster.

WeeBushy wrote: »

There is a reason it only has three signatures.

What tripe.

In fact, I was even more idealistic than the next poster....

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 12:41pm

silkfield wrote: »

Why?

I suppose the short answer is that, it is of the essence of the human condition that enough is never enough for everybody.

WeeBushy · 05-03-2011 1:00pm

silkfield wrote: »

Why?

Where to start?

1. He says that machines will run the planet. Who will make and service this machines? Who will do the jobs that machines can't? I sure as hell won't - I'll be sitting in my garden consuming as much of everything as I possibly can because its free. As will the vast majority of people.

2. Machines have freed us from hard labour. Wrong.

3. He says that our resources are plentiful for all mankind. Wrong.

4. No money will just lead to massive waste of our resources.

5. Why would anyone bother their arse doing anything when there is not incentive to do so.

Its just utter rubbish.

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 1:16pm

The big question is...

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 1:17pm

...How do we turn this thread into a right good SF bashing session?

SupaNova · 05-03-2011 2:57pm

The Zeitgeist Movement is a twist on Socialism with a focus on the environment, technology(machines doing everything) and sustainability. They talk very little on how to get to this utopia. Maybe because it would actually take huge loss of life and human sacrifice to get there. And all on the premise that a computer(programmed by a human) can solve the problem of efficient resource allocation in a society without money. History shows that Socialism lead to mass starvation.

Permabear · 05-03-2011 3:31pm

This post has been deleted.

silkfield · 05-03-2011 6:46pm

WeeBushy wrote: »

What tripe.

'Tripe'; compared to what?

johngalway wrote: »

Words fail me to express the deep stupidity of that idea.

'Stupid'; compared to what?

Love nor Money wrote: »

And, with hope in my heart I checked the venus project website, which is a set of nice slogans and pictures of funny buildings like out of a 70s sci-fi-futurist-otherplanet sort of film. Being too dosed up to reach the crackpipe doesn't seem so bad any more...

The Venus Project website is awful, but their underlying ideas are sound. They just don't portray them very well, IMHO.

WeeBushy wrote: »

1. He says that machines will run the planet. Who will make and service this machines? Who will do the jobs that machines can't? I sure as hell won't - I'll be sitting in my garden consuming as much of everything as I possibly can because its free. As will the vast majority of people.

Why would you constantly consume something that is plentiful anyway? Your definition of 'free' is not having to spend money for something. That definition is meaningless when there is no money at all.

WeeBushy wrote: »

2. Machines have freed us from hard labour. Wrong.

Wrong. How can you possibly deny this??

WeeBushy wrote: »

3. He says that our resources are plentiful for all mankind. Wrong.

Wrong. If people change their world-view from individualism and consider themselves part of a wider community, we can do anything. And this is not airy-fairy sh*t (which I've no time for); this is survival of the species. Eventually no-one will have a choice about having a money-free society, but by then we will have inflicted mass genocide on each other. Doing this before that happens makes sense.

WeeBushy wrote: »

4. No money will just lead to massive waste of our resources.

See above..

WeeBushy wrote: »

5. Why would anyone bother their arse doing anything when there is not incentive to do so.

So, why do YOU do anything you don't get paid for?

WeeBushy wrote: »

Its just utter rubbish.

'Rubbish'; compared to what?

SupaNova wrote: »

The Zeitgeist Movement is a twist on Socialism with a focus on the environment, technology(machines doing everything) and sustainability. They talk very little on how to get to this utopia. Maybe because it would actually take huge loss of life and human sacrifice to get there. And all on the premise that a computer(programmed by a human) can solve the problem of efficient resource allocation in a society without money. History shows that Socialism lead to mass starvation.

Please see my point above, we can do this the hard way or the easy way, and luckily now we do have a choice. The hard way, as you say, means blowing each other to pieces first. Nice.

Thank you all for your replies and keeping it real!

Einhard · 05-03-2011 6:58pm

silkfield wrote: »

'Tripe'; compared to what?

'Stupid'; compared to what?

It's not relatively stupid, or comparably tripe, so it doesn't have to be compared to anything! It's stupid in its own right! Which is some sort of achievement I s'pose...

Why would you constantly consume something that is plentiful anyway? Your definition of 'free' is not having to spend money for something. That definition is meaningless when there is no money at all.

Because, as history has so often shown, people will always want more than they have, and more pertinently, more than their neighbours. Now, if the campaign was proposing to fundamentally alter the human condition, it might have a chance of success, otherwise it's just a wild fantasy.

