Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 16 of total 16 in this topic |
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Nov 7, 2008 - 03:19am PT
|
I just finished watching the free two hour downloadable movie "Zeitgeist Addendum"
While I wont stand up and say I agree with the whole movie, it contains many fascinating allegations and facts and a completely different vision of a future society.
I think it's critical to wrap our mind around different future visions and to question the motivations and mechanics our our present ways. We are creatures of conditioning and tend to blindly accept the status Quo and our habitual assumptions.
Throughout history, society has changed dramatically and will continue to do so. Our type of democracy, without overt slavery and with equal rights for women, would have been wildly crazy sounding to people in the feudal middle ages or biblical times.
even in climbing, it has been our lack of vision that limited our accomplishments. 35 years ago, few could have remotely dreamed that multiple El Cap routes would go free or that Half Dome NW face could be free soloed.
So instead of just debunking this particular vision, imagine which parts of it we might evolve towards and which parts are flawed. And regarding our present society as well, how much competition versus cooperation is a good balance? Where is our system unsustainable and when will those parts fail?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912
open your mind and tell me what other possibilities are out there beyond the way we are now?
Peace
Karl
|
|
Coldfinger
Mountain climber
Bethany, CT
|
|
lets think about this 30 to 1 leveraging the unregulated hedge funds did in a more down to earth example. your in a back alley dice game and say - three thousand says i make my point - you roll them bones, lose and sheepishly admit you only have a hundred bucks. for you there will be serious consequences. the hedge fund managers walk away, often with a golden parachute.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2008 - 06:11pm PT
|
I checked out their website afterwards. Can't agree with all their solutions and perspectives but I think it's worth noting their awareness of the challenges we face.
Bumping because I posted this over the weekend and naturally few people saw it.
Peace
karl
|
|
Paul Martzen
Trad climber
Fresno
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2008 - 07:44pm PT
|
Kind of similar to a Jehovah's Witness sales pitch, with some weird psychedelics thrown in. Lots of groups use the same technique. They point out some basic contradictions in our society that we should really think about, but we don't because we are so used to them. And then once you sort of agree with them they say, "and it is all because of this one thing!" Original sin or the monetary policy, or satan, or greed, whatever. Join us and all will be nirvana.
I don't know why the movie makers chose to add all the mysterious gobbledy gook of static and eyeballs and people standing around. Maybe trying to tap into a religious feeling or something. The information about the banks and monetary policy was interesting to me and might even have some practical implications, but I wish it had talked about alternative money systems, instead of continually droning, "Money from nothing".
The stuff about different energy sources was also interesting, so for awhile it seemed like the movie was an attempt at a documentary. When it kept returning to the Venus Project it gradually seemed like a sales pitch of sorts, join us, support our vision. "Project" makes it sound like a big deal, but I wonder if it is much more than the couple and their few supporters. I noted that their campus is up for sale.
It is hard to take them too seriously when they seem to claim that human suffering is due to a monetary system that has only been around for a few hundred years, or if you want to be more generous, for a few thousand years in various forms. They seem to argue that material equality will make us all happy and free to be free thinkers like them.
However, while I don't care for the mental leap they make from their evidence to their conclusions and sales pitch, I think the evidence is worth thinking about.
With money, I am not so much concerned that it is made out of nothing, since I don't know what else you would make it out of. But it seems like the people who are brazen enough to make the money then have psychological control over what every body else does. We ask permission of our superiors to do things. If they are willing to pay us, then we do something and if they are not willing to pay us, then we sit around on our hands wondering what to do with ourselves.
On the other hand it seems clear to me that people have strong pecking orders. We look up to our betters and do what they tell us, while our inferiors look up to us and do what we tell them, to some extent anyways. So money may just formalize that process.
The fact that we have poverty alongside such tremendous material wealth is a big contradiction/problem in my mind. The more we mechanize our industries, the less workers we need and the more free time workers should have, but if the value of a worker is only based on his production then increased mechanization means the worker becomes useless and valueless. In a communist society, theoretically the benefits of mechanization would be spread among everybody and we could all go climbing and think deep thoughts, or be artists. In our society the benefits go primarily to a few owners and leaders while the mass of people become a hindrance. In our competitive society somebody has to lose and once you start loosing it becomes easier and easier to continue loosing. So we have a lot of ineffectual losers at the bottom of the social pyramid who are a drain on society. Nazis and Spartans and such just killed them. Companies can fire them, while churches or social groups can ostracize them. Our society won't kill them directly but we don't want anything to do with them either.
