What is the defintions of perfect social system/culture system following the golden rule.

Mods please move to other forum if this is not the correct forum since this thread will probably cover both social systems and culture including religion/spirituality.

All below is from my point of view.

The golden rule:

do as you would be done by

Treating others as you would like to be treated yourself.

1 The first idea I have is that the real currency that exists regardless of social system/culture is time. Time is used to take up and refine what is physically needed and used to learn skills needed for society.

2 So being economic and not waste your or other peoples time would be part of the perfect social system. Am I correct in specifying Time as the real currency all societies are dependent on?

3 Upsetting the balance of nature is time wasting since someone have to waste time restoring the order. It is not economic but wasteful.

4 Taking out more Time from society (regardless of size of society) than you put in is breaking the golden rule (stealing). Wasting someone else time is also stealing time from another. This means to be economic with all peoples time you need to make sure society do not have unnecessary administration and that the peoples time is used to create the resources needed for the society.

5 Having many inefficient rules used as soft violence against the individual forcing it to comply is time wasting. This exist both in religions and social systems. Would not a perfect society also make sure the need of soft violence/administration is kept at a minimum only making sure the golden rule is followed?

6 The power pyramid is a structure where power is distributed unequally and resources and power flow to the top. This is a parasitical structure. To follow the golden rule you cannot allow yourself to waste more time of a social system than you contribute. That mean both you cannot be a person on government welfare not contributing or on the top taking out more time than you invest in the social system. Both are parasitical and not mutualistic.

7 Capitalism often speak about free market but never implement it. For free market to be able to exists all knowledge have to be equalized. When all knowledge is equalized the most time efficient way of doing a task is used since it is most time efficient. Capitalism having a free market that works and supply and demand is meet in the end becomes close to communism (communism where time in=time out) since time spent will equal time gained in resources. No parasitism allowed on the individual.

There might be many equal social system/culture system that can bring the same well being and morally follow the golden rule. But there is right and wrong answers that can be fleshed out.

This is the thoughts I have so far. Please give me feedback if I make logical mistakes and help me flush out the ideas of what ideas are needed at the core to build the perfect system that do not waste resources and at the same time follow the golden rule.

Below is Sam Harris on Moral Objectivism where cultural systems are being scrutinized for what kind of well being it creates.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

Well as you know you can never control totally the Economic system, it has been tried and failed by many political system's as it is driven by supply and demand but you can regulate it and milk it via taxation for the good of the whole.

You can try to control the political system but once again it is based on people's attitudes and belief's, if the system is seen as oppressive it will fall no matter what even if it hang's in there for a long time so the best action is to ensure your population are educated NOT BRAINWASHED with baseless idiological propeganda but Educated with fact's and evidence including a socialogical element focusing on the testimonial's and experiences of those living under various system's and those that remember what was before and what came after any major system and economic change's by studying those testimonial's from various nation's.

But for me the perfect system would have to comprise the following.

Freedom (of course one man's freedom is another mand's bondage so freedom within limits set by law)

A political system based around the PEOPLE not the companies or the back hander underhanded death dealing corrupt minority (Think my opinion of that bunch of lout's is obvious there) such as was originally envisaged in a PURE democracy, one that is not biased by wealth and in which exploitation is not acceptable (born equal under God) so definitely idiological on that point but one of the best idiology's.

A safety net for both company's that provide employment and People for whom there is no employment or are too ill to work, disabled etc.
Tax based subsidies provide the safety net for the company's in which during lean economic time's they may approach the government and ask for financial support, these subsidies are paid from a central kitty held by the chancelry of the nation and made up of revenues raised through a fair taxation system were the excess wealth of the elite, large profitable organizations (not just domestic but those importing good's via import duty's etc), the richer you are the more you pay on the idiology that since you built your wealth (in general) from the economy of the nation you can be as rich as you like but must also bare your fair share of the state's tax burden.

Now that is both western Democracy and Western Socialism.

Today we have a new cancer of the political system (it was always there but never so prevalent for nearly a century and not is like time has turned backwards to the bad years of the 19th century) which has hijacked and mutated the democratic system's of the west and that system is FREE TRADE CAPITALISM, it promotes excess profiteering for the extreme elite few while it has at the same time an almost allergic reaction to paying it's way and instead it abuses it's wealth control to manipulate nation's and political system's as well as buy and even place into power it's own puppet's.

And the Pathogen that carries this disease of our political system's and has so diseased our nations' is non other than the runaway financial sector ran by the Banksters and there corporate Mafia families.

I would imagine that humans are incapable of running a perfect society save for the brightest non-psychopaths of our species and even then there would be dirt done between them.

The only way in my opinion would be to have an AI that can essentially play nanny to human beings since we are incapable of being truly fair to each other in many instances.

If we could build that sort of AI the elites would no doubt want a fresh slate so as to not have to worry about being attacked and challenged during that time.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Regulating and milking the economy are attempts at controlling it.