Wrong. How can you possibly deny this??

Because my kettle wasn't the one painting my house yesterday!:D

Wrong. If people change their world-view from individualism and consider themselves part of a wider community, we can do anything. And this is not airy-fairy sh*t (which I've no time for); this is survival of the species. Eventually no-one will have a choice about having a money-free society, but by then we will have inflicted mass genocide on each other. Doing this before that happens makes sense.

LOL, I love the logic. If we don't do as I'm proposing then mass genocide [isn't genocide always "mass"?] will be inevitible. You're not for mass genocide surely?? Nice try, but mass genocide is far from the inevitible consequence of not pursuing the policies advocated by this group.

'Rubbish'; compared to what?

See above..

Please see my point above, we can do this the hard way or the easy way, and luckily now we do have a choice. The hard way, as you say, means blowing each other to pieces first. Nice.

No it doesn't.

Your proposal would necessitate altering the results of millenia of human evolution, and fundamental restructuring of human thought and mental processes. I afil to see how that can conceivably be called the "easy way".

Thank you all for your replies and keeping it real!

I'd suggest that's the one thing that advocates of this campaign are failing to do!;)

silkfield · 05-03-2011 7:31pm

Human Condition? What on Earth does THAT mean?

Human Condition-ing however, is very real and accounts for the way we react to almost everything that happens to us. For instance, we ask our children what they want to be when they grow up. Fair enough, but you have now just 'told' that child that they must be SOMETHING when they grow up! They must advance themselves and succeed on their own. This implies that they are in competition with every other kid. and so the kid grows up to be a successful tycoon; then some clown comes along and says "now we're going to do away with ALL money..." How do you think that person will react?

This is learned individualism through conditioning, and it has happened to all of us. This is just one example....

These concepts are NOT easy to take on board. It takes time. It will gnaw away at you however............

nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom.....

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 7:35pm

Look, it's all very nice to dream of this utopian ideal. However the id will never be defeated. That's why none of this can work.

silkfield · 05-03-2011 7:47pm

Love nor Money wrote: »

Look, it's all very nice to dream of this utopian ideal. However the id will never be defeated. That's why none of this can work.

Even if you think it won't work, will you sign it?

Einhard · 05-03-2011 7:52pm

silkfield wrote: »

This is learned individualism through conditioning, and it has happened to all of us. This is just one example....

These concepts are NOT easy to take on board. It takes time. It will gnaw away at you however............

nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom.....

Like an insignificant little tick which, once noticed, is easily dispatched with a flick of a finger!:D

johngalway · 05-03-2011 8:53pm

silkfield wrote: »

'Stupid'; compared to what?

Compared to something which makes sense. Anything that makes sense. Take your pick.

Wildlife Actor · 05-03-2011 10:58pm

silkfield wrote: »

Even if you think it won't work, will you sign it?

No. Not because it won't work. Rather, because it cannot work. And also because - since it requires the suppression of natural human instincts - even striving towards making it work would give rise to horrendous results: it would require massive government-backed coercion based on broad principles. Broad principles give rise to hard cases (the devil is always in the detail) so these principles have to interpreted by someone: presumably an elite. So we end up with the rule of man rather than the rule of law. Now we have that to a certain extent at present: but in comparison with a utopia-creating government, the need for coercion is not massive.

silkfield · 05-03-2011 11:36pm

Love nor Money wrote: »

No. Not because it won't work. Rather, because it cannot work. And also because - since it requires the suppression of natural human instincts - even striving towards making it work would give rise to horrendous results: it would require massive government-backed coercion based on broad principles. Broad principles give rise to hard cases (the devil is always in the detail) so these principles have to interpreted by someone: presumably an elite. So we end up with the rule of man rather than the rule of law. Now we have that to a certain extent at present: but in comparison with a utopia-creating government, the need for coercion is not massive.

Human instinct is to survive and procreate. Today, we confuse survival with earning money and competing against each other. Humans are a social species by nature, that's why most people live in cities. The fact that we are competing against each other is in fact AGAINST our nature.

Anyway, don't rule it out. If this initiative was adopted, everyone would gain. It's difficult to see this in the current world, I admit.

20Cent · 06-03-2011 12:33am

Might be possible when we reach the Singularity.
Good article about it in Time Mag

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2048138,00.html

silkfield · 06-03-2011 2:02am

Thanks to all respondents. Of course something as big and radical as this should stand up to scrutiny and be debated. We wouldn't be human if we didn't question things. I myself was not entirely sold on these ideas when I heard them first. But those ideas fermented over time, and I resolved to become a part of it and give my own interpretation of the concepts, which is what the website is.

