Finding Yourself - Consider an Android and Other Thought Experiments

Where are you? What is the thing that we define as YOU? Is it the physical form that experiences the world? Are you merely the electrical activity in the neurons of your brain, or are you something more?

In this blog post I will be tackling the nature of consciousness and individuality through numerous thought experiments, each designed to determine something about the nature of what consciousness and individuality really are.

WHAT are You?

source: sciforums

When we think of ourselves, or other people, what is it that we are considering to be "that person". Is it the collection of physical traits which make up their bodies? Is it the collection of their likes, dislikes and beliefs? Is it the thought processes which govern their behaviour and reasoning? What is it that makes you, YOU?

If your personality was transplanted into another body, or your brain into another head, would you still be you? Would you still be YOU if your personality were somehow placed into an artificial brain? If the answer to these questions is, yes, then we can argue that it is the personality which defines individuality and not the medium in which the personality is contained.

Further to this, if somebody else's personality was transplanted into your own body, would they become you? If the answer to this is, yes, then individuality is defined by the vessel in which the personality is contained. Considering that we often accept that the disembodied voice on the end of the phone, or the lines of text popping up on a screen are a person, I think we can safely assume that most would agree that the personality - rather than the vessel - is the defining characteristic of an individual.

WHERE are You?

Where is your personality? Is it produced by the ebb and flow of electrical impulses flowing through the wet-computer that is your brain? Is it some kind of disembodied concept similar to the idea of a Soul? Is your consciousness, your sense of self, even local to your body? To tackle this question from a purely scientific standpoint, we must consider what we know about the way that we experience the world through our senses. This is sometimes known as the "Brain in a Box" thought experiment and when taken to its logical conclusion, has profound implications.

Source: wikipedia

Everything we experience of the physical world is simply electrical impulses interpreted by your brain. If we were to place your brain in a box, keep it alive and feed it with all the sensory information of a given setting - it would be impossible for you to tell that you were not experiencing the physical world.

But let us take it one step further and really throw a spanner in the works! Under a local anaesthetic it is possible to have the top of your skull removed while conscious where you could, in theory, look at and even touch your own brain. This has the profound implication that; since anything we experience with our senses could be simulated, we cannot prove the existence of our own brains!

Consider An Android...

Science is showing more and more that we are living in a procedurally-generated universe, put simply; matter is defined by our perceptions of it. This is known in the World of Science as Holographic Universe Theory, but similar ideas have been put forward by science and spiritualism in concepts such as Vortex Mathematics, Sacred Geometry and the Schwartzchild Proton Unified Field Theory. But back to consciousness...

If we cannot prove the existence of our own bodies or indeed ANY matter outside of our own perceptions and experience of it, where is the personality? As uncomfortable as we may be with the concept, the thought experiment above shows that matter cannot be the source of consciousness, it must be the product. So where is the entity which uses the brain to think and the body to perceive? Where does your mind reside if not within the brain?

Consider an android; one of such immense complexity and so far in advance of our own technology that to us it would be indistinguishable from a biological human. This android is controlled remotely and the signal received by the android is undetectable to us, hyperspace communication, quantum entanglement, whatever mechanism you like.

If this android was damaged in such a way that it would be unable to properly receive, process or express the information in the signal - it would be easy to conclude, from our limited perspective, that it's personality had been changed or damaged. In reality, the signal would be clear and the Mind intact - the information would still exist. The personality, the Perceiver, would continue to endure.

The Two Possibilities

If you've made it this far I congratulate you, it's been a mind-bending journey, but here we are at the conclusion of all those experiments! Where does all this leave us? We cannot prove that anything but our own subjective experience of reality exists at all.Yet there is correlation between individual experiences, on a massive scale, which can lead us to one of two possible conclusions.

1. You are the only thing that exists in the Universe, everything and everyone else is an illusion, dream or simulation in which you are the only true participant.

2. There is some sort of Universal Overseer, a Unified Mind or Consciousness Field which ensures that all our experiences of Reality are consistent.

What if both were true? The Universe as we experience it does appear to have a natural polarity to it, doesn't it?

Namaste.

Fanfare for The Conscious

Thought-al Combat - Is Debate a Testing Ground for Ideas?

