I wish I was still amazed at how people can spin endless yarns about how spiffy things would be if everyone just did things THEIR way, but yet none of them seem to be willing to...you know, do those things themselves and prove it.
@AlexanderKingsbury The process of discovery rarely starts with proof. Rigorous analysis is almost never completed except near the process' end.
The main point here is to fire the imaginations of us all. Because clearly, the way we are doing things now isn't working and only leading to both societal and environmental death.
There are other things worthy of mention here, such as credible evidence of the active suppression of actual free energy devices. But this should be enough.
"The main point here is to fire the imaginations of us all."
Then allow me to let you in on a little secret; when you say "Abundance IS possible", that sounds a lot like you imagine that we don't have abundance NOW. Which we do, in large measure.
There's no need to imagine what already exists.
@AlexanderKingsbury You're not wrong. Except, it doesn't really matter to most of us if our political economy remains deliberately designed to not distribute that abundance.
We need the radical paradigm shift as of yesterday.
People make claims like this all the time; "things are DESIGNED to keep some of us poor!" But I see no actual, convincing evidence of such claims. IN the US and around the world, tens of millions of people a year climb out of poverty and grow wealthier.
Whether or not the system is "designed" to not distribute abundance...well, it's succeeding at distributing abundance.
@AlexanderKingsbury And what about the BILLIONS of people left behind.. who have NO hope of EVER being lifted out of poverty?
Fuck 'em. Right?
Oh, that's easy; you're describing a group that doesn't exist. Sure, MANY people around the world live in poverty; but to claim that they have "NO hope of EVER being lifted out of poverty"? That's, at best, ignorant. The global standard of living has risen VASTLY over the last 200 years, and continues to rise; the poorest have benefited greatly from that rise.
I don't "demand" that they wait 200 years. I don't demand that they wait a moment. I don't even WANT them to wait a moment.
"You are demanding self-sacrifice from them."
A. completely false and B. that's not necessarily hypocritical, even if I was making such a demand. Which, again, I am not, and never have.
@AlexanderKingsbury Then, indeed we DO need a new paradigm, if you don't want to make the world's impoverished wait.
What do you want? What is your agenda?
To work with visionaries to solve long standing - but ultimately unnecessary - problems?
Or to satisfy your own ego by "being right", or hearing yourself talk?
Do you want the last word here? Or are you truly a devil's advocate?
I want all sorts of things; I doubt any "agenda" worth having could fit into the character limit here.
I don't much care whether or not those solving problems are "visionary" or not.
As to my ego; it would be FAR easier to stroke that by just whining idly about capitalism or oppression or the patriarchy and hearing people bark praise.
Who has the last word means little to me. I never claimed here to be a devil's advocate.
stephenhayes
AKingsbury