Do any of you honestly think that Fine Gael and Labour are going to sort your problems? I know they want to, but look where they're coming from and what they're up against!

Do you honestly believe that the Irish economy is going to come back around this time? That we are all going to have jobs?

Look at what is happening in North Africa. These are not backward countries just going ballistic for sport; these are real, smart intelligent people who have just had enough of the system they live in. They have mass unemployment. They have no money. In Ireland, we quietly affirm to ourselves that "it's terrible, but it'll never happen here..."

It WILL happen here. And sooner than you might think.

It's 'game over' for the monetary system. Capitalism has failed, socialism and communism have failed. There are no more jobs. (Not nearly enough for everyone anyway) We need to make provisions for an alternative society before things start get really sour.

If no-one is working, there is NO economy. Fact.

I want people to sign The Free World Charter, because I, and many thousands of others in similar movements believe it will work. It costs you nothing to sign, and commits you to nothing. What's the worst that could happen?

SupaNova · 06-03-2011 12:21pm

For the love of god you have fallen in love with a complete fairytale. One of the first things they do when presenting the story is say what would we do if started all over again how would we go about planning a society and and economy. Totally bypassing the fact we have to get to this dreamland from the mess we have at the moment.

One of the first things they say we would do is take a complete stock take of all the earths resources. It could take hundreds of years of exploration and mining just to do this stock take.

Now i agree they are problems with the current monetary system. Creating money out of thin air as debt and giving it to governments does nothing to promote fiscal responsibility.

silkfield · 06-03-2011 12:36pm

SupaNova wrote: »

For the love of god you have fallen in love with a complete fairytale. One of the first things they do when presenting the story is say what would we do if started all over again how would we go about planning a society and and economy. Totally bypassing the fact we have to get to this dreamland from the mess we have at the moment.

One of the first things they say we would do is take a complete stock take of all the earths resources. It could take hundreds of years of exploration and mining just to do this stock take.

Now i agree they are problems with the current monetary system. Creating money out of thin air as debt and giving it to governments does nothing to promote fiscal responsibility.

The transition to such a society would be either peacefully through mass support of the program and incredible amounts of complex organisation (as you say); or it'll ultimately be on the wrong end of WW3!

You choose; support now, take a chance on it (that costs you nothing) and opt for a peaceful transition, or sleepwalk your kids into an inevitable future of death and destruction.

If people sign the Charter and I'm right, everyone wins.
If people sign the Charter and I'm wrong, everyone wins.

SupaNova · 06-03-2011 12:51pm

or sleepwalk your kids into an inevitable future of death and destruction.

Why do you think this is whats going to happen?

silkfield · 06-03-2011 1:16pm

SupaNova wrote: »

Why do you think this is whats going to happen?

Did you read through the site? It's very simple, if the rich get richer, the poor must get poorer, right? This is mathematics. Can you imagine the rich getting poorer and the poor getting richer? No. That won't happen because the rich are the ones making the rules of the game, right? So:

We continue to support the monetary system >
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer >
Inequality widens creating increasing tension > (Libya, Eqypt)
Poor people eventually either starve or revolt >
Revolutions cause widespread chaos, looting, violence and civil war >
Death and destruction.

Also, on another thread:
We continue to support the monetary system >
The rich get richer, poor get poorer >
Poorer people can't afford to buy quality goods >
Promotes manufacture and production of inferior goods >
Creates pollution and wastes natural resources >
Poisons our environment & plunders limited resources >
Poisoned environment causes mutation and disease, dwindling resources call for stricter rules and rationing of those resources >
Disease, starvation and possible revolution result >
Death and destruction.

These are all 'quasi-mathematically' provable certainties, the only unknown is time.

Einhard · 06-03-2011 1:25pm

silkfield wrote: »

Did you read through the site? It's very simple, if the rich get richer, the poor must get poorer, right?

Eh, not right.

Seriously, I admire your enthusiasm for the project, but you're basing much of your thought on pretty facile, easily refuted assumptions such as the one above.

silkfield · 06-03-2011 1:54pm

Einhard wrote: »

Eh, not right.

Seriously, I admire your enthusiasm for the project, but you're basing much of your thought on pretty facile, easily refuted assumptions such as the one above.