If Free Thought is the forge of new ideas - the place where concepts are moulded, shaped and polished to a high shine - then Civilised Open Debate is the proving ground for those ideas. As pretty as it may look straight out of the machine-shop, any idea must be put through it's paces, compared with it's competition and allowed to fall foul of perspectives not yet considered.

The Idea Machine

Like any construct, an idea is formed of many pieces which interlock, influence and affect each other. If one of the pieces fails then the whole idea, much like an intricately engineered machine, could come grinding to a
smoking halt. The concepts, assumptions and assertions which come together to form a coherent idea are much like components in an engine and when these fail, the motor might no longer run as intended or stop altogether.

The "proving ground" of civilised, open debate is there to test these ideas out in the "real world". It is an opportunity to throw gravel at, pour acid on and blow dust into the finely-tuned mechanisms of reason and logic upon which an idea is based. Building a good-looking construct is great, but it is only by letting it get battered and dirty in a debate that we start to see it's true potential and it's pitfalls.

A Shiny New Idea

Forging your own ideas is the cornerstone of Free Thinking and it is okay to be proud of your ideas. But pride should never be allowed to become arrogance, dogma or hubris. To be so sure of your own idea that you refuse to even hold it up to scrutiny, by yourself or others, is to turn away from the essence of Free Thought itself.

Ideas are meant to be shared, they cannot and should not be owned. Just because you "have"an idea, it doesn't stop anybody else from having the same idea completely independent of you. It is even possible to argue that thoughts, which are collected together to form ideas, might not even be products of the brain itself. But that is another subject for another time.

Taking It for a Spin

Everything has a purpose and the purpose of an idea is to be considered carefully, from as many different perspectives as possible. It is a little like prototyping a vehicle, simulations are great for doing a lot of the work but - until you test it - you won't know how it performs in the "real world".

When you publicly state an idea, you throw it open to debate, delivering it into the minefield of criticisms and questions. By the end of a debate your idea might have been reduced to a smoking ruin, or it might emerge battered but victorious. In either case it is not the success or failure of your idea to stand up to scrutiny which matters, but the way in which you move forward from that point.

You can return to the fray with a more refined machine, having learnt from the experience and taken the opportunity to view your construct from new angles. To see how others were able to bring it crashing down, or even understand why they failed to do so. Ultimately, the process will always be a learning experience and one from which your ideas will grow and develop.

It's About Progress

Debating isn't about being right, it is about holding an intellectual position without personally claiming that space. The very best debaters are the ones who can assume positions which they don't necessarily believe in, the ones who play devils advocate and ask questions of the proposer in order to clarify a position.

A great debater should have a certain amount of intellectual malleability, a fluidity to their ideas which allows them to yield like water and incorporate new information easily. They could even find that the position they personally hold is changed over the course of a debate, whether or not they are assuming that position at the time.

Always remember, as one of my favourite researchers, Andrew Johnson of www.checktheevidence.com says:

"Any conclusions can be reached about anything, but it's value will be inversely proportional to the amount of evidence ignored."

Namaste.

Fanfare for The Conscious

The Right to be Wrong - What is Free Speech and What is it Not?

Freedom of Speech is a wonderful thing, but I believe it is something which is misunderstood by many. The Right to Free Speech is exactly that, it is the Right to say whatever you like without censorship. It is the Freedom to express your ideas and beliefs without fear of repercussions.

It is not the Right-to-Get-Upset-if-Somebody-Disagrees-with-You. Refuting a point is not and Free Speech gives people the Right to disagree with you, in public, if that is where you choose to exercise your Right! It is censorship  not the Right to be Abusive but it is the Right to Cause Offence, where the line must be drawn is when Psychological Harm is being caused.


Right to Be Wrong

Many people forget that with Rights come Responsibilities. When you exercise your Right to Free Speech, you must accept the Responsibility to deal with criticism in a reasonable manner, without censoring, intimidating or otherwise manipulating your audience. Threatening, deceiving or being abusive is stepping into the territory of Psychological Harm and is a perversion of the Right to Free Speech.

Certainly, Free Speech gives you the Right to be a racist/sexist bigot if you choose to be. But it also gives everyone else the right to tell you that you are one. You cannot expect to broadcast your views in a public space without being challenged on them; if you can't handle defending the views you express in the name of Free Speech - then don't express them.

