The Zeitgeist Movement... why not?

[dtugg]

Ok some points.

1) ¿How does current society deals with rich people? They certainly do not need to work, yet, I believe a bunch of them choose to have productive life's instead of being parasites. Yes, one answer is greed, they have everything they could possible dream yet they want more. Still, Gates, Buffet, will give back almost everything they have earned, why, because once you past a certain point money is useless.

2) How come, in a world where money is indispensable as you live permanently in debt (an important point that I will stress later), there is such thing as ONGs? What would impulse anyone to volunteer? and this happens from moms working at their kids schools to firemen, risking their life's for other's, to doctors giving (for free) all their hard years of study. What in hell can be in the minds of such people? are they nuts? Or... are they also following human nature... and... there is arguabily more "givers" than "takers", so to speak.

3) (this is not the ZM but my own take), (no it is not "a solution" is just an idea in progress, one that will obviously evolve in part by the feedback I'm receiving in the JREF), You have housing, healthcare, education and food for free, but fancy TVs, travels, videogames and other stuff requires you to be productive. Now, the difference here (with actual model) is that you would not get a bigger tv if you are succesful actor than if you are a baker.

I am not going to argue too much on the first two points. There are definitely rich people, especially self made rich people that are still productive even though they don't need to be. And of course plenty of people volunteer because they feel the need to. Not everybody is like that.

As for the last part, you are actually OK with giving everything that people need for free? I promise you that millions of people would take you up on that and never do anything productive in their lives, ever. For example, I know a lot of stoners that would love to sit around and get high all day and not do a damn thing else. As of right now, they have to work to support themselves and their habits (either that or sell drugs). Under your system, they would just get high all day. Would you have a problem working to support a bunch of druggie slackers? I would.

As for getting all the bells and whistles for being productive, who decides what productive is? Does any kind of work count as being productive? Could I get anything that I wanted by doing any kind of work that I wanted? Perhaps I would be a sky dive instructor. I would be productive by helping people have the time of their lives. It would be a fun job too. I would take my students out on my private plane and when I 'm finished for the day, I would ride home in my Bugatti Veyron to my 30,000 square foot mansion.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Ok some points....

3) (this is not the ZM but my own take), (no it is not "a solution" is just an idea in progress, one that will obviously evolve in part by the feedback I'm receiving in the JREF), You have housing, healthcare, education and food for free, but fancy TVs, travels, video games and other stuff requires you to be productive. Now, the difference here (with actual model) is that you would not get a bigger tv if you are successful actor than if you are a baker.

Congratulations! You have just created not only a caste system, but introduced the basis for a state funded black market into your system. It would be long before those fancy TV's, video games and other things are being exchanged within the general population, with a small group amassing the most toys and becoming powerful. Oh, well that and the inherent bureaucratic structure that would have to be developed to decide who is productive.

So lets see what you accomplished...

1.) You actually removed "equality" from your system.

2.) You introduced the basis for a black market.

3.) You introduced the basis for crime, but it would have existed anyway so lets not count this one.

3.) You created a governmental structure that will actually be more oppressive to the people than the capitalist structure it replaced.

 

[Mr_Mix]

Lets.


You really haven't done anything here. Money is a stand in for goods and all you have done is replace the incentive of money for goods. No change at all, just new lipstick to an old system.


You argued this point and no one here has accepted those reasons. Your reasoning behind why those jobs would vanish has been poorly thought out.


Here is the problem BDZ. None of that the Project Venus, Zeitgeist or even YOUR beliefs into this utopian belief system is new. In fact many were thought of before and some even tried before, some centuries ago and even during the Greek philosophical era. Just about every philospher since ancient times has thought of this.

You and the Zeitgeist proponents are receing crap because of how naive and uneducated you are on this issue.

Let's start with a basic point:
1)Why is money bad?
2)Why do we have to replace money?
3)What do you want to use to replace money in society?

I’ll go through these questions based on my current understanding of The Venus Project and a resource based economy.

1) Money is bad because you need to compete for labor or to sell your products. This competition is said to create incentive and it may well do that but at what cost and what kind of incentive are we looking at here? People cannot and do not act ethical when they are forced to compete for money and resources. You get crime out of this scenario. You get massive corporate corruption, social stratification, greed. You will not find these things in a non-monetary system proposed by The Venus Project.