I think it is worthwhile to try to understand the weirdities of our society, but I am skeptical of anybody who offers simple solutions.
I liked what Mighty Hiker wrote in the remembrance day thread.
"Perhaps war is part of the human condition, from which we can know but little respite." We don't really know for sure but some people do continue trying to find ways to resolve problems without destroying each other.
|
|
Paul Martzen
Trad climber
Fresno
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2008 - 07:52pm PT
|
Here is an example of an attempt to turn a problematic competitive system into a more cooperative system in the fishing industry.
Commercial fishing frenzy criticized
Report calls practice wasteful, hazardous
San Diego Union Tribune – 11/13/08
By Mike Lee
It's known as the “race for fish” – the free-for-all at the start of each commercial season in which those who catch the most fish the fastest get the biggest payday.
The strategy often leads to huge loads of wasted seafood, unsafe fishing conditions and the depletion of ocean ecosystems worldwide, according to a report to be released today by a bipartisan group of politicians, scientists and policymakers, including California's secretary of resources.
The group is pushing President-elect Barack Obama and Congress to reform ocean fish management by switching from derby-style competitions to “catch shares,” which allot a percentage of the overall harvest to specific fishermen, allowing them to catch their quotas whenever they choose.
Today's report follows a landmark decision in San Diego last week to establish the most sweeping catch-share program in the country. It covers dozens of species of West Coast groundfish, including types of cod and sole, that are caught by commercial boats.
“We are right at the beginning of changing the way that we fish and acknowledging that the oceans are not limitless,” said George Sugihara, a professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego. “This is going to bring about a revolution in how fisheries evolve into organized, transparent markets instead of a race for fish.”
Catch shares are contentious partly because of the difficulty of setting fair quotas. But advocates say they make the harvest more profitable and sustainable while providing consumers with more fresh fish. The concept is emerging in the United States at a pivotal point for oceans, which are being hammered by overfishing, climate change and other factors.
“Catch shares will protect ocean productivity and diversity . . . for generations to come,” today's report states, adding that federal policy changes could quickly and inexpensively revive fisheries.
Under the new rules adopted Friday, about 175 commercial trawlers in California, Oregon and Washington will be allotted shares of the overall number of groundfish that can be caught. After the program takes effect in 2011, fishermen will be able to sell their stakes in the harvest much the way people do with company stocks.
Shares are expected to increase in value if the fish population expands, providing an incentive for fishermen to support the long-term health of the resource.
With fewer competitive pressures under a catch-sharing approach, fishermen could switch from trawl nets to more selective gear that causes less ecological damage and allows them to better target high-value types of fish, said Shems Jud, an analyst for the Environmental Defense Fund in Portland.
Fishing more carefully also should reduce “bycatch” – the unintended harvest typically discarded at sea. Studies say traditional derby-style fishing can result in 20 percent or more of catches being tossed overboard.
Not everyone likes catch shares. Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations in San Francisco, said selling shares of the harvest could give large processing companies too much power and hurt some ports.
His group blasted the groundfish quota plan as “a massive giveaway of a public resource that will lead to . . . a plantation-style fishery, turning fishermen into sharecroppers.” Consumer advocates at Food & Water Watch in Washington, D.C., raised similar concerns.
However, a recent paper in the journal Science documents how catch shares can halt or even reverse the global trend toward widespread demise of fish populations – one of the world's most pressing environmental problems.
“When you allocate shares of the catch, then there is an incentive to protect the stock, which reduces collapse. We saw this across the globe,” said Christopher Costello, an economist at the University of California Santa Barbara and the lead author of the journal article.
He compared the situation to buying a home instead of renting it. “If you own something, you take care of it – you protect your investment or else it loses value,” Costello said.
Individual fishing quotas have been adopted in Australia and Iceland and are credited with helping revive the Alaska halibut industry.
Sugihara of UCSD said catch-share programs are supported by science in some cases, but they don't make sense everywhere. Like other management tools, they rely on high-quality data to set the overall catch limits.
For consumers, catch shares could result in more fish and longer periods when markets offer fresh local fish as opposed to frozen imports, Costello said. He said prices generally are set by world markets, not local fishing rules.