The Right to Counter


Now comes the subject of "Hate Speech", many people will argue that this should be censored in the name of decency and protection of the vulnerable. However, censorship does not tackle the problem at its source, it merely reduces the outward expression of it and drives such views underground.

People will still hold these views, but they will be harder to identify and be challenged over them. We need to allow these people to express their views no matter how bigoted, misinformed or dangerous they may seem so that we can publicly counter them. We must organise counter-demonstrations, challenge them to open debate or question them about why they hold these views - censorship is not the way.

Educate, Liberate

If you are out with your kids and you happen to pass by someone expressing particularly discriminatory views, take it as an opportunity to educate your children. They will inevitably encounter such opinions in their lives, so better to teach them the errors of them early and build up their intellectual armour to the short-sightedness and generalisations of such perspectives. We should be trying to help them better understand why some people buy into these ideas.

Ultimately, I guess my point is simple. If we start to censor people because their point of view is unpopular, dangerous or potentially subversive - not only do we force this ticking time bomb out of public view where it could be diffused - we potentially open up the flood-gates for thought-crime and further censorship, which could be extremely dangerous.

We only need to look at the labeling of "Conspiracy Theorists" and Political Activists as Domestic Terrorists, or the recent attempts at gagging legislation (preventing anyone but Political Parties from discussing politics publicly around election times) to see how close we are to an Orwellian Society. Do we really want to take any further steps in this direction?




Namaste,


Fanfare for The Conscious

What's the Matter? - Missed Messages in Science

Science is important; I think we can all agree on that. It is the action of curiosity and intent to understand the Universe and Ourselves more completely. Science is the Eternal Question of Why and the relentless Pursuit of Knowledge.

But, in our thirst for measurable results and mathematical relationships, could we have missed some of the more profound implications of the discoveries we have made? In all our urgency to balance our equations of explanation, did we miss the simple and beautiful messages which come from our discoveries?

 The Great Balance

The most simple, profound realisation about the Universe provided by Science, can be taken straight from the way in which its relationships are expressed. Relationships, such as cause and effect, are described in Science using Mathematical Equations. For an Equation to be true (valid), it has to be complete and balanced (or EQUAL). Both sides of the equation must have equal value. For example, 1 + 1 = 2 is complete because all the terms are present and it is balanced because both sides of the equation have the same value.

Also worthy of note is the fact that all mathematical operations used in these equations are polar in nature - they have opposing functions. Addition is the opposite of Subtraction, as Multiplication is the opposite of Division. Just looking at the way that Maths describes the Universe tells us some really fundamental things. Which is that everything in the Universe is Polarised, Balanced and Equal. Everything has an equal and opposite, in true balance, a Super-Symmetry.

 The Great Unity

Einstein is, I believe, a misunderstood scientist. Many people will quote him like gospel, as if he is the be-all and end-all of Physics. However, I feel Einstein's work has been misinterpreted because many of his famous quotes seem to hint at a much deeper, more spiritual view of the Universe - which goes unrecognised by many who follow his works. Simply looking at his most famous equation - E = mc2 - in a qualitative sense tells you something incredible about our reality. You see, the relationship described here is one of a Unity between Energy and Matter. They are interchangeable and fundamentally connected to one another.

I believe that Bill Hicks described it best when he said, "All Matter is merely Energy condensed to a slow vibration." It is as if Matter itself is simply Energy in a state of low vibration. As though Light itself has been condensed and concentrated into physical form. Light (Electromagnetic Radiation), seems to be some kind of border state between the realms of Matter and Energy. It exists in a state of Duality, as both a Particle (Matter) and a Wave (Energy). If we also consider the hypothetical Tachyon then our understanding of this can be extended further.

Tachyons only exist as a particle when traveling slower than the speed of light. When they are traveling faster than this, they exist only as energy. When you consider this, the Speed of Light seems less like a barrier and more like a transition zone, where Matter becomes Energy and vice-versa. As Light itself sits exactly on this hypothetical boundary, it displays the Wave-Particle Duality that we are familiar with - the Unity of Matter and Energy.

