The day after economics
Economics is out. We cannot keep progress or wellness away from people who cannot afford it. We cannot morally play with lives of millions or billions of people to fill the pockets of a few deadly soles. The era that this was tolerated is ending fast. We are entering a new era of wealth, the one that is not based on economics but on something else. I have called it Sustainocracy, just to give it a reference to talk about. What is the difference?
Modern economics is “the financial science to deal with shortages”. It has to do with money that is spend to purchase material goods, valued against the degree of desire and scarcity of the object. Entire nationwide economies are based on this system that places the availability of resources in the hands of people who make it available only to the highest bidder. Maintaining shortages raises the economic perspectives and it has become a game to deal with this in a globalized world for the benefit of those who can control certain material elements. We see this in commodities, housing, energy, food, loans, etc. This automatically means that people need money to gain access to wealth. Money is only made available to those who have work and work is only valued with money if it fits in the robotics of the system. In an other blog I already asked why the care taking activities of a housewife with small children was not valued in a money system while the labeling of packages in a logistics process is. Is the one more valuable then the other? Of course not, but the system determines what gets paid and what not. This regulated choice creates a society and the morality in it. The woman with small children gets no money and has not right to access wealth and the factory worker does. It is a choice and this choice needs to be turned around because it does not suit the general purpose anymore of sustainable progress. On the contrary. Extremely talented people necessary in all kinds of human needs are forced to work in the system on positions that contribute to problems simply because the system is organized that way.
And if you have no job you are obliged to get a debt in order to maintain a degree of wealth or wishes to survive, no matter what talent one has. Some do not even have access to the debt system and perish, supported by this inhumane system.
Dead end
The system of economies that are based on speculation around shortages are making our lives unsustainable, expensive and unstable. These systems collapse and receive a growing opposition of the general public that is willing to rise against those who block abundance to the masses. We simply have to recognize that economics has reached a dead end. Economies of growth only mean that they expand further the disaster just to finance the unbalanced debts of the past. The debts of countries rise simply because they produce only costs and no value anymore, despite the massive amount of talented people they contain.
There is a desperate need to deblock these human talents and make them work together on sustainable progress. That is what I call “the day after economics”. What is this other option?
Sustainocracy
We need to recognize that our resources on Earth are finite, but our talents grow in abundance. The more finite the material resources (food, water, oil, etc) are the more valuable they would become for all people if we want to sustain a minimum of living standard or even survival. We cannot sustain a financial system that speculates on the availability of resources in scarcity. It becomes a source of blackmail, not just over the pockets of the people but also playing with their lives. Capitalist economics are likely to become the genocide of the 21st century where certain people are willingly, for their own benefit, to keep life supporting and saving resources away from the public by pure financial speculation, causing death, war and disaster. We have already seen the consequences of this in commodities like grain, wheat, water, oil, etc. and the effects on global stability.
Sustainocracy therefor represents the “science of talented abundance through cocreation”. This meand that human scientific knowledge, productivity and progress is owned by the species and not members thereof. Human talent is value of humankind and should not be dealt with in confinement of scarcity but in abundance for progress. This means that every invention, every insight should reach all members of the species not just a selected few.
In Sustainocracy only one continuous goal is important for all members of a community: sustainable human progress, according to the definition described in a previous blog:
“continuously working together on a healthy, vital, safe and dynamic human society within the ever changing context of our natural local environment”.
This statement allows no political debate or speculation since the goal is for all members of the global community. Everyone can take responsibility for this sustainable progress by contributing with one’s own competences, talents and energy. All elements of such society are measurable, feeding in open reflection the interaction of people in the community. Application of knowledge and personal energy is key to address the changes provoked by any change that is being made. It gives a common purpose to a society.
Sustainocracy is Talent + Energy + Purpose = Sustainable Progress
The community based on sustainocracy does not necessarily need money to produce progress. Resources are used but only become valuable when introduced in the result driven processes. The results are delivered to the benefit of everyone in the community. There is no need to speculate with scarcity of resources since the community will become creative, using the local means that it has available to it. Communities become cohesive in human interaction on a local for local basis trying to avoid dependence on other communities. If such relationships are needed to exchange material resources then reciprocity is organised in exchange of talents. Payment in times of needs are not done in money but in talent which will help communities to deploy automatically the human and material resources needed to assure community progress and intercommunity relationship, even if particular communities have scarcity of resources but abundance in talents.