People will chime in about ‘oh humans have always been violent and corrupt. It’s human nature - it’s human nature - it’s human nature, like a parrot. You would think that these people worked there whole life on studying human behavior but I doubt that is true. If they had, perhaps they would see that we are products of our environment. It’s about %5 chemical IE genes then its all environmental conditioning with a dash of choice thrown in.

2) There is nothing to replace money. The idea is to get rid of it without a replacement. If we wanted to replace it, what would be the point? Barter is just the same. Remove the things that cause people to act in the desperate ways that they do and they will act very differently.

Few people here have stopped to imagine an environment that did not promote competition and instead promoted people working together for the common good. That’s a world without the idea of money in it. We can use the carrying capacity of the earth’s resources to supply everyone with everything they need and more. We have the resources on this earth. The question that is asked is “How much money will it cost?” And that’s the problem. No replacement. Just the eradication of this outdated idea called money.

3) Again, no replacement. Many new incentives for “work” could emerge in this new environment but I think that the entire world being fed, clothed and housed plus the end of war would be incentive enough for me. That’s the whole point really. No one is taken advantage of; no one is dominated by anyone else. People will grow up differently in this type of society.

Technology would replace what it could through automation. The cities themselves would be built by machines as it is described in various texts and videos I have seen by the The Venus Project. The area of finance and all jobs with it would disappear. Many jobs would not need to exist in the society. Jobs and work would exist but the there would be much less work and a lot shorter work days for the jobs that humans were still needed to do.

The incentives would be less work, free food, homes, clothing, medical care, transportation.

I think the society would be concentrated in cities that would be built from the ground up with absolute efficiency which would allow everyone to go where they need to go in a short distance and without cost. Free communication, transportation, food, medical care. Everything you need and more. No homelessness. Almost no crime with certain types of crime totally disappearing.

 

[balrog666]

I see. So we change human nature and then everything will work fine in the Pacificist-Utopia.

I have to wonder though - wouldn't it work better without the humans in the first place?

 

[Mr_Mix]

I am lazy. If everything that I need or want is provided to me just by virtue of being born, I wouldn't work at all. I would just do things that I find fun like using drugs, or going on adventures around the world, or playing video games.

If I won Powerball, I wouldn't do anything that contributes to society except for spend of bunch of money.

Interesting questions.

If you were truly lazy then you would not want to adventure anywhere, specially around the world. So it does not seem that you are lazy at all. If you don’t want to work at your job, that does not make you lazy.

When you did travel around the world it would be free and by train most likely. I think trains going around the world by bridges or tunnels will be possible in the next 10 – 20 years. In terms of the raw technology I think we can already do that. Some of the tunnelling projects going on around the world are already proving we can think about a global Maglev train system that I talked about earlier in this thread. You would get to China in about 4 hours from anywhere in the US

Anyway, so you travel around the world end experience many new people and places and they experience you as well. Sounds good. I think you would be playing a lot less games, that’s for sure.

And drugs? Why not? I need not worry about being charged for a criminal offence of doing drugs. They are free and legal since the war on drugs is completely eradicated in this system. Just don’t get addicted to the smack! If you do get addicted you have the most advanced medical system ever devised to take care of you. The likelihood of harmful drug addiction is much less because the system is not repressing you. There is less stress and many more interesting things to do besides drugs. The incentive to do and get addicted to harmful drugs is almost eradicated. Can you see what I mean by that?

Another point is that I play video games and do drugs right now because of the environment I am being effected by. It would probably change because I wouldn’t feel a need to escape into video games when the possibility are wide open to experience life instead of the rat race I’m trying to escape from by playing games in the first palace. Escapism is a part of the psychology of a system like the one we are currently experiencing.

About the Powerball. There is no money or Powerball in this system so you wouldn’t be spending or winning anything. It’s very hard for people to foresee how their whole outlook and perception of their reality would change in this system. You would not think things or say things in this new system that you might in the current one. It’s a total paradigm shift. People in this forum are trying to imagine this but I can tell by their language that they have not realized the immense change that would take place in their entire consciousness. We think and act the way we do because of the environment we are surrounded by. In the new environment you would think like a different person because the old way of thinking would be irrelevant. Right now you are talking and responding to these ideas based on the current system of thought but when you think about the effects the change would have in this new system you begin to see how very different it would be and how differently you would think and act.

I am sure there are many people that are like me. How does the utopian fantasy deal with this? Would we just be allowed to leech of everybody else? Would we be forced to work somehow?