West Coast groundfish represent a major test of the catch-share strategy. Federal regulators called the fishery a “disaster” about eight years ago. Several species in the class remain overfished.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council now manages groundfish through a complex system of fleetwide limits, gear restrictions, seasonal closures, in-season adjustments and other measures.
As is, “fishermen have little to no incentive to not fish. Any fish they don't catch, one of the other fishermen will,” said Frank Lockhart, a top official at the National Marine Fisheries Service in Seattle, which is responsible for setting the West Coast program's quotas.
The new program involves placing monitoring agents on board all of the trawlers. Federal officials said that will dramatically improve the quality of their data about harvests, ensure that quotas are strictly observed and encourage less bycatch.
“On balance, this approach to management of fish is much more intelligent, and there are better controls over the total impact on these stocks,” said Bob Fletcher of Point Loma, president of the Sportfishing Association of California.
Friday's decision capped more than five years of study by the fishery council. Board members said they were conflicted about the right course but decided to try something new.
“Without a change . . . fisheries are going to crumble,” said Stephen Williams, a council member from Oregon. #
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081113/news_1n13fish.html
|
|
Jingy
Social climber
Flatland, Ca
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2008 - 10:03pm PT
|
Whats another word for open-mindfulness....
Your words point toward all possibilities.... I am made to be more hopeful for my own, and our (the world-collectively).
This is the best time to be alive... but I know that any one person living throughout the history of time can say the same.
To all..
Cheers
And thank you Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 14, 2008 - 12:00am PT
|
Thanks for the time and thought you put into that Paul.
There can be little doubt in that, if we have modern society in the year 3000, we will have evolved our system in ways we can't imagine now.
Was speaking with a friend recently who is involved in a lot of route maintenance and new route development. He does so with a lot of concern for the longevity of the route and equipping them as good adventures for the level of climber most likely to enjoy them.
There are folks who don't like that idea. The "old way" was to just have "your" adventure as boldly as possible and not go back and consider the future or those who would follow.
In my mind, a new spirit of community contribution and service has entered the climbing community and I think that's a good thing. The "old Skool" claimed to be against competitiveness in climbing but this seemed to be betrayed by their actions.
PEace
karl
|
|
SammyLee2
Trad climber
Memphis, TN
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2008 - 12:50am PT
|
Really deep thoughts from both Karl and Paul. Somehow I find that my own personal failings add to the worldwide failings. Six billions failings added together....
Yet I don't doubt that things can change. George Wallace changed. I've changed. No doubt, most all of us on this forum have changed, mostly for the better.
Consider Dirt. Many here have had strong differences, yet those same folks send him our best thoughts and well wishes.
I don't know the answer but I know that helping people where I can adds Karma to all those failures I allude to. I await for the outcome of our collective lives. If there is a God, may God bless us.
|
|
Paul Martzen
Trad climber
Fresno
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2008 - 02:34am PT
|
My most radical thought these days is that happiness is an emotional transition between when you just start to solve a problem and when you finish solving it. Happiness is the solving of a problem and once the problem is solved the happiness immediately starts to fade into boredom or anxiety. It like you are happy while accelerating from zero to 60, but once you stabilize at 60 you get bored again. The biggest happy rush is from zero to 5 because that is where we can feel the acceleration the best. We keep going faster and faster cause we don't want the happiness to stop even though the reward becomes less and less.
In all fields we glorify the the highest achievers as if they are the happiest and most satisfied. But it has been my experience that my first steps into a field are the most amazing. When I started climbing, I would be buzzing and satisfied for a week after a day climbing. Each learning step seemed huge and satisfying. A year or two later and I was still buzzing for a day or two after climbing. Then it was for only a few hours. Now, I still like climbing, but I might be thinking about something else completely within minutes of topping out. Maybe those at the top of their game in climbing have to climb at an extreme level just to keep getting a minor buzz. Like heroin addicts having to take huge doses to feel the sensations they love.
Then I step off in a new direction, try a new activity or sport and I am back at the beginning where every little triumph and setback seems huge and has a big emotional effect. But it is risky to go in new directions. It is easy to make mistakes that can be costly on many levels; social, emotional, and physical.
So, do we go off in new directions that could be really cool or just as easily disastrous? Or do we stick with stuff that made us fairly happy the last time we tried it?
