Anonymous (UK) - Letter to David Cameron

[Porkins' Wingman]

I came across this the other day. It's a few months old now but I hadn't heard about it 'til now and a Google search doesn't throw up very much at all on it, so hopefully I haven't missed the boat on it.

It's a long letter, and some may not be inclined to read it all, so I've numbered the paragraphs to facilitate people commenting on just those that interest them if they wish.

Generally it's fairly well written, although I do think some overly-dramatic language is used at times that detracts from what otherwise seem like very valid points to me. Clearly the conservatives among us will write it all off the minute they see the source of the letter, and the proposal is fairly radical, probably too much for some to take seriously.

The author provides some references and links, although I'm sure Nexxo will have wanted to see more in the way of evidence, but I for one like to give reason as much credence as 'evidence'. So what I'm looking for is an idea of how many generally support the assertions made, and for those who disagree with it, some reasoned debate, or evidence, as to why. Please don't rubbish it just because it comes with the Anonymous label or spares little in melodrama.

Much of it is stuff that's run through my mind at various points in the last 6 years or so, but I know I ultimately don't care about the state of society/the world enough to have ever bothered trying to assemble those thoughts into one, integrated (if slightly bloated and lacking brevity in places) proposal. But I would certainly be interested to see what effect it could have if given a sufficiently high profile through public awareness.

So here's the letter. Make sure you've been to the loo and have refreshments with you before you start:

Dear Mr Cameron,

1. I am writing you to as a matter of urgency regarding Britain's - and ultimately the World's - future options for tackling the economic and environmental crises which pose a growing threat to the future of humankind.

2. From the courses of action being pursued by your government, it is clear that there are some critical systemic and environmental factors that you have not taken into account during your economic decision making processes. Therefore, I would like to begin by analysing these factors, and end by demonstrating the scientific reasoning and methodology that must be applied in designing a long term solution that can ensure our long-term survival as a species.

3. Please note that the methodology I propose is entirely irrespective of political ideology.

4. Firstly, I would like to address the mechanisms driving the Monetary system, and its historical origins: -

5. Throughout the millennia prior to the industrial revolution c.1800, Ninety-eight per-cent of the world's economic productive energy was generated by human labour, and two per-cent by non-human energy - Chiefly beasts of burden, windmills, sails and watermills. Imported goods required long, slow and perilous journeys across land and sea. Hence at every level of their production and distribution, goods consumed could be measured directly in terms of the amount of personal toil necessary to bring them to the consumer. Monetary exchange, using tokens of direct intrinsic value therefore provided a convenient mechanism to enable people to fairly apportion the fruits of their labour. The monetary system was validated by 2 key factors: scarcity - imposed by the physical limitations to human output, and growth - which was necessary to expand the money supply to enable increasing numbers of people to improve their living standards whilst covering all existing liabilities. To a population measured in millions rather than billions, living on low levels of biologically derived fuel and other renewable energy, an infinite-growth paradigm seemed feasible, and such factors as climate change and resource depletion were beyond the horizon of human experience.

6. However, as we moved into the industrial age, the level of reliance on human energy declined in favour of rising levels of mechanical energy in production. Ironically, as our capacity for producing goods grew, so our capacity for buying them shrank, as increasing numbers of human workers were displaced by mechanisation. Hence the monetary system began to falter, and governments had to embark on deficit spending to cover welfare payments and subsidies to bridge the growing gap between goods produced and human work-hours employed in their production. The 2 world wars necessitated an acceleration of industrial mechanisation to compensate for the departure of all the workers sent into military service. By the second half of the 20th Century, Governments were firmly locked into their addiction for spiralling deficit spending, to cover the previous years' spending plus interest owed to bondholders. From the 1980's, the rise of digital technology meant that middle class, white collar jobs were also becoming vulnerable to obsolescence through mechanisation, exacerbating the gap.

7. Meanwhile, the phenomenon of scarcity had been eliminated, since industry now had the productive capacity to provide for the needs of everyone. However, this scarcity has been falsely maintained in order to maintain prices that allow companies to make profit, support 'growth' and ensure continuing tax revenue levels needed to meet accumulated deficit spending liabilities. If all the unused food produce 'mountains' that have been artificially held back worldwide for this purpose in recent years had instead been distributed to the poorest people on Earth - using spare capacity on existing cargo vessels - then countless millions who starved to death during this time could still be alive today.

8. By 1971, the infinite growth delusion driving the world's economic ambitions reached a pitch where money had to break its ties with intrinsic value - and hence reality itself - to keep pace with the distortion, and the Bretton Woods Gold standard was abandoned. The world's economy adopted a fiat currency system which creates money out of debt, and makes possible false economic booms driven by credit-fuelled binges.