Although I have yet to get into the nuts and bolts of the system I think I can see how this might work. The city that you lived in may need human labor of some kind for jobs that still required it. Maybe you worked for a few hours a day for instance. If you had everything provided for you and lots of time to pursue whatever you desired and the city said “can you work a few hours a day for a month at this location doing this job? Would you always just say “No! I’m busy!”?It was this system that gave you time to do whatever you wanted. It’s the system that provided everything for your family and all that is asked in return is minimal work for so much. Who would not want to contribute so little for so much in return? You would probably love to do it. If you didn’t, there would be no forcing of anyone to do anything but it is a way better deal than what we do now. It seems like a better deal in the new system as far as personal freedom. You could go wherever, do whatever.

Again, I’m just taking an educated guess but I’ll find out just how this works as I get into it in the coming few days. I’m not sure if that is how it would work because I haven’t got that far in studying the system yet. There is a lot of info to take in. I’ll probably know what has been proposed within the next few days. I just wanted to through that out there as a possible answer. It’s all new to me.

 

[Mr_Mix]

Although there are a few different ideas going on in this thread I want to point out that the thread was originally asking about the possibility of the The Venus Project becoming a workable system. The title reads "The Zeitgeist Movement...why not?" so what we are talking about here is the Venus Project's ideas becoming a possible reality. I'm currently finding out the nuts and bolts of that exact system and thats all I will personally be discussing here regardless of any other system being talked about.

I'm wondering if there is anyone else who has read/viewed all or most of the free information on The Venus Project Project that is available online and what are the major problems that are seen so far. I'm hoping there are a few people in here who have checked it out a bit. Here are some useful URLs.

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/faq-home.htm

http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

I am not going to argue too much on the first two points. There are definitely rich people, especially self made rich people that are still productive even though they don't need to be. And of course plenty of people volunteer because they feel the need to.

Now, an important point here is that we would not conceptualize productive activities as "work" in the same way as as we do on this society. One thing is to have a productive activity and another, very different, is to have to work. Both can refer to the same endeavor yet their meanings are substantially different. For instance, you can perform a personal satisfying productive activity because it suits you, it makes your life interesting, gives you a sense of personal value and it gives you meaning.

In contrast, slaves (in this society) have to work for their right to keep themselves alive. They born in debt and will be forever in debt. Only a very few, selected individuals can dedicate themselves to productive activities that are not monetary "rewarded". After all... it is said, you HAVE to WORK for a LIVING... Truth is, you only have to work when your assets can't cover your basic needs for as long as you live, if you do have such assets then you definitely don't have to move a finger for a living.

As for the last part, you are actually OK with giving everything that people need for free?

It is not like that, at all. The problem is, like I stated above about the concept of "work", the concept of "free". Something "is free" when it has is a monetary value and yet it is given without making the other incur in to a debt. Of course, this simple concept has a lot of problems (that are not seen as problems because they are implied in our thinking process).

Suppose you like fishing, you don't make a living out of it, you simply enjoy being there in a peaceful environment. When you return home you give some fish to your neighborhood, as this is not an interchange, well, maybe in some way (fish for thanks) there is no money involved, yet the transaction is accomplished with no problems, because (in a way) we assume we are giving something because we want, not "giving something for free", which has emotional connotations in our society.

So, I believe a leap of world view is needed here. You would not be able to give anything "for free" because it would be a nonsensical to claim that something has to have a price. Nothing would be "free" as nothing would cost a dime.

I promise you that millions of people would take you up on that and never do anything productive in their lives, ever.

But you have reckoned that people often do productive activities without receiving a dime. So, how do you KNOW this? I believe most would choose to have meaningful lifes, but that's my feeling. What differentiates your view from mine? both are just ideas, assumptions, until we have some actual facts. And we will not have such facts unless proper methodologies of research are implemented. Actually, I would like to see something like this happening in the hands of the people behind the ZM.

For example, I know a lot of stoners that would love to sit around and get high all day and not do a damn thing else.

Last time I checked, they were are a small minority. And who knows what would happen to them if more interesting things than McJobs were around, ready for them to explore.

As of right now, they have to work to support themselves and their habits (either that or sell drugs). Under your system, they would just get high all day. Would you have a problem working to support a bunch of druggie slackers? I would.

Again, this is a non supported assumption. As a side point, why do you pay your taxes at all?? Because you are giving them all kind of public services, for free, and you don't seem to be upset about it.