 The Great Perception

In our early journeys into the Science of The Small, we found out even more astonishing things about Matter and our influence upon it. We found that what we see as Solid Matter - physical things - are actually 99.9999...% empty space. Even more profound was the discovery that the mere observation of Matter changed it - observation has been scientifically shown, scientifically, to affect the outcome of that observation.

To clarify, if an atom was the size a football stadium, the nucleus - the most solid part of it - would be the size of a full stop. Furthermore, the electrons exist as a probability field around the nucleus and, until they are measured, have no fixed position in space-time! It is as though the perception of matter itself causes it to condense into existence, a concept pursued long-ago in the Philosophical Existentialism and the thought experiment; "If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?"

Confused yet? Consider the Schroedinger's Cat thought-experiment. A cat is placed in a box with a flask of poison and a radioactive source, while a radiation detector is rigged to release the poison on the release of a radioactive particle from the source.  Because radioactive decay is random, it is unknown when the poison will be released and thus whether the cat is dead or alive. Essentially the cat, unobserved in the box, can be considered to be both dead and alive and neither dead nor alive, in a state of Unity and balance between opposing states.

To determine the state of the cat, a Change of Perspective must be made in order to make an observation - at which point the condition of the cat is determined as one of the two states. Until that observation is made, it is impossible to determine the state of the cat or even prove its existence at all. We can only provide proof of existence for things which have been OBSERVED. Until that observation, the Matter may exist only as Energy or even Data embedded in the fabric of the universe itself.

 The Great Observer

So, if Science has determined that observation directly affects the results of those observations. What can we determine about the Universe itself, with regards to the Observer? Many would argue that the Universe continues to do what it does even when it is unobserved by a physical being, so what impact does that have on our understanding of consciousness itself? What if consciousness itself is not local to the brain? What if consciousness exists instead as an energy field which is spread throughout the universe?

 Let us imagine for a minute that our physical being is like a radio. If we had no knowledge of Radio Transmission and we were to investigate the radio, tuned in and playing a broadcasted radio station; it would be easy to assume that the electrical activity we see flowing around the internal circuits was what was producing the audio signal independent of outside influences. We could argue that the electrical signals themselves were responsible for producing the patterns of sounds we hear coming from the speaker, but this would be incorrect. In reality we know that the radio simply converts the radio signals into the electrical signals - they are being generated by the radio waves.

Recent studies have begun to show that the assumed cause and effect between electrical activity in the brain and conscious thoughts may not be in the direction we have always assumed. Almost everyone will agree that electrical activity in the brain indicates the presence of Life, of Consciousness and it is usually assumed that those thoughts are caused by the electrical activity. But what if they weren't? What if our brains and bodies were merely a vessel, an antenna which is tuned into a very specific frequency of consciousness? What if our Consciousness, our Soul - the thing which uses our bodies to think, to feel and to experience - was not confined within the body?

For those of you who doubt what I am suggesting here, I ask you one simple thing: If you believe that your thoughts are generated by the electrical activity in your brain, why can you not "turn them off"? Try it for a moment; try to switch of your thoughts and think of absolutely nothing. Harder than you might have imagined. Now think about WHY that might be, REALLY THINK about it.

Namaste.

Fanfare for The Conscious

Sources

Wikipedia: Schrodinger's Cat
Wikipedia: Tachyon

Waking Times: Consciousness is Not Local to the Brain

Stockholm Syndrome Society - Why Defend Our Captors?

Why do so many people defend the current system of governance? When you look at the evidence objectively, it's clear for anybody to see that the current socio-economic and it's attached political system is at best flawed and at worst completely corrupt. It has consistently served to further drive inequality and repeatedly fails to improve life for those who are suffering the most. It's achievements are few and far between, often short-lived and usually dwarfed by it's colossal failures, lies and inability to follow through on the promises by which it was empowered. So why do so many people in this country still defend, often aggressively, the system which consistently fails to serve them?

Stockholm Syndrome

Stockholm Syndrome is a psychological phenomenon (also known as capture-bonding) whereby hostages develop positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes even identifying with or defending them. Such
a relationship is said to occur because of the helplessness experienced by a hostage at the hands of their captor and the related dependency on them for survival. Hostages can come to see a lack of abuse by captors as an act of kindness, regardless of the situation they have been placed in by those very same people.

The capture-bonding process is said to be a defense mechanism designed to protect the Ego. If the hostage can come to develop some kinship with their captors, then they will see them as less threatening and thus cause a drop in the psychological stress experienced by the hostage.  They also become somewhat comfortable with the hostage situation itself and fear what will happen if it changes. In a long-lasting siege situation, this process may even be a contributing factor to the little-known Lima Syndrome - in which captors become fond of their hostages.

Abusive Relationships are another great example of how Stockholm Syndrome can induce helplessness and prevent people from breaking out of the cycle of abuse. The abused become so dependent on the person doing the abusing, their sense of self-worth so linked to the abusive relationship, that they fear being unable to exist in any other situation. They feel like they deserve to suffer in this situation and blame themselves whenever something bad happens. The abusive relationship is so insidious that people often need to be told that it is abusive and are unable to see it for themselves.

The Fear of Change

Ultimately, I think Stockholm Syndrome plus an unhealthy dose of Cognitive Dissonance serves to provide a good explanation as to why people have become so blind to the horrors inflicted upon the planet by the Governments of the world. We have been put in this position by the system and all the hardships we endure is because of that system, yet we take the lack of direct violence as evidence of good intentions. It is much less stressful to our Egos to believe that the Government and the financial backers who support it are not trying to hurt us, rather than to accept the truth of the situation.

We are being held hostage by the Government, who have been sent to do the bidding of a few disgustingly rich people. They keep us stuck in the system by forcing us to work for the right to life itself (food, shelter, clothing etc), they take away our freedoms, control our media and indoctrinate our children. When critical thinkers stand up and try to talk about the fact that it doesn't have to be this way, people get scared. If we try to change the system, who knows what could happen? They're not actually trying to kill us (really?!?!?) so they must be working for our benefit, right?

The non-aggression by our captors is mistaken for kindness and people forget the whole system which is keeping us working just to get through the month. They forget that this is facilitated by the captors, that they could give us true freedom at any point, but they chose not to. We are held captive in this slave-factory, told that we cannot exist without it. But outside the sun is shining and without the captors restricting us, we are free to solve our own problems. Free to pool our knowledge and use our combined skills to build anything we desire and anything we dream of!

Do We Really Need THEM?

The simple truth of the matter is that The Hierarchy Enslaving You are only able to do so by our own admission, apathy, or complicity. It is time to step back and look at the whole of the situation of our lives and realise that we are in fact being held hostage, the weapons they use to keep us in line are poverty, intimidation, fear and despair. They have us so convinced that we could not function without them that we struggle to see a way out of the system and collectively vote for it's continuation in the hope of the illusion of change because - remember - most people actually fear that.

It is time for us to break away from The Hierarchy Enslaving Mankind, it is time for us to tackle our Stockholm Syndrome Society. We need to be brave, we need to show courage and we need to have faith in ourselves - not anyone else. You are stronger than you believe and together we can thrive without the parasites at the top of the pyramid getting fat on our labour. It's time to put down your ego, realise that your head is filled with lies, your emotions have been manipulated and your productivity hoarded. Look the abusive system straight in the eye and say no, say it loudly and proudly.

Figuring out that you have been deceived and enslaved is a painful realisation and something that every person who has been in an abusive relationship can attest to.

Peace, Love and Light,

Namaste

Fanfare for The Conscious

Sources

Wikipedia: Stockholm Syndrome
Dr. Joe Carver: Love and Stockholm Syndrome
F4TC: Genocide by Proxy - Weaponised Poverty

What is the Colour of Money? - Kudos As Currency

If our modern, corporate-controlled currency had a personality - what do you think it would be? If money was a person - what would they be like? Do you think that the "nature" of the currency we use has an influence on society? If we could change the nature of our currency, could we also change the nature of the societies using that currency? These are some of the questions I have been asking myself recently and they have lead me to some pretty surprising conclusions.

In order to identify the likely personality traits of our modern currency I'm going to look at how it is created and used, how it behaves and how it influences those who have it. Furthermore, I am going to talk about why I think the "character" of our currency is important, as well as how I think it influences our society as a whole. Make no mistake, I am not trying to claim that a £20 note has human traits, I am instead looking at the currency system itself - how money works.

The Personality of Modern Money

When money is created, it is done so out of nothing. There is no physical value attached to it; it is effectively defined by itself and has no relationship to the real world. In order for it to be created (by a loan), the demand is made that greater than the amount created is "paid-back" (via interest). If the terms of this agreement are not met, then the entity who created the money will confiscate the property bought with the money, which didn't exist until it was created.

When money moves, it does so from the hands of the people who need it most, to the people who already have it in abundance; From the people who will die without it, to
the people who have more than they could ever use in a million lifetimes of comfortable living. It abandons the very people who it promises to help and sits idle while people suffer and perish. The most productive people of the Earth are awarded the least of it and the least productive, the most of it.

The people who have money always want more and no matter how much they acquire, it is never enough. The people with the most of it will even let others physically suffer in order to hoard ever-increasing amounts of wealth, which they continue to use in self-service. People feel that their success is defined by it, that the control of it will give them the key to happiness, when all it ever brings is the want for more.

From this I feel justified in arguing that money is a psychopathic personality, viciously competitive, greedy and without empathy. It cares not for the people who need it and tells those who have it that they are unfulfilled, that they still need more - that they are not enough as they are. Modern money is the spirit of competition in spite of the consequences, it is the voice that tells you to consume and the cancer at the heart of our society.

Alternative Currencies: Idea's and Examples

Transition Towns are a concept which is part of the Permaculture Movement. Permaculture is an initiative which focuses developing a robust local economy by supporting local businesses and encouraging sustainability within the community. Trade is often supported within the community by
the use of Complementary Currencies, which can be used at local businesses for buying services and goods. Residents of the communities involved have even been known to have salaries paid in local currency, to show support for the businesses which are taking part.

Fureai Kippu is an alternative currency which is issued in Japan. The phrase itself means "Caring Relationship Ticket" and credit is earned by offering services to the elderly. These Fureai Kippu credits may be  transferred to other family members or saved for when the owner becomes sick or elderly themselves. In this way, people may work helping others within their own communities to earn Goodwill Tokens, which they can transfer to an elderly or sick friend or relative in another community. The personal connection and spirit of kindness implied by the currency transfers with the tokens - which I think is something quite beautiful.

The most interesting thing about this concept is that, when surveyed, the elderly people preferred the services of those who were paid in Fureai Kippu, over those paid in Yen. The nature of the currency as a "Goodwill Token" seems to imply a personal connection which is not conveyed by Yen. Essentially, I think the Fureai Kippu concept is a quantified version of the idea of using Kudos as a currency. But what is Kudos? Do we already have it in some form and how could we implement this in modern society?

Money Just Gets in the Way...

Kudos is a form of public esteem, it is the respect of your peers that is earned through service to others, cooperation and kindness. It is the regard with which others hold you and is the foundation of all healthy relationships; romantic, platonic or
otherwise. If you feel that a person has a lot of Kudos, then you respect them simply because you believe that they act in a way which you find admirable. It is created by the actions of people and can be traded because you are more likely to assist someone who has your respect (and gain Kudos by doing that), than you are to assist some one who does not.

In our society, material wealth has for many people become a proxy for Kudos. If you have a lot of it - an expensive house/car/wardrobe etc - you are deemed to be a success, society tells you that. People who have money feel that they can demand respect, some will give it to them based purely on the fact that they have a lot of it and some will even believe that Kudos can be bought with material gifts. Although I would contend that this is untrue because this Kudos usually disappears with the material wealth, where true Kudos has an endurance to it beyond the act of acquisition and is not "spent" in the traditional sense of the word - think about it. Do you lose esteem for someone when you help them out? What acts could cost someone Kudos?

Making a Money-Free Economy Work

"But if we take away money, what will people have to work for?" "Yeah! Won't people just get lazy or greedy anyway?" "Competition is in human nature! We can't change that!" These are the protests that I most often hear when I table the idea of A World Without Money (cue dramatic music). Challenging the status-quo is hard because the Cognitive Dissonance surrounding the subject of competition is so strong. The urge to compete and be better than another person, team or country is so ingrained at every level of the system that many people struggle to operate outside that box.

I would argue that many of the examples I am given of "natural competition" are Texas Sharp-Shooters quite short-sighted and fail to consider the wider context. Nature doesn't compete with itself on a grander scale, it finds balance as a cybernetic system and different organisms generally achieve this balance by exploiting niches within the system which allow it to live harmoniously with it's greater environment. They align themselves with the naturally existing system of their environment and thrive within it. Genes only compete to reproduce by finding new niches or better exploiting existing niches than their predecessors.

In a Kudos-based economy, we can all work together to live more harmonious lives and better use the finite resources of the earth wisely. We will need to work together because no one person has the answer to our problems, our desires and to making our dreams come true. Only together can we continue to exists, prosper and advance ourselves into a higher quality of life because in a society of competition somebody always has to lose. When we put a price on the essentials of life - food, shelter and health - the losers pay the ultimate price. Is that the world you want to live in?

Namaste,

Fanfare for The Conscious

Sources

Oxfam: Growing Inequality
OxfordDictionaries.com: Kudos
Wikipedia: Transition Towns
Wikipedia: Permaculture
Wikipedia: Complementary Currency
Wikipedia: Fureai Kippu
SimplePsychology.org: Cognitive Dissonance
YourLogicalFallacyIs.com: Texas Sharpshoter

Genocide by Proxy - Weaponized Poverty

Could we be living in a period of sustained and legislated genocide? I was unexpectedly struck by such an idea a few weeks ago and have spent much time since then pondering the details of this idea. As disturbing as it might seem I will contend that the current socio-political/economic system is creating a worldwide situation which is knowingly causing widespread suffering and needless loss of human life. Although I suspect that many would claim that my use of the word "genocide" is misleading and alarmist, I will attempt to outline my reasoning below.

Systematic Slaughter

Genocide is the concentrated and deliberate murder of a group of people who share a common characteristic such as race, religion or - in this case- social class. Typically, people think of The Holocaust and other more recent genocidal events such as those which occurred in Rwanda and Bosnia, where the focus was religious or ethnic groups. But I maintain that the concept can also be applied to determining factors such as Social Class or Residential Status.

Some may argue that these factors are too broad to use the term genocide. Others will counter that there is no deliberate murder, in the sense that people are not being hunted and killed by death squads. These views, however, rely on the very blinkered perception that all wars and battles are fought with physical weapons. When in reality, physical weaponry is usually the last resort in conflict. Modern wars are waged with economics, politics and psychological operations long before the first bullets begin to fly and long after the last explosions have shook the ground.

Poverty as a Weapon

In a Capitalist world, money is life. Without money you cannot be sure to have the Essentials of Life and must rely on the charity of others. You cannot be sure of shelter, clothes on your back, warm food in your belly and in the majority of places in the world, even medical care. When people are deprived of money, they are also deprived of the vital things needed to sustain their lives, they become homeless, malnourished and eventually die due to exposure, starvation or disease.

It is easiest to see this in the developing countries of the world, where around 21,000 people die every day simply because they don't have enough money to feed themselves, or seek medical attention. However, it must be noted that these issues are creeping ever more into Western societies and those in the most dire need of support due to poverty are finding themselves without a safety net in hard times. People are now dying on the streets of supposedly civilized societies, the cull has reached our doorsteps and the continuing decline of wages and social support services only drives more of us closer to the danger zone.

Life is a Right

Since you started reading this post 30 people have perished worldwide as a result of the poverty caused by the consumer-capitalist economic system. The people who have helped to create and mold this system over the decades are fully aware of the loss of human life and the environmental damage caused by it, they just don't care. It is this fact that I would contend makes them guilty of pursuing a campaign of Genocide by Proxy.

It is time we stood together for the sake of our lives. How long would it take until you were reliant on the goodwill of others to survive? How many paychecks could you really afford to miss? Should ANYBODY have to justify their right to the Essentials of Life? How many more people need to suffer before we take action? The answer is in your hands.

Namaste,

Fanfare for The Conscious

Sources

Dictionary.com: Genocide 
Wikipedia: Genocide
Wikipedia: Political Warfare 
Wikipedia: Psychological Warfare 
Poverty.com