You didn't refute it though? Even though you said it was easy?

silkfield · 06-03-2011 2:33pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvDKTRgoSS8

sink · 06-03-2011 2:47pm

Monetary systems are more engrained in the human psyche than you imagine. When resources are finite there will always be value placed upon them.

Energy is one of our most basic resources, there is a limit to how much of it we can exploit, yet our potential uses for it are limitless. If energy is completely free what's to stop one person using more than their fair share or even monopolising it? You would have to come up with a system to equally distribute the energy. Now some processes are more energy intensive than others so you would have to plan where the energy goes so it's put to best use. What you inevitably end up with is a centrally planned economy alla communism. As history has taught us centrally planned economies inevitably lead to massive inefficiencies. To counteract these inefficiencies you will inevitably see the development of a black market where energy is traded and your back to using a form of monetary system.

You can not remove currency from an economy, the two are inseparable.

SupaNova · 06-03-2011 3:01pm

You can not remove currency from an economy, the two are inseparable.

+1

silkfield · 06-03-2011 3:40pm

sink wrote: »

Monetary systems are more engrained ....

There is no limit to the amount of energy we can produce once you remove the highly invested trade patterns of fossil fuels. Wind, solar, tidal, wave, geo-thermal. There is effectively an infinite supply of energy all around us. To harness all these energies just does not make financial sense right now. That is why we need to remove that limitation. The monetary system is the only limitation to infinite energy.

Sure, economy and money go hand-in-hand. I never said otherwise. Removing money means removing the current economy as we know it. Sorry if this wasn't clear.

Be brave.

SupaNova · 06-03-2011 3:57pm

Money is just a medium of exchange. It used to be actual gold and silver. Now we use fiat money which gives governments the opportunity for deficit spending. For that deficit spending to show a profit it has to be invested in areas that increase production by the sum of the loan plus the interest. This is the reason most governments are in so much debt. The solution at the moment is to go deeper into debt in the hope of stimulating the economy. Its probably not going to end well but i don't imagine world war.

takun · 06-03-2011 4:27pm

The funniest thing about this is that by advocating getting rid of money as the answer to all of humanity's problems, it is actually elevating money to a status above even that which it has in our current system.

Wolves, elephants, lions, monkeys don't have money, but they have a hierarchy. I have three cats - there is even a hierarchy at work between them. The weak suffer, the strong prevail. Take this genetic imperative of the survival of the fittest and the superiority of the strong, mix it with herd mentality and add a good pinch of human nature along with it's messy emotions and pesky individualism - stir that pot and even in the absence of money what emerges is not some beatific peace where everyone lives in harmony and equality, but an ugly scene of brutality and chaos.

As for the bit about there suddenly being no such thing as hard labour - words fail me.

Permabear · 06-03-2011 4:40pm

This post has been deleted.

silkfield · 06-03-2011 4:46pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That is due to technology, not capitalism.

Permabear · 06-03-2011 4:50pm

This post has been deleted.

silkfield · 06-03-2011 5:09pm

takun wrote: »

...it is actually elevating money to a status above even that which it has in our current system.

I don't agree, but if so, so?

takun wrote: »

Wolves, elephants, lions, monkeys ....... not some beatific peace where everyone lives in harmony and equality, but an ugly scene of brutality and chaos.

I agree with most of this, but almost recoiled on reading your last line. Where did that come from? I would love to see THAT particular train of logic.

takun wrote: »

As for the bit about there suddenly being no such thing as hard labour - words fail me.

When is the last time you ploughed a field with oxen? Or the last time you walked home with a bag of coal on a wheelbarrow? Or washed your clothes in a basin? Or cut the grass with shears? Or wrote out the text of a PDF and brought it to someone? Or heated up your baked beans on hot coals? Are you freaking serious???

There are jobs that only humans can do, yes, but they are becoming fewer and fewer each day. Any idiot can see that. In a money-free world, these 'human-only' jobs will be done by humans, not because they have to, but because they want to.

silkfield · 06-03-2011 5:10pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No.

takun · 06-03-2011 6:00pm

silkfield wrote: »

I don't agree, but if so, so?

By assuming that the elimination of money would inevitably and permanently change human nature for the better.

silkfield wrote: »

Or the last time you walked home with a bag of coal on a wheelbarrow?

Well, since you ask, as it happens...... we provide all of our own winter fuel by dint of our own labour.