As for getting all the bells and whistles for being productive, who decides what productive is?

This is a better question. Society will, exactly like now. I have also proposed that every citizen would be part of the government, from say 30 to 33 years old, there are no elections, no democracy, nor technocracy, no bureaucracy, every single member of society have to be the government, so every decision is collective. Someone can invent a productive activity, for example, and ask via internet who would be interested in taking part. If there is interest things would happen automatically. For example, say you want to teach "karate on a snowboard", if people is interested in learning that, you would have a productive activity.

Does any kind of work count as being productive? Could I get anything that I wanted by doing any kind of work that I wanted? Perhaps I would be a sky dive instructor. I would be productive by helping people have the time of their lives. It would be a fun job too.

There you go, an excellent choice for you. Would be nice, wouldn't it?

I would take my students out on my private plane and when I 'm finished for the day, I would ride home in my Bugatti Veyron to my 30,000 square foot mansion.

Well, I don't know if it is efficient for individuals to have their "own" planes, maybe their own Veyron, I can't see why not, but certainly not the mansion. They are very inefficient waste of space, and require many people to perform some manual jobs that would be not required if we all lived in more efficient environments. I think in small cities, where we would have incredible nice private spaces, maybe something like current homes and apartments, but certainly more engineered than the "chaos" we live now on.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

It would be long before those fancy TV's, video games and other things are being exchanged within the general population, with a small group amassing the most toys and becoming powerful.

The purpose being? You can't sell them, nor can distribute them. In my world instead of courts we have thousands of (completely independent) surveillance systems, those attempting to have advantage over others would be in the sight of every member of society and would have to be removed (yes, contrary to the ZM in my world there would be special facilities for keeping those who can't behave in a way that it is healthy for the whole community, yes, like in our world).

So lets see what you accomplished...

1.) You actually removed "equality" from your system.

2.) You introduced the basis for a black market.

3.) You introduced the basis for crime, but it would have existed anyway so lets not count this one.

3.) You created a governmental structure that will actually be more oppressive to the people than the capitalist structure it replaced.

1) I have not tried to reach "equality". Individuals are different, they want different things, they like to do different things, their skins need different kind of soaps. Some of them want to rule over others, some others like to follow orders. Some will want a videogame console, others will prefer gear to climb mountains.

2) I have not.

3.) Agreed, crime is unavoidable, at least until we find more about what constitutes our "mind".

3) How come? First of all, what is "oppressive" is different from culture to culture, so it is a relative concept. Second, people in this society are not slaves, they do not own anything just because they are born.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

The purpose being? You can't sell them, nor can distribute them. In my world instead of courts we have thousands of (completely independent) surveillance systems, those attempting to have advantage over others would be in the sight of every member of society and would have to be removed (yes, contrary to the ZM in my world there would be special facilities for keeping those who can't behave in a way that it is healthy for the whole community, yes, like in our world).

So you will create a police state more oppressive than any other in history. Um...good for you, but you will still fail in preventing people from trading and distributing goods. You can't monitor everyone at everytime, well at least not without having your society overthrown that is.

1) I have not tried to reach "equality". Individuals are different, they want different things, they like to do different things, their skins need different kind of soaps. Some of them want to rule over others, some others like to follow orders. Some will want a videogame console, others will prefer gear to climb mountains.

And some are better than others, smarter than others; and as such a class system will develop naturally. You have solved nothing.

2) I have not.

Of course you have. People will want what the next guy has, and that next guy will be willing to trade it. Without a horrible police state you can't stop it, and eventually that you fail.

3.) Agreed, crime is unavoidable, at least until we find more about what constitutes our "mind".

It is beyond your society's or any society's ability to prevent.

3) How come? First of all, what is "oppressive" is different from culture to culture, so it is a relative concept. Second, people in this society are not slaves, they do not own anything just because they are born.

No, I am pretty sure at some level you will find people agree on what is oppressive. It is usually those doing the oppressing that disagree. And your society is one of complete and absolute entitlement, and as such you would make slaves of the productive until they either rebel or only go through the motions.

So I mean the simple fact that you cannot see the flaws in this communist system are puzzling to me. It merely takes common sense.

Basically it seems to me that you want to have a society that executes absolute control over the individual.

 

[lionking]

I am still (patiently) waiting for reasons why our current, obviously very flawed system, has transformed South Asia from abject poverty.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

I am still (patiently) waiting for reasons why our current, obviously very flawed system, has transformed South Asia from abject poverty.

