Paradise or Oblivion

[Deleted]

But I still don't think that is the real obstacle, because once we are all working together that should be achievable - except for the "instantly" part.

We're already working together. The whole global market is a massive teamwork.

The fact is that no matter what we do, we cannot have everything. Resources are not infinite. And I'm not only talking about raw materials, but processed consumer goods and services.

People are unique, and thus their preferences are unique. It's impossible to satisfy everyone's every need. Mostly, because there's not enough of different resources available (physical materials, ideas, labor etc).

It's a completely impossible idea that we can all just chill at home while some automated system provides us with everything we might ever want.

[Deleted]

So, while it's not a dream per se, it's certainly not feasible without some major time period where everything will just be awful.

And even after you force everyone into this sytem, there will be people who go "fuck this" and start opposing it.

[Deleted]

And even after you force everyone into this sytem, there will be people who go "fuck this" and start opposing it.

Why? Everything you need is provided. Food, shelter, entertainment, material objects and social interaction.

Anyone who opposes a system that's designed to allow them to follow their passions is a complete moron.

[Gerrin]

Why? Everything you need is provided. Food, shelter, entertainment, material objects and social interaction.

Anyone who opposes a system that's designed to allow them to follow their passions is a complete moron.

Liberty? freedom? self determination? This situation is abject slavery, anyone who can't see that is a moron.

[Deleted]

Liberty? freedom? self determination? This situation is abject slavery, anyone who can't see that is a moron.

How is total freedom "slavery"? You can do anything you want. You want to paint, good stuff. You want to research marine biology, good stuff. You want to do nothing, you can do that too.

Another person who didn't watch it?

[Deleted]

Liberty? freedom? self determination? This situation is abject slavery, anyone who can't see that is a moron.

Slavery is being given everything you need and being allowed to follow your passions? Not a description I've heard used before if i'm honest.

[Wolder]

Slavery is being given everything you need and being allowed to follow your passions? Not a description I've heard used before if i'm honest.

If "Everything I need" is defined by someone else then myself, yes.

[Deleted]

If "Everything I need" is defined by someone else then myself, yes.

*mindblown*

So all biological, entertainment, material and social needs fulfilled with the resources provided to follow any passion is slavery.

[Deleted]

*mindblown*

So all biological, entertainment, material and social needs fulfilled with the resources provided to follow any passion is slavery.

If it is then I want me some of that slavery.

[Wolder]

Would be interesting to see how jacque fresco would do in a peer reviewed scientific journal like the American journal of political science or journal of Political Economy..

My guess is that he would be completely destroyed in any sort of debate with even poor economy/politology professors. If he truly wanted to change the world and educate people about his ideas, he would engage the social science society in rational debate instead of making youtube videos..

[therealbowser]

The only thing we do wrong as a people is live under illusions and refuse to seek out the truth. Being greedy is just part of this. We live under the illusion that nothing matters outside of our lives, that having money is the most important thing in life, we accept what people tell us, and what we've been brought up to know without confirming things ourselves, and the fact that we will not survive as a race (we will literally eventually go extinct, and we are bound to start going downhill severely soon, possibly even within our lifetime) if we do not change what we are doing.

I fear that the only way we will ever change as a species if something devastating or terrible were to happen to us, and honestly, if it came to that point it might come too slowly and we may not survive it. But I am entering the realm of theory and conjecture now...

I am not sure if what this movie is proposing is a realistic solution, but a lot of the ideas they have are sound. Using technology that is eco-friendly is a great idea. Having a utopia where no one needs to work and everything is free is a little far-fetched, I do not know if we'll ever be able to do that. Personally, I don't care for that idea of a society where I own nothing and 'borrow' everything. I personally would not be compelled to 'challenge' myself, I fear I would simply be content with doing nothing, as would the majority of the population.

Us doing nothing is the reason things are like they are. People are content living in the own 'utopian' society we have today, where we forget our problems (especially problems that do not directly concern us, such as what's going on in the world) and ignore what's going on all around us in the world. We are content to donate a few dollars to charity and forget that the entire world is in dire need of reformation. (If you wish to call me out as a hypocrite, go ahead. My life is... complicated. But I am no exception to this rule as a whole. I could be doing more than I am, so I should be.)

Even before seeing this movie I've been thinking (in my own mind, without any help from outside sources) that the world can't keep on going like it is. This is not difficult to realize with basic common sense. We must change or we will not survive. It's literally that simple.

What I do know is that anything helps. If you can do more, do more, but at the very least recycle, encourage others to do so. Again, anything helps. We need to change the world, but if we have to do it step by step, then at least it is something.

[Wolder]

*mindblown*

So all biological, entertainment, material and social needs fulfilled with the resources provided to follow any passion is slavery.

What if one of my personal needs is the ability to overthrow the then-in-place resource based economy because I find it unjust? Would that need be accounted for aswell?

[Deleted]

What if one of my personal needs is the ability to overthrow the then-in-place resource based economy because I find it unjust? Would that need be accounted for aswell?

Name a way it's unjust and you might yeah.

[Hutmacher]

even if there're 10.000 fishes and bananas and whatever for everyone, any1 WOULD make money (or anything similar) of it, he just CREATES it, mankind sucks, hope the next war will be the last lol

[Wolder]

Name a way it's unjust and you might yeah.

And this, my friend, is actually where we differ. We have diffferent definitions of the philosophical term "justice" and I doubt we will ever agree on what that means. To that point our ontological views are simply too different.

