arul
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by arul on Apr 7, 2009 18:58:11 GMT 10
Hello from lovely Tavara. The sun is warm and bright today and I have two links to share with you all. The Venus project is one which I believe will be of interest to all Nova and Micro Nationalists. This is the best site I have ever seen: www.thevenusproject.com/ and it's companion site: www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/Now as for Tavara, we are a brand new Nova Nation which is my term for a Micronation that is serious about creating a new culture. I use this as a way of separating the hobby nations from the serious endevours. George invited me here and I am glad to be amoung you all Nova and Micro peoples. With respect, Arul Iafa. www.teamhair.org
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Apr 7, 2009 20:13:45 GMT 10
Welcome to LOM.
The problem with utopian concepts like the Venus Project is that they're predicated on the assumption that it's possible to create and sustain a new type of society from the ground up, in isolation from present systems.
That is simply not so.
The only type of meaningful change that it's possible to effect in reality is always incremental and evolutional - and based upon, not divorced from - existing systems.
|
|
|
Post by D. N. Vercáriâ on Apr 8, 2009 6:11:33 GMT 10
The other possible type of meaningful change is abrupt and violent, maybe somewhat "revolutionary" at best, but often simply an expression of raw power. Anyway, based on existing systems, too.
That doesn't mean that utopian ideas don't have an impact. In fact, they may be a guiding light that leads to incremental, evolutional societal processes (or that inspires the direction of abrupt changes).
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Apr 8, 2009 9:55:52 GMT 10
I chose my words carefully (as I always do) I don't personally consider the violence of sudden or revolutionary change to be "meaningful", as it almost always sets into motion events and processes which sow the seeds of the revolution's own destruction - thus laying the foundation for a continuing cycle of violence and social/economic dislocation and disruption. Both the French and Russian revolutions are excellent examples. In other words, the ultimate costs of violent upheaval rarely outweigh the benefits immediately delivered. History is a series of pendulum swings; the best outcome for humanity arises from mitigating the degree of each swing.
|
|
|
Post by Arul Iafa on Apr 8, 2009 22:27:50 GMT 10
The venus project and Zeitgeist movement are using existing human world to establish a new one. As a transhumanist I have to disagree and say that anything is possible if you have enough people, and this not at all utopian but rather practical. The alternative is not at all appealing but rathr appalling, this video video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3932487043163636261establishes how this can be put into effect. The alternative is this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2gdeKqHtl8
|
|
|
Post by D. N. Vercáriâ on Apr 9, 2009 4:39:26 GMT 10
I chose my words carefully (as I always do) I don't personally consider the violence of sudden or revolutionary change to be "meaningful", as it almost always sets into motion events and processes which sow the seeds of the revolution's own destruction - thus laying the foundation for a continuing cycle of violence and social/economic dislocation and disruption. Both the French and Russian revolutions are excellent examples. In other words, the ultimate costs of violent upheaval rarely outweigh the benefits immediately delivered. History is a series of pendulum swings; the best outcome for humanity arises from mitigating the degree of each swing. Now there's the dilemma that we have to define "meaningful". I should have better been using the words "effective" or "striking", when talking about revolutions as events that let history take a new, often unexpected course. Doesn't mean that I am advertising revolutionary measures as a political tool of choice. In fact, I would always prefer a constant democratic process of societal evolution. Revolutions aren't even a measure, they are an event, like the bursting of a volcano. But in some cases, like in case of the French Revolution, they are some sort of a catalyzer that is leading to thoroughly meaningful changes. Like, from an absolute feudal monarchy to a modern civil society, after some troublesome steps inbetween.
|
|
|
Post by sogoln on Apr 9, 2009 16:22:36 GMT 10
In fact, I would always prefer a constant democratic process of societal evolution. Unfortunately, that works only with honest politicians... Yes, that's an oxymoron. ;D
|
|
|
Post by D. N. Vercáriâ on Apr 9, 2009 18:08:47 GMT 10
Heh.
If it is a representative democracy, the parties should also offer a real choice of various options instead of mainly the same program with very little differing details.
|
|
|
Post by shadowdarkfyre on Apr 10, 2009 15:15:31 GMT 10
In fact, I would always prefer a constant democratic process of societal evolution. Unfortunately, that works only with honest politicians... Yes, that's an oxymoron. ;D (chuckles) Well played...
|
|
|
Post by commiczar on Apr 11, 2009 6:13:18 GMT 10
GREETINGS & WELCOME !!
|
|