What do you mean, that I imply that a monetary economic system is the worst possible thing after a bad headache? Then you have not being reading. I say the system efficiency is lacking, I have give concrete numbers (facts) to point it out.

Other than that, and answering your question, because it creates wealth for some, and eventually it is distributed (less than more but you get the point). If I have something to sell I need costumers who can afford what I sell. But not competitors who can outrun me. That's about it. Now, are you ready to accept that maybe humans can create a more efficient system? that, maybe, money based economic systems can cease to exist?

A last question, you cite Asia, what about Africa? has it succeed there? if not, why not?

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

And some are better than others, smarter than others; and as such a class system will develop naturally. You have solved nothing.

Where have I stated that I wanted a system with no classes? I was the one telling you that people is different. This is natural and I can't imagine why would I want to control it? I believe you misread something.

What I want to hypothesize here is a more efficient system in regards to production, distribution and consumption. Nothing more. I have pointed out to concrete numbers to support this assertion, it is not just a subjective feeling.

Of course you have. People will want what the next guy has, and that next guy will be willing to trade it. Without a horrible police state you can't stop it, and eventually that you fail.

Why would I want to stop interchange? I say I don't want anyone to steal from others, a very different thing.

Crime

It is beyond your society's or any society's ability to prevent.

Not really, the day we know better about genetics and neurotransmitters, this will change. Complex matter and not the topic in the thread, but interesting.

It is usually those doing the oppressing that disagree.

And those who can't exert critical thinking on their own environment, and consider it "natural".

And your society is one of complete and absolute entitlement, and as such you would make slaves of the productive until they either rebel or only go through the motions.

No. You have not being reading. You would have to explain this. I stated that every individual is the government. I have stated that they can live doing whatever they want. I have established that society, as a whole, would decide if what some individual want's to accomplish can be considered productive activity or not. What else do you propose?

Basically it seems to me that you want to have a society that executes absolute control over the individual.

What? ANY society will do this, ANY, but some will exert a more rational use of resources, that's all.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Where have I stated that I wanted a system with no classes? I was the one telling you that people is different. This is natural and I can't imagine why would I want to control it? I believe you misread something.

So you admit that the Venus Project would fail then?

What I want to hypothesize here is a more efficient system in regards to production, distribution and consumption. Nothing more. I have pointed out to concrete numbers to support this assertion, it is not just a subjective feeling.

No they don't, and your backing of a communist system is evidence of this fact,

Why would I want to stop interchange? I say I don't want anyone to steal from others, a very different thing.

Who said stealing? I was talking about the free exchange that would be established as a black market within your Stalinist system.

Crime

Not really, the day we know better about genetics and neurotransmitters, this will change. Complex matter and not the topic in the thread, but interesting.

So you are saying that you want to be more oppressive than Stalin? You want to control people's very thoughts. Why should we give your police state a chance again?

And those who can't exert critical thinking on their own environment, and consider it "natural".

This is the statement of a weak mind that is getting angry at peopl that disagree. So again why should I let people like you have power if you want to belittle anyone who dissents against Stalinism? Are you going to send me to the Gulags too? You know you have already declared that you would have them, Mr. Stalin.

No. You have not being reading. You would have to explain this. I stated that every individual is the government. I have stated that they can live doing whatever they want. I have established that society, as a whole, would decide if what some individual want's to accomplish can be considered productive activity or not. What else do you propose?

Capitalism. It works, but it has problems. Doesn't mean I should give up all those freedoms for your system which as been a PROVEN FAILURE. Stalinism didn't work.

What? ANY society will do this, ANY, but some will exert a more rational use of resources, that's all.

No, I have more freedom under the current system than your Stalinist police state. It is very obvious to anyone with education. I can still make art and expect payment, and not have to worry about Mr. Stalin spying on my wacking it at night out of fear that the people will want to actually have freedom.

The good news is that people will follow me before they follow you. So it is a non-argument.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

No, I have more freedom under the current system than your Stalinist police state.

Are you sure we are in the same thread? What do you find so intimidating here? Have you understood that there is no self elected government, no democracy no state? No one with more power than others? That you would be free to do what you really want instead of having to worry about bills? That you would born in a society which doesn't assign you a permanent debt because you have simply born?