For you see, for me, its not about what is provided. Justice or unjustice has nothing to do with material needs and everything to do with whether or not YOU own your own LIFE, aka are you in control of your own life. In a capitalist democracy, you utilize this control in form of voting. How is it utilized in the system you are describing? How do you change the system, if you disagree with it? If you can NOT change it, it is slavery.

It has nothing to do with whether the system is fair in itself(from an objective point of view), but whether you can change it if you don't think its fair.

[Deleted]

Why? Everything you need is provided. Food, shelter, entertainment, material objects and social interaction.
Anyone who opposes a system that's designed to allow them to follow their passions is a complete moron.

Because it's impossible for the system to provide you with everything you desire.

Especially if your desire is somehow related to other humans, such as therapy or massage by another human, it won't work without a slave-class. Because if your desire to be massaged by a human being is fulfilled, it obligates another human to work for you. And if another human is forced to massage you, that human no longer enjoys having everything provided to them as that human can no longer enjoy as much leisure as he/she wants.

This system cannot exist except in a theoretical world of paradoxical superabundance.

Now, if you want to argue that this system gives everyone the basic means for living a good life and then some, sure, it could happen. But then we're speaking of a sort of communism (not stalinism).

[Gerrin]

Name a way it's unjust and you might yeah.

Um, how about someone other than the individual is deciding "what I need?" Who the hell is someone else to tell me "what I need?" Slaves were given "what they needed" to survive and their jobs (pardon the term) were what the plantation needed done. That wasn't just nor is anything about this whole idea. There would be no freedom to choose vocation because then there wouldn't be enough people to take out the trash or run a sanitation plant. There would be forced labor to fill in the gaps. You wouldn't be able to learn what you wanted to learn; you would be taught what the leaders wanted you to believe.

This is not a new idea, this is exactly the pap that was being spouted by the Bolsheviks. Step away from your government school for a bit and read a history book. The people who tout this kind of philosophy have their minds on blood and power. Those who buy into it provide the blood.

[Deleted]

UnceSilas is trying to sound intellectual with his knowledge of social movements, but he has no grasp of the very basic functions and behavioural patterns of a group of humans. If you have a large enough group of people, and they can in any way, shape or form provide favors to eachother, a system of trading will emerge. Trading will create a market, and a market will create a currency.

Even in prisons, where people's freedoms have been limited to the least possible, such as in the concetration camps of Nazi germany, prisoner work camps of Siberia or modern prisons, a currency for trade has emerged. Usually cigarettes.

What do you think will happen in what you describe as a society of total freedom? The result is inevitable.

[StayTuned]

So wait, lets sum up

Everything is for free.
Everything is available in unlimited amounts.
A lot of things are automated, the other things are produced by people purely because they want to contribute something to their society. They spend part of their lifes working, until others come and replace them.
Individuality is being promoted, yet everything will look the same for the sake of automation and "smart resource distribution".
No crimes or wars, since the resource surplus will make the feeling of greed obsolete.
Energy will be 100% clean and renewable.
We will be living on the water.

These are like the basics of the whole venus project.


Now let me ask you some questions, because it looks like I've missed some pretty important points.


1. How would this project begin? I know, there is this survey thing; however, in order to create a society without economics, we need to remove the system of economics cold turkey. Such a huge change can not be done in such a short period of time.

2. What kind of government would we have? Democratic? None at all? Who is going to set up standards for schools and universities and other institutions?

3. What about crime out of "passion" (missing the right word here)... Even if we have all material goods we could wish for, we would still be humans with human emotions. Would we still have a judiciary system to prosecute murder for example? Husband kills wife because she cheated on him? Not like it's something that rare. And if we have, who is going to volunteer for such a job? Are we going to force people into jobs like police officer? I don't actually think somebody would like to do such a job just for the lulz of it. And if we force people into it, would it still be a society that is free for all and based on equality?

4. Number 3 is a long question, so I'll skip this one

5. To adress question number 1. If we do not quit the priciples of money cold turkey, would we build up this new society with money? Wouldn't this be kind of ironic?

6. What if we achieve a level of technology where everything becomes automated to such an extent that manual labor becomes completely obsolete? Will education alone and the will to be part of something bigger really overcome human fatigue and laziness?

7. What about the need to be the best in his field of interest? Wouldn't this again be a cause for greed? Someone is better at football than I am, thus I try to sabotage him, or try to claim the first place through other means.

8. What if everybody goes berserk on what he wants. Can we really build enough boats, race-cars and yachts for everyone who wants one? If we do not allow luxury, will it be a society where everbody owns absolutely the same? Where is the individuality in this system?

9. We design 1/8 of a city and then we simply duplicate it, so that cities can be build by machines. Will every city look the same? Wouldn't that be very boring? What about old fashioned european cities like Rome, Madrid, Zadar or Paris? What will happen to tourism if every city looks more or less the same?


I could go on like this for quite some time. But what I actually want to say is that this whole idea sounds kind of like a dream to me and I actually can't decide if this is a nice dream, or a nightmare in which I never want to live in. I like the current system as it is, because it allows me to express my individuality. I do not want to live with hundreds of other people, stuffed into big buildings that all look the same. If I would want this, I could just as well move to the ghetto disctrict of my city. Everything looks the same. Gray.

[Aphrel]

i dont see how his vision can come true without us inventing robots capable of managing all the "shitty jobs". The only reason the majority of ppl go to work is because they need the money. if they hadnt needed the money they whouldnt work.. so his vision will have to wait some 50 or 100years i think.
thou his idea of a one world goverment sounds like a good idea. will probobly be impossible to achieve thou.