shaping society

Fellow ATSers, I apologize for not having the schedule -nor the patience to research and provide evidences for all of my opinions. Please realize they are just that, opinions based on my limited education. From these opinions I am presented with a question, which I share with you�.

Human progress in the arts, philosophy and science is curtailed by the enigma we call 'time'. Whatever its true nature, we seemingly cannot grasp it. It is because of 'time' that humans study history only to repeat it. Because he feels pain, man is constantly focused on avoiding and replacing pain. Throughout history we can observe multiple societies that have come and gone, all of which are geared towards minimal pain for those in control of that particular society. Some flourish, others struggle, but all societies end or develop into anew. Never-minding the specifics, Utilitarianism has peeked its ideas in and around some societies of mans, but ultimately laws are compromised and rules are bent until that specific society breaks or is reformed via revolution etc� To date, it seems that no one individual human (barring some very unique -even religious figures) is so grounded in their morals as to defy absolute power from corrupting them absolutely.

Now based on the above and supposing the following��..

-You've just been granted a small country with which to devise your own 'society'.
-You posses 'absolute' power - (regarding the country).
-You are determined to avoid being corrupted absolutely -or at all for that matter.
-You genuinely want to find the balance between 'realistically possible' and 'Utopia.'


���how do you set up your 'government', and what do you do to insure its longevity?

I have a constitution of sorts for my own hypothetical society and may share it later. However, I currently am prodding for your ideas.

I would gain the trust of the people by providing an ideology on how to live.
Then I would kill myself and become a marauder.
The people of the country would base their lives upon my ideology.
I would let the people of my country determine their own utopian society based on my teachings.
The government would be solely based on my ideology.
There would essentially be no seperation of 'Church' and 'State'.

Jesus Christ did it, why not me?

[edit on 12/15/2004 by Simulacra]

Interesting...

I will take the assumption that the small country is empty at this point

At all entrances would be a declaration of law/rules/guidlines what ever you wish to call them and no one could enter unless signed in agreement, by signing they would be signing on behalf of all future generations. If they didn't like it they don't enter, if there later generations don't like "we" as a society we will help them find somewhere and get to a place they wish to be.

No law/rules/guidlines will be changed without the majority concent.

One way to stop absolute power corrupting, would be not to take absolute power. Make it a peoples nation.

1. Freedom of faith - you may follow what ever faith you deem as your own, in the conduct of your faith you may not influence or interupt the life of any other, or recruit to your personal faith.

2. Freedom of speech - you may speak your mind as long as it is done in a appropriate manner and at an appropraite time. Protests are not included.

3. Loyalty to the society/country/area - guess I would kinda have to put this one in incase of events like iraq and that, their are people kicking of all over the place due to faith etc, I would want people who respect the fact they are not being dictated to on faith and belief and therefore would not disrupt the society due to things affecting their faith. Think that makes sense.

4. Anyone wishing to enter the society after formation - immigrants etc would be requried to perform national service, as a way of proofing loyalty to the society. Hopefully this would stop the effects the uk are having at the mo, can't believe they are getting free driving lessons, free houses which they keep selling and making loads of cash, when UK born citizens are homeless and going hungry.

5. All decisions on a scale that will effect the society on a whole, ie involvement in anything outside the society, will be decided by the society.

6. All decision affecting the life of the society, ie joining of unions, like the EU in England, will be decided by the society.

I think that would be a decent start. Would be difficult to maintian if it got to be any great size, but that woul be a problem for later.

If you want expansion on any point just ask, it's a bit hard to detail what you mean without waffling on.

fair enough. yes the country is empty.

personally, I would advertize citizenship to my country, with the constitution included in the application. Freedoms for the individual would be infinite as long as they do not affect anyone else adversely.

It would take some time, but as my country became more and more known, I would personally interview the first thousand applicants (yeah, im taking it slow).

the overall creed would be 'the advancment of man' and my citizens would be expected to live by it. any and all would be welcome granted they are willing to work.

immigrants from already existing societies would distribute their wealth where they please before entering the country. My society would function similar to a commune -everyone doing his/her part.

Upon gaining citizenship the individual would cease to worry about the monitary because the gap between rich and poor will not exist. Thats right, no poor people. Likewise, no rich people.

My citizens will be granted ONE cancelation of their citizenship if they discover they like capitalism or whatever else better. They cannot however return after leaving.