Plus, get off the personal disqualifications bandwagon and stop your strawmans, they won't take you anywhere.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Are you sure we are in the same thread?

Of course, you just pretend that we aren't.

What do you find so intimidating here?

A Stalinist police state that will kill millions because we don't want to be slaves and work for your "system".

Have you understood that there is no self elected government,

Oh...I know that there is a dictatorship in your system believe me, complete with cameras in every house and the ability to put those who don't agree in prison. We are all aware of your plans for all of us.

no democracy no state?

Again we know. The people will be told what to do by the few in power, and if they don't like it they will be taken out back and shot. Yes we know.

No one with more power than others?

Except for those who decide who gets what, which will be you Mr. Stalin.

That you would be free to do what you really want instead of having to worry about bills?

But of course the moron works the nuclear power plant because he was number 145 in line and the really smart guy picks up (rule 10) because he was 146 in line.

That you would born in a society which doesn't assign you a permanent debt because you have simply born?

Of course it does, because you work for the benefit of the lazy. Again obvious to those of intelligence.

Plus, get off the personal disqualifications bandwagon and stop your strawmans, they won't take you anywhere.

There not strawmans but intelligent responses, and you can''t deal with it. They also take me everywhere and anyone viewing this knows you are losing. Admit it that you are pushing a STALINIST POLICE STATE! Dude you are so done. You are pushing Stalin's version of Communism and calling it Star Trek and expecting us to agree. Whatever.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

There not strawmans but intelligent responses, and you can''t deal with it. They also take me everywhere and anyone viewing this knows you are losing. Admit it that you are pushing a STALINIST POLICE STATE! Dude you are so done. You are pushing Stalin's version of Communism and calling it Star Trek and expecting us to agree. Whatever.

Really?

Sorry to disappoint you, this is not a personal fight, no one "wins" no one "loses". You believe you are intelligent that's fine, but keep your comments on the thread and stop the red herrings. So far you have commited (beside your strawmens) Appeal to emotion, Appeal to tradition, Appeal to motive, Ad hominems and Argumentum ad populum

 

[paximperium]

One simple question BDZ. What do you do with people who refuse to follow your utopia's rules?

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

One simple question BDZ. What do you do with people who refuse to follow your utopia's rules?

What would be to refuse to follow the rules?

I will suppose that a bunch of people tired of the world as it is right now would venture in create a self sufficient city which complied with what I am sketching here.

Then I will assume that only people committed with the ideas will want to live there.

Later, that if some of them want to return to the monetary based economy they are certainly free to do so.

Now, if ALL THE WORLD were living on such a system, it would happen exactly the same as it happens now.

This guy pretends that I have to "rule" "my" society as the ultimate upper duper emperor of some sort. No, I have not claimed that AT ALL. I would not do anything in such society but enjoy my life, my family, my friends, having a productive and meaningful life. For a few years I would have to serve as the government as any other citizen, but that's about it.

This society would be based on everything we know about human behavior, I'm pretty sure we, as humanity, can model something better that what we have now (more efficient as I have said countless times), it would not be based on my personal beliefs, or likings. Made to my own image if you like.

You both seem to forget that I'm merely playing here with ideas, thinking about imaginary worlds to see your opinions. There is the ZM and as it is obvious by now, I agree with some of their ideas while I doubt the feasibility of some others. Based on their ideas I wanted to explore mine. Are they more feasible? I doubt it, this is an exercise, nothing else. I would have to dedicate my life to study and to find people who would be interested in attempting such a goal, and I don't see that happening unless the world as we know it disintegrates.

 

[paximperium]

So what will happen if people who live "there" refuse to follow your utopian rules and refuse to leave since everything is all great and free?

PS: I couldn't care less why you're here. Your "discussion" has invariably been one sided and selfish, so excuse me if I find your patronizing, holier than thou attitude obnoxious and less than righteous.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Really?

Sorry to disappoint you, this is not a personal fight, no one "wins" no one "loses". You believe you are intelligent that's fine, but keep your comments on the thread and stop the red herrings. So far you have commited (beside your strawmens) Appeal to emotion, Appeal to tradition, Appeal to motive, Ad hominems and Argumentum ad populum

and wikipedia means you win? Oh...no it doesn't. So what about any of the completely valid points I brought up? I mean come on?!?!?!!?!??!!?!? You believe that somehow I am going to believe that you did research...even though you are clearly avoiding the question. Does Stalinism make you afraid?????