Money could be used to value the individual contributions to progress making the variables of “talent” (competences, knowledge and creativity) and “energy” (motivation, teamwork, involvement, etc) instruments of value that can receive recognition on individual level and maybe some sort of adhered status. The level of value can be determined by the community in a democratic process.
In all cases the local for local communities would become small local pearls of self sufficient centers in which sustainable progress would be carried by all members of the community. A woman who gives birth would as important as a man who helps to build a house. Community choices would be prioritized according the level of sustainable progress everyone desires, lead by the circumstances, not greed.
Sustainocracy represents peace and progress, a modern new way to step up the human evolution using our accumulated abilities and levels of awareness for the benefit of all, starting with the future perspectives of our children and the way we educate them today on how to take responsibility using talent and energy.
Sustainocracy has become the system to value talent and reciprocity in Sustainocratic processes)
-Belief- is essential for progress
Why don’t politicians support the transformation of society? Why do banks not change their bonus culture? Why do people go to church when they encounter a crisis?
When I try to get overall scientific, business, political or financial support for the transformation of human society into a state of sustainable progress (referred to as the Global Shift) I do not get it. Why? All the crises in the Western world seem to cry out for change yet people only focus to get more of the same. New economies develop based on those that are now in crisis hence knowingly develop their own problems. Why? Why are all these human structures so reluctant to change and destined to repeat their mistakes over and over again? Because all these institutions are not based on “belief”.
It is necessary to be a believer to open up for new realities and hence accept and even conduct progress through the acceptance of change. To understand what I am saying we need to first define “belief”. According Wikipedia belief is:
“Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.”
This definition refers to a “psychological state”, not a proven truth, hence it is subjective to the individual. What do you believe that is true? Proven truth or suspected truth? We tend to accept only what is touchable or commonly accepted as truth. A believer tends to visualize a truth that does not exist yet in the physical or proven world. All our current human surroundings are organized in complex human structures, institutions. These are known, hence true. Anything else, that is not yet included in the human organizational structures is hence unknown and does therefor not exist.
Or it exists when you believe it exists, or could get to exist. True believers open up to things that do not exist yet in our regular life. Everyone who has a hired position inside an institution can only sustain what is known and stops believing. If one would believe he/she would probably question what is served. The only option such people, even so called world leaders, have is to keep in place what has been organized, because it is known. Even when it is in crisis. If they are visionary and see the problems they cause by keeping up the unsustainable they would have to step out of the system to change it. But then they loose their position of power.
From an operational point of view this is logical simply because every human institution is a structure with a particular purpose. It would only change if the purpose of the structure would change or when it goes broke. If those institutions are as significance as a political organization, a financial system of power or a business monopoly, everything will be done to avoid its collapse, not by changing it but by maintaining it, no matter what.
One could expect that common sense would prevail when we see the suffering of so many people caused by this lack of flexibility. But common sense is only based on the same knowledge that is commonly accepted as truth, hence within the same dynamics as where the problems occur.
Science does not help
If we look at the definition of belief why would science then not be a believer? Doesn’t science believe in its own studies to obtain progress in knowledge? Of course it does and that is also the essence of the difference. Science is a non-believer because it looks for proof through commonly, already accepted knowledge. Science does not want to “belief”, it wants to “know”. This interesting paradox of science is that it is continuously searching for knowledge so needs to accept belief to understand that it still has a long way to go to accumulate all knowledge. We still do not know everything. This automatically means that science needs to accept that new knowledge can dispute any old knowledge. We can therefore know for sure that all knowledge is only believed to be true until is proven not to. A crisis is not enough to prove something wrong. Only something different would prove something else to be more truthful. The problem we face is that science does not easily accept this scientific belief. It claims the truth by accepting proof and then holds on to it. If you do so you block yourself from the possibility that what was proven true can also be proven untrue in time. So science accepts the state of belief to motivate the search for knowledge through guided research but does not accept belief to question knowledge that has been accepted as truthful. Science therefor tends to try to prove the known and tends to avoid the unknown. In the process of providing proof to the known we stumble across new knowledge to be proven. Science seems only to advance by further analyzing the known. It is fixed to a particular track. This means that in essence science is not a believer, just a proof provider to perceived knowledge.
So for change we cannot rely on science and hence find that universities only teach science but not belief or the potential of change. They can’t, even if intellectuals inside the university suspect new tracks of knowledge they find difficulties in their institutions to support deviation to the unknown. Universities depend on the resources provided by the structures that do not belief and hence serve the known, not the unknown. Only a very small part of research funds are invested in finding new realities and these even need to be covered up by arguments that the common structures can understand and support.
The world of statistics
Business and politics do not even worry about belief. They reason from the influence of the masses of people either by exerting power on them or by offering external securities in the shape of goods. There is only one certainty and that is the one of proven support in the shape of votes. In essence any purchase is a commercial vote too. From that point of view all of the world of politics and business is measurable and conducted through statistics rather than belief. The statistics are translated into a standardized system of values, often called money. Financial systems manage money and hence manage statistics, nothing else. By speculating with shortages the statistics move and become measurable instruments of economies that live eventually a virtual life on its own without considering the human being or our natural universe itself. In fact, the way statistics move through artificial intervention of politicians and business people have created a simulated reality that interacts with our true reality and is even perceived to be real through the importance we give to money and material valuable. But it is all fake, even the poverty we see around us is fake simply because the statistics of our robotized systems do not allow people to create a new, self sufficient reality.
Belief means acceptance of change
None of the above provides any true progress because it is all based on commonly accepted truth and knowledge, but no belief in alternatives, simply because they do exist yet. That is why the quantum leap of human evolution will surprise us as it comes. When it happens it will extensively be studied by scientists and even open up new channels of knowledge development, just like financial analysts now know why the credit crisis occurred but back then never saw it coming.
Becoming a believer
People in a state of crisis experience the lack of support of the commonly accepted truth of the obsolete systems but cannot embrace change yet because it does not exist yet. They experience a crisis because securities are falling apart and are not replaced by new ones. They are challenged to think for themselves and accept change by stepping out of the structures in crisis and start deciding for themselves. Since this is extremely difficult for individuals who have taken the old truth for granted they tend to go to church and ask for a miracle. In reality people ask the universe to react by creating a renewal of the universal truth. They ask God but in fact they ask themselves to accept change. We are so used to external securities that we have learned to distrust our selves. People in search for spirituality are opening up for renewal of their faith in humankind and especially in themselves. They experience suddenly the warmth of friendship and social support, self leadership and significance. They become believers, not just in God, but especially in themselves.
I can describe the Global Shift, the transformation of humankind, and find opposition from all common human structures. If it does not exist it is not true. People fight collapse of existing systems simply because they do not have “belief” in letting go. The old systems are known, scientifically analysed and hence true. The new systems are in the world of beliefs without and proof of truth and hence without any guarantee for security. That is also why true progress is made by people who are only considered a genius when reality changes, proving them right in hindsight. Meanwhile they are always seen as a risk to the established truth and crazy, weird or clowns, despised by the systems and laughed at by the masses.
But only believers are truly progressive. They are prepared to see the invisible, to accept that truth is relative to our common acceptance but not at all reliable. Believers accept that other realities exist and set out to find them. They accept to be despised by the masses and ridiculed by the knowledgeable realizing that all those who react that way are locked up in their own prison of disbelief and a reality conditioned by their own limitations.
Even religious believers tend to create dogma’s around the unknown to enable to speak in name of God by creating limitations proper to the human world of “knowledge” rather than abundance of the miracle of the Universe and our adventure as a true believer in progress. If we belief in God we should accept the unknown as our evolutionary challenge to progress and science as simplified form of registering perceived truths until they prove wrong or reconfirmed. We are getting to a point that sustainable progress does not accept anymore virtual statistics as a reality nor scientific proof as absolute truth of knowledge.
Soon we enter an era (the quantum leap) where we accept the unknown as the only constant for our progress. The amount of crisis of the world of knowledge and statistics will be so big that the world will turn around believers who show a new reality, the reality of a humankind based on spirituality, on the belief in our evolutionary quest and eternity. Science will not be proof anymore of knowledge but a reflection of our progress by accepting the stepping up of our adventure by challenging knowledge against the unknown.
When we do that business, finance and politics will cease to exist because they will not be necessary anymore as fragmented human institutions. They will transform into key area of responsibility and related competences that interact to provide sustainable progress by addressing the unknown on a continuous basis. When that has happened we will refer to this a the quantum leap and even give it a scientific understanding leaving it in out past as a significant moment in time when humankind opened up to its own universal destiny.
Sustainable progress is hence assured by believers.
Youth unemployment – no money = no value?
Recent articles refer to the graph of youth unemployment in Europe as “scary”. Indeed it is alarming to see that in Southern Europe around 50% of all youngsters between 16 and 24 have no perspective of making a living through any form of employment.
The key problem we face is that there is absolutely no relationship anymore between the basic human needs, values, employment and money. Industrial centralization of manufacturing and productivity to areas of high concentration of cheap labor or facilitating policies for volume related, highly automated activities have taken all basic responsibilities away from the general public. If we go back a few hundred years the main concern of every individual was to produce enough for self sufficiency. Most of our time was dedicated to food production. If we sum up today our basic needs: food, clothing, energy, water, shelter, mobility how much of our time is devoted to achieving it? Nothing! All these activities have been taken away from our daily concern from a labor perspective. We only have access to our basic needs through money, not through our energy or talent.
So where should the energy and talent of our populations go to if the basic needs have been taken away from us in centralized money processes of which we see nothing ourselves? There is nothing except the “care for each other”. Care is something that cannot be centralized as it affects us all directly. You cannot go to a shop and buy a pound of health care produced in China or India. The care taking needs to be done on a personal level. Even though care is needed it is not directly seen as a primary value. In many countries it is financially organized through means that come from primary production processes, i.e. a secondary economy that depends on the primary economy of productivity (the making industry), speculation (housing) and consumption. So if the primary economy fails no care can be financed either and unemployment rises.
Unemployment rises due to disconnected values
But does that mean that people do not have any basic needs anymore nor the need for care? No, of course not. It simply means that we have learned to connect the wrong values to the money system. Europe opened up the borders to liberate the distribution of goods as a primary foundation of our economic progression. But these goods hardly contain European labor which means that there is no reciprocity between what we consume and what we personally contribute to our wealth. If there is no direct relation between our consumption and our labor where do the means come from to obtain them? Either by creating a primary economy of care that covers the expenses of the economy of goods and if this does not exist we create a debt for ourselves. From this point of view our debt evolution makes China grow in wealth because that is where the productivity takes place.
Our debt evolution has been camouflaged by keeping up speculation in the housing market and a booming business in real estate but this only covered a part of the economy while producing an economic bubble through speculative forces of banks and politics.
The solution is to be found in transforming our economies back into a direct connection between our individual needs and our productivity with our talents and available energy. This can start by accepting care, human health, vitality and education, not goods, as main value of society expressed in money. All the unemployed youngsters can find things to do in helping their own community into health, social cohesion and support receiving means back for it to sustain themselves. The second step is to become self-sufficient again in producing the basic needs, using modern technologies to provide abundance without centralization of productivity around the world. Food, water management and energy production become than again issues that keep us individually busy and disconnected from the large global dependencies. All people become then again aware of their own productivity related to the wealth we perceive and produce ourselves.
This transformation of the local economies is easily done if we allow ourselves to change our perspective of wealth from the “having” to the “being”. The opposition of course comes from the centralized power positions around goods and financial controls. To break through these impositions local governments have to step out of the economic grip of these systems and introduce new systems of human values that motivate their populations to invest their talents and energy in each other. This will cause a lot of old systems to go broke and stress will be high when the entire world based on old industrial process is forced to reallocate the resources and their own value systems. In between monetary systems will become obsolete and go broke. Large amounts of debt will be cancelled along the way by mere obsolescence of their existence. Since most of these debts are only related to a few in the old hierarchies of power they can be blamed of speculation over the back of humanity and punished by new laws that the new humankind will develop through this new paradigm.
When we look again at the graphics of youth unemployment in Europe time has come to make the transition. Local leaders would be wise to take the first step to show their commitment to their own people instead of luring still with the old hierarchies that are obsolete and already in the historic area of payback demands of humankind asking them to personally take responsibility for their leadership now and over the last few decades. Politicians and business executives would show signs of wisdom if they now choose side of humankind instead of money. That is probably why articles refer to the graphs as “scary” even though they indicate also the build up of frustration that will explode to make way of renewal. Those who let that happen knowing that peaceful alternatives are at hand already as described above, are also to be blamed when judgement day arrives. When we look back at ourselves today in ten years time, what will we see?
Sustainocracy, the new democracy 