The number one priority in my country would be the comfortable, equal life and survival of all citizens. Via the selective application process, I will try to hone only individuals willing to overcome racism and other biases. Further, I would be looking for individuals who want to take humanity to the next level.

The second but very important priority would be education. At a healthy rate of course, my countries citizens would work co-operativley to further mandkinds voyage into the arts and sciences alike.

Initially already 'rich' immigrants would be few and my country would likely only attract those in meeker positions (and they would be welcome), but my screening process would filter out free-loaders. As harsh and biased as it seems, the objective of my country would be to achieve the most realistic utopian society possible for ALL citizens. People could not go there with dreams of getting rich quick etc.... and scarce as immigrants might be, with passing time my citizens and outside observers would understand what the whole fanatical idea is about - and hopefully that would be a recruiting factor.

All government decisions after that would be determined by a very real democracy - each vote counting. No representatives, just policies. I expect my citizens would genuinely care because they would have realized that they themselves are shaping the conditions underwhich they live.

over the course of many years i would hope for my countries ideologies reiterated constantly for the children.

Its pretty vague also -but the idea is there. No its not outright communism but a fantastic step for those that are ready.

...and there would be an optional but new and improved DARE program at school.

instead of filling the childrens heads with biases, the program would provide any and every substance for first hand learning. as the student learns what drugs are and what they can do the student may opt to "test drive" them. limited doses of each substance would be available depending on the particular drug. so when a child reaches a certain age and has completed the required studies, they can recieve a free dose of '___' or whatever else in a very controlled environment.

i would hope the idea above and others like it would remove the "big brother" syndrome that has many people paranoid of "the man". in my country people would have no fear of the government - but rather turn to it for resources. majority rule would govern far reaching policies.

Pollution (cars, factories, farms), corruption (companies, politics, rich individuals, organisations), wars, unexplained sicness/deaths, social unrest, thiefs, madmen and terrorists.

Except sicnesses, madmen and maybe terrorists, these problems is caused by money:

pollution
-factories does it to save money for their (often) already rich owners.
-cars (boats, plains) because oil companies benefit from it and car companies are afraid to change their production to make electric cars; people might not buy electric cars.

corruptions, wars, theft
-In africa they fight over gold and diamond because of its value
-Bush fight for oil for its value to his friends (wich is corruption too)
-theft everywhere. It is done by many otherwise normal people and it cause anger and social unrest among the rest of us.
-police (and fbi) is misused by politicans and/or rich for their own causes. Fbi have prevented many americans from engaging in political protest marches. I would have to view this as corruption as police and fbi should not be engaged in politics.

All this happens because of money. So what would happen if we change form a money-depending society to money-free one?
Factories would have no reason not to build pollution filters for air and water.
Car companies could safely make only electric cars. And there don't have to be as many car factories as there is now.
Bandit armies in afrika would no longer have a reason to fight each others/goverments as it would be pointless (they fight over gold and diamond resourches). The bandit groups would hopefully disband.
What use is oil for electric cars? One still need some for airplains and rockets, but the pollution would be nothing compared to now.
No reason to steal when one don't have to. Or if some fool steal anyway one can easily replace the missing item.

Money is only a thing. It is we who make it, not the other way around. When a thing make so much trouble for us as money do, I'd say; let us throw it away!
As it is said in a famous book/film;
'is it not a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt for so small a thing?' (if you guess it is from 'The Lords of the Ring' you guess right).

A society need people to work, not money. Even today society is made up by people (we are affected by friends, colleagues, local politicans or organizations deciding things that influece us) for people. Money is only playing an indirectly role in this; they might decide to demolish your house for the new road as it's cheaper for them than making it go around your house. So my hope is that we don't need to change the world upside down in order to change from money-depending to money-free society.
My thought is that money-free society will be just like now; only remove banks, insurance companies and stock markeds and you're there. I could be wrong and we might have to change or organize society differently and that is why I don't suggest we switch to money-free permanently just yet. I suggest we could try it out for 10 years, maybe. I like round numbers

So my suggestion is;
we try money-free society for a 10 years periode. In those years we can try different aproach of how to organize it and find one wich most are happy with. A countrys population must decide if they want to be a part of this money-free expriment.
As it is a test periode all money, prices, taxes and all is frozen at the time of the change.
When those 10 years nears its conclusion we'll see what we've learned and tell the population.
Then the population can choose to
1. try it for new 10 years,
2. go back to money-society,
3. continue money-free society forever after (or how long it is needed).