Do unto others?

For me it would be leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. In other words, GO AWAY!

originally posted by: stabstab
I would imagine that humans are incapable of running a perfect society save for the brightest non-psychopaths of our species and even then there would be dirt done between them.

The only way in my opinion would be to have an AI that can essentially play nanny to human beings since we are incapable of being truly fair to each other in many instances.

If we could build that sort of AI the elites would no doubt want a fresh slate so as to not have to worry about being attacked and challenged during that time.

AI could be useful. .

In my way of thinking a ideal society also have a problem of being allowed to exists since some people who want control over the whole world cannot allow something that is competing and not controlled by them.

I do think humanity might one day experiment more with what works and do society projects where you put different individual in their own system where the society rules are predefined and see what changes evolve naturally.

a reply to: ketsuko

You can be a hermit and self sufficient and follow the golden rule.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

Well I AM an introvert.

But honestly, I just feel like too many people way too concerned with remaking everyone else's lifestyle to fit their own image of what they think society should be and that is most definitely not do unto others.

That's why I say, "Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone." I neither need to know nor really care what your personal lifestyle is and you shouldn't expect me to accommodate it by adapting my lifestyle to reflect what you think the perfect lifestyle ought to be. If I want to be a gay transgender porpoise who lives with his two cross-species partners in open relationships, who are you to tell me otherwise so long as I am not imposing on you and who am I to try to remake all of society even though I ought to know darn good and well that I might very well be the ONLY gay transgender porpoise with a cross-species harem and open relationships in the world? Society wasn't exactly created with me and mine in mind and it I shouldn't expect it to bend over and recreate itself from ground up just to make me perfectly happy.

If I insisted on it, am I living and letting live? Am I doing unto others?

a reply to: ketsuko

Your statement is following the golden rule and compliance to a mold would from my point of view is part of societal soft violence. And that should not be needed since the golden rule is followed.

5 Having many inefficient rules used as soft violence against the individual forcing it to comply is time wasting. This exist both in religions and social systems. Would not a perfect society also make sure the need of soft violence/administration is kept at a minimum only making sure the golden rule is followed?

a reply to: LittleByLittle

And see? This is where the Golden Rule begins to fail because people only think of it in terms of their own needs and desires and why I fall back to GO AWAY.

If there is no one around me, I don't have to worry that people will be offended by my "soft violence" or that they will attempt to shame me by accusing me of it all while they in turn carry out very real "soft violence" of their own.

Do unto others is as much about thinking of what others want as it is thinking of ourselves.

So, if this is where we are ... GO AWAY.

How does the golden rule apply to masochists?

The golden rule is the non-aggression principle. That is the basic axiom of libertarianism. most libert arguments flow from that principle.

time based currency? no.
There are a lot of better systems. Basket/commodity currencies. They measure not only the final commodity price but each input affects the commodity price, the capital needed, etc.

a reply to: LABTECH767

I think with direct democracy instead of voting for politicians you could at least equalize the political power and lessen the corruption so I agree with you there.

And the Pathogen that carries this disease of our political system's and has so diseased our nations' is non other than the runaway financial sector ran by the Banksters and there corporate Mafia families.

The banks will still have power over the economy with fractal lending and bend the people in different ways shaping the economic system thru pyramid schemes. To get a less corrupted market from my point of view you need to dis allow Ursury fully since it is a drain on the economic system.

originally posted by: Phage
How does the golden rule apply to masochists?

. Thank you for forcing me to look outside the box for a while.

I would say if a person enjoy getting beaten he/she should find someone who are into giving him/her joy.

Beating someone who is not masochists would bring that person suffering. And following the golden rule you would expect others to bring you suffering if you brought them suffering. Just because someone is a masochist it does not mean it cannot suffer in other ways.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

The problem with direct democracy is this: Wouldn't it inject the very "soft aggression" you are worried about? If you have direct democracy, you also have voting blocks develop. We have them developing now. Your vote, my vote, they are completely irrelevant. All that matters is what our demography says we are and how those demographics will likely vote. Are you a soccer mom? What about a black male? Maybe you are gay?

Your vote is only as important as the block you are perceived to vote with and this will only get worse as you inject more direct democracy.

Not only that but look at the vicious hatred directed at those who buck the trends of a demographic openly: blacks who do not toe the line as authentically black in the mode of an Al Sharpton, gays who aren't all down for the LBGT agenda, women who aren't feminists in the second and third wave sense, etc. By injecting in direct democracy to an even greater degree, you actually encourage even more of this because any one block then is only as powerful as the number of individuals it can accrue to vote for its interests to create "soft aggression" on the rest of society. Any individuals who break away openly to evangelize a new way of thinking MUST be openly shunned and derided because they threaten the group and its cohesiveness, thus its power.

And, of course, the smallest minorities never can expect to have any power in a direct democracy at all. And you never, ever want to be an individual in that system.