Saving Civilization #2

[psychopath]

In my last thread I posted an excerpt from a guy's website that made sense to me, but this time I want us to talk about it from scratch.

How will we save civilization? For it to be saved, perhaps the form it is in now is not enough, and it must change, or perhaps we just need to survive a few things here and there and eventually we'll be perfect. I don't know...

Lets talk about everything from different economic systems to the technology we need to survive with at least a somewhat sustainable civilization.

Discuss.

[undergroundrevolutionary]

at this point the idea of "saving" society is a foolish and ignorant one. People think that there is nothing wrong with the society they we have created and think that anyone trying to save it is a false profit. If society were to be saved, there would need to be an event that shook every one to the core. Maybe an asteroid impact, maybe an pandemic, but without a major global event short of complete extinction, the fact is people think that reform would be good but in not crucial. It would have to be something that effected everyone, and made them take a step back and look at themselves from a different perspective. A perspective that was one of a higher being, one in a constant search of knowledge and destruction of ignorance.

If this event, which may just be a global revolution of thought, were to occur, things would change nearly over night. People would shift their views to those, of not necessarily communism, but views that looked out for society as a whole, not that of an individual struggle. No longer would we spend billions on weapons development yearly, but looking into 100% sustainable living. Living that would make our children proud to human. Wars and hatred would be non existent. Love would not be something rare and hidden, but something to be shared and spread. People would no longer have a need for introversion. All would be excepting of life choices. Choices would no longer be based on the best for the individual, but the group. Any form of government would be obsolete. Rape and murder would be non-existent. Monetary systems would no longer exist and people would only take what they need in terms of food, fuel, and accessories. Cars would be exclusively used for trips of more than 30 miles. Commuters would walk or bike. Recycling would not need global campaigns. People would no longer feel the need for useless bullshit. Designs of all things; shoes, cameras, cars, computers, ect. would be streamlined. Creativity would be a thing to be shared with all, not something that is whored for monetary gain. Theaters, concert venues, independent movie theaters, and true independent reporting would explode. The world would live to help each other and the term selfishness would be obsolete.

But, a revolutionary change in consciousness is far off. The only way to create this utopia in our life times, is to spread the love in it's truest sense. By loving those around us, and spreading creativity and intelligent thought, not selfish ignorance.

[psychopath]

What if we can save civilization overall? Maybe this one, as it is, is doomed. But a better system might have a chance. Whether that could be achieved by a global disaster could be something to be discussed.

What if people start over, but make the same mistakes, leading to another society that will destroy itself? What if it keeps happening, like a cycle, and what if it has already happened lots of times? Maybe eventually we can break out of the cycle(if such a cycle exists), maybe we could, potentially, do it before this civilization is destroyed.

[undergroundrevolutionary]

I don't the system we are using is the root of the problem. The people enacting it are. They are the ones that allow 85% of the money on earth be in the hands of 5% of its population and so on. Basically, you are agreeing that there needs to be a radical change in people to break this supposed cycle of civilization.

How would we go about doing this without a traumatic event? I think that without a major event or catastrophe, it will not be able to occur quickly. It would be a long drawn out process created, by great people, working for the greater good. And it will go unannounced to those working against it. It would be enacted very slowly and subtly, with occasional jumps towards the goal.

What do you think needs to be done?

[psychopath]

I agree that without a major catastrophe it wont be able to happen overnight, if ever.

I suppose both methods could have risks. If we try to cause change slowly, then we might never achieve it until it's too late. If there's a catastrophic event, it could be so catastrophic that we would be forced to live like we did ages ago, everyone eventually forgetting about the flaws of our current system, only to make the same mistakes.

One idea would be to prepare for both scenarios, that is, have systems setup in place to take over and bring people together in the right way if there's a catastrophe, and, for the slow change scenario, I'm not sure yet, but we could definitely figure out what changes need to be made, even if we don't find a way to make them happen.

There's also the possibility that massive changes could happen quickly without a catastrophe, and that would probably happen through a revolution, which is difficult to achieve unless the revolutionaries have endured so much stress that they have to do something.

[S.]

Ill make a constructive post in this forum when I get some freetime, but until then; I think everything in this thread seems to be about the words of Jiddu Krishnamurti, look him up on YouTube and watch as many of his videos as you can, they're eye opening. He was a philosopher/sociologist from India in the mid 1900s, but his worked changed the world, for the better.

[Milk2Go]

Humanity wasn't meant to be saved. If we decided to save it for whatever reason, it'd turn stupid and kill itself again almost immediately.

[Amortisatie]

Fate will decide if we stay or go, we can't do much about it

[psychopath]

BobManPerson Wrote:Humanity wasn't meant to be saved. If we decided to save it for whatever reason, it'd turn stupid and kill itself again almost immediately.

Then enjoy burning in the next nuclear attack, or your legs turning into ice in the nuclear winter.

Quote:Fate will decide if we stay or go, we can't do much about it

Do you say that because you believe in determinism, because you believe that the future is written in stone?

Well determinism hasn't been proven to be true, currently the closest to certainty about something we can get is its wavefunction.

Or maybe you believe that "fate" is a separate entity.

Please, enlighten me how this thing called "fate" decides my future.

[Amortisatie]

Its kinda hard to explain, its just a deep-down feeling that I have that all of us are heading towards something that is pre-decided for us, who decided it i'm not so sure.

Like BMP said, maybe humans weren't meant to exist forever, we might go just as the dinosaurs

[Sociopath]

If peaceful Anarchy turns out not to work, then all the intelligent people (like those on SS) will become Isolationists: live in a house, make your own electricity, pay no taxes, grow your own food, live for yourself, with no one around, unless you can trust them

[Amortisatie]

TA, if that happens, I call the Mississippi River as my source for energy, water and food

But yeah, thats just what I believe, I can't back it up but thats just how I feel like it will happen