Last summer, as we always do, we went to a bog and turned turf that had been cut on our behalf by machine (it was allowed, don't get upset about that. Though I'm a bit upset we won't be able to do it for much longer.) When it had dried, we moved it to a trailer, drove it home, took it (in wheelbarrows as it happens) to the back garden and stacked it. This required 8+ trips and each unloading took about 30-40 trips with the wheelbarrow. Staking it is a bit of a job too. We also delivered several other trailer loads to other people and assisted them with unloading/stacking.

We also cut down two very large trees, one of which was dead, the other was undermining a house foundation. We generally get a couple of people every year who need a tree or a few trees cut down, in return for which we take the wood (usually leaving them a good pile too if they want it). These were then cut into manageable size, though pretty large, logs and again taken home and stacked. We didn't need it all, so again some was taken to other's houses. And once again all this moving of wood was largely accomplished using..... wheelbarrows and good old manual labour.

Now every week we spend an hour or two cutting these logs into small enough pieces to burn for the following week. And of course every day we have to bring in the day's supply of fuel. It proves the old adage that 'the man who cuts his own wood warms himself twice' - though I'd extend that to 4 or more times.

It was all pretty hard labour, though not unenjoyable, as there is satisfaction in labour sometimes. I have no heating costs at all and live in a very warm house - that is certainly satisfying, but it is labour that replaces the need for money.

Granted, we are not forced to do this. It's what we do, and I like to think its not bad for our son to experience from himself that there IS labour involved in production and there is reward for effort.

But talk to any farmer - mechanisation or not there is labour involved there still. And show me the house built entirely by machine and not manual labour. I've worked in a meat factory - let me tell you you'd be physically exhausted at the end of your shift there.

And that's in a first world country with existing infrastructure (much of it built by dint of physical labour).

And before you say that in the absence of money I would still do all this happily - so it proves your point, well no, I would not. Why would I bother when I could have my heating free anyway? Why would I want to teach my son that labour brings rewards, when really it would not?

SupaNova · 06-03-2011 6:03pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masdar_City

I wonder why they never mention this in any of the Zeitgeist films. I thought it would be something they would be interested in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyz3OvjSZdc

silkfield · 06-03-2011 6:31pm

takun wrote: »

And before you say that in the absence of money I would still do all this happily - so it proves your point, well no, I would not. Why would I bother when I could have my heating free anyway? Why would I want to teach my son that labour brings rewards, when really it would not?

Labour can be its own reward. I know that. I've just been chopping logs myself too and thoroughly enjoyed it. I admire your self-sufficiency, and if you enjoy it why not? Money or no money? Isn't the whole point of life just to live well and be happy?

We are not living well. You obviously are, but 10 people a week are taking their own lives in this country. I've no stats, but I'm willing to bet every single one of them has/had financial problems.

How many more people have to DIE before we realise what we're doing wrong?

Roughly 36 MILLION people die each year due to malnutrition. Now ask yourself, is that due to lack of food, or lack of purchasing power?

takun · 06-03-2011 6:36pm

silkfield wrote: »

Labour can be its own reward. I know that. I've just been chopping logs myself too and thoroughly enjoyed it. I admire your self-sufficiency, and if you enjoy it why not? Money or no money? Isn't the whole point of life just to live well and be happy?

Indeed. But let me assure you whatever other benefits it brings, the primary purpose of our labour is to save money. We have significant financial problems. I've just waved goodbye to my partner who has left to work for a week at the other end if the country, not something he really wants to do, but he does it purely because we need the extra money. I am not living in some kind of nirvana where manual labour is a noble effort undertaken for it's own sake - it's done because it saves money. If all was provided to me for free I'd give in happily to my natural sloven and put my feet up.

silkfield · 06-03-2011 6:36pm

SupaNova wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masdar_City

I wonder why they never mention this in any of the Zeitgeist films. I thought it would be something they would be interested in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyz3OvjSZdc

Great! Haven't seen this.

Einhard · 06-03-2011 6:38pm

silkfield wrote: »

We are not living well. You obviously are, but 10 people a week are taking their own lives in this country. I've no stats, but I'm willing to bet every single one of them has/had financial problems.

How many more people have to DIE before we realise what we're doing wrong?

Over 4 million people don't kill themselves every week...

silkfield · 06-03-2011 6:42pm

Einhard wrote: »

Over 4 million people don't kill themselves every week...

Denerick · 06-03-2011 6:45pm

I watched the whole 6 minutes. Reminded me of an idea I came up with after taking a **** load of MDMA. It didn't sound so smart the next day when I wasn't overcome by feelings of empathy.

What is The Free World Charter?

Comments