9. For the past 40 years, Governments and banks have been engaged in various superficial economic PR exercises that mislead the public into believing that infinite growth and hence prosperity for all is possible if we keep a stiff upper lip and labour on - protected by a system whose accountability to the real world has been obscured by a fog of propaganda and self-referring, self-justifying technical language. This culture has in turn been widely protected by self-interested media corporations. But the conspicuous global societal decay we now experience as we struggle to stay afloat against our national debts reveals a different reality. The infinite growth pyramid is finally being exposed to all as a Ponzi scheme now that it has collided with reality in the form of debt saturation and peak oil.

10. It is now widely acknowledged that world oil production passed its peak around 2005, and is in decline as remaining reserves become more hazardous and energy exhaustive to extract - as was illustrated by the Deep water Horizon incident in April 2010. Additionally, we all know that the OPEC member states are hooked into the same Growth addiction spiral as every other country. And since their permitted rates of oil-revenue generation are dictated by their published estimated reserves, one would have to be very naive to take the latter at face value. The fuel supply needed to grow our way out of our ever spiralling debts no longer exists in the real world. Global economic collapse is a mathematical certainty. For a government to knowingly propagate the deception of 'business as usual', and still focus its population on the on-going pursuit of 'economic growth' amounts to fraud and negligence on a grand scale.

11. Another key and insidious feature intrinsic to the debt-based monetary pyramid is the upward transfer of wealth through the charging and awarding of interest. The most highly financially rewarded and hence politically influential group in our market/monetary driven society is the one engaged in making money through the investment of money - an activity which is of least productive merit to society in terms of generating goods that meet real-world life needs. In order for those at the top of the pyramid to maintain their levels of economic gain, then a corresponding level of wealth must be lost in interest repayments by those at the bottom who are forced by insufficient wealth to borrow capital to buy things they genuinely need. Hence the poorer a person is, the more helplessly immersed they become in a vicious trap of austerity to subsidise those who already have funds to spare. Even if their fortunes change and they fight their way out of debt, it will be at the expense of someone else who will be driven down to take their place in the pit. The erosion of human mental wellbeing from being placed in such a position of inequality has been studied, and is termed psycho -social stress. It can lead to a wide range of illnesses, physical and mental, including addictions, criminal behaviours, cancers and heart disease. Note: Simply giving people welfare to provide adequate food and shelter to support their physical health is not an effective remedy for psycho-social stress, because the latter is not a result of being poor, but feeling poor. Across a spectrum on many nations studied, a clear and consistent pattern emerges: the greater the inequality, the greater the manifestation of all these problems. This type of structured abusive relationship exists between countries as well as within societies. Its ultimate victims are the billion aforementioned victims of poverty and malnutrition in the 'developing' world, whose vulnerability is essential to maintain the first-world's geo-political strategy - ensuring corporate demands for cheap resources and labour are met in the name of market 'efficiency'.

12. It is also worth noting that Dr Robert Hare, the eminent authority in the study of psychopathy has carried out research into the relationship between personal qualities advantageous to career advancement in today's corporate structure, and the personality traits of the psychopath. He has concluded that there is a significant correlation. The propensity for predatory manipulation, false charm, distorted self-worth, and lack of empathy for the wellbeing of others is evident in - and is an undeniable advantage to - many of those who are the most ambitious, successful and politically influential players of the economic game. A government that seeks to deliberately propagate this social system - that clearly benefits the interests of its own social class at the expense of the greater population - is thus in serious breach of its core duty to the public, and is aiding and abetting a form of systemic abuse that could be termed structural classism at best, and genocide at worst.

13. Secondly, I would like touch upon the legislative and legal processes that your government continues to enforce. Extensive research conducted by Doctors Gabor Mate, James Gilligan, Robert Sapolsky and other eminent experts in the field has determined that all human social behaviour is the product of its environment, and even if individuals manifest the strongest genetic pre-disposition to violent or antisocial behaviours, then they will still develop into law abiding and supportive members of society if all they are nurtured from the foetal stage in an environment that meets all their emotional and physical needs (a condition which as we've seen is intrinsically guaranteed not to be met for many under the 'free' market system) Hence different genes are shown to be switched on or off in response to environmental stimuli. This is termed an epi-genetic effect. The psycho-social stress already discussed is an illustration of this effect. Thus the concept of 'blame', presuming complete choice and free will of the perpetrator, irrespective of environment is fundamentally flawed. Those induced into antisocial behaviours are victims of culture.

14. Our legal system chooses to ignore the root causes of 'antisocial' behaviour, and resists changes to its own structure that would allow the most scientifically supported solutions to be applied. Instead, it chooses to impose rigid, simplistic and dogmatic sets of rules on the public - the protection of whose best interests is the sole purpose for its existence - and prescribes punishments on aberrant behaviours, which can only serve to