Getting back to the film a little bit.
How much money to we need to be happy?
Will material equality make us happy?
Will we quite picking on each other if we are equal?
Do children or siblings who are relatively equal not pick on each other?
How long will we be satisfied if get geothermal, wind and solar power to cover all of our present energy use?
How happy are we as we burn up a million years worth of oil in 150 years? Would we be happier still if we burned it up in 75 years? Or happier if we burned it up in 300 years?
I read about a happiness study this year. They found that people consistently and greatly overestimate how happy they will be when they achieve their goals. People also consistently and greatly underestimate how happy they will be when they fail to achieve their goals. Meaning happiness is mostly not related to achieving goals even though we think it is directly related.
So getting to the top of a mountain or climb does not make you long term happy and failing to get to the top of a mountain or climb does not make you long term unhappy.
edit: Thinking about Sammy's comment. It really is interesting how people here on supertopo can argue and flame each other so badly, but if they keep sticking around long enough it does not seem to matter much. Quite amazing. I am still scared to flame anybody, though it is occasionally tempting.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 14, 2008 - 03:34am PT
|
That's the nature of desire it seems Paul. We run after fulfilling our desires but as soon as we do so, we just go on to desiring something else.
I think there are means of fulfillment beyond seeking to fulfill desires. Unconditional love, creative expression, and being connected with our essence are all inherently satisfying without the cheap thrill temporary nature of grosser desires.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Jingy
Social climber
Flatland, Ca
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2008 - 01:38pm PT
|
Karl - It was nice to watch this film.... Nice to finally something similar to what theoretical physicists have been searching for you many decades... A theory for everything.
This film puts everything into perspective.
Note to the faithful: You may watch this film and have your faith solidified, or, if you are a conscious, thinking person, if you have that little piece of brain matter back, way in the back, that tells you "something is wrong"... Well then, you may find other ways of spending your time than the fairy tale.
This movie demystifies many aspects of our current culture. Takes note of the futility of government "of the people", "for the people" and "by the people". There are powerful interest at odds with each any every one of us, this movie points this out very clearly.
And to end with words so poignantly spoken by a man much greater than I.....
"I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality".
-Dr. Martin Luther King Jr
Thank you Karl for another reminder that I'm not going insane.... I see clearly, this movie proves it.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2008 - 01:44pm PT
|
Human nature cannot be changed without spiritual enlightenment. It's the basis for all morality.
These quacks seem to be quasi-Marxist with a dash of cultism.
Sounds all nice but think about the implementation.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 15, 2008 - 01:57pm PT
|
I do think they made a mistake by ignoring the spiritual dimension to focus on resource management and technology. "getting from here to there" is always a huge issue and it's impossible to know the path we will take to a society where the goal isn't
"Beating the other guy or country" in competition instead of cooperation.
Peace
Karl
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2008 - 02:12pm PT
|
Funny you mention the competitive spirit of the US. It wasn't until after WW1, and especially WW2, that we realized there's bad people in the world and we barely won WW2. To prevent a future near-disaster we'd have to stay on top at all costs.
It kinda sucks that the world isn't all fuzzy bunnies and ducklings, but we've always been there for abused people, they problem is there's too much now. We can't do it all ourselves, we need a new UN with a set of nuts, and it wouldn't hurt for Russia/China to help out instead of facilitating the problems.
EU, where are you?
|
|
Crimpergirl
Social climber
Boulder, Colorado!
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2009 - 07:54pm PT
|
I just finished the film. It has a lot to think about, as well as some that is pretty kooky - especially in the utopian/new society section. I am nagged by some things. For example, in the utopia discussed, if no one works, how do the vegetables get on the grocery store shelves? Who gathers the carts in the parking lot and returns them to the store? Who carries away trash?
Still, it was a very interesting watch...
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 19, 2009 - 08:00pm PT
|
Thanks for bumping this old thread. The vision for the future expounded by the video is certainly unlikely. In fact, any idea we have for the more distant future is likely to be unlikely.
But it's good to expand our awareness of the possibillities, just like climbers who began to realize walls could be climbed in a day and 5.13 wasn't a pipedream.
It's about freeing the mind from ingrained assumptions rather than really knowing how it's going to shake out.
Peace
Karl
|
|
| Messages 1 - 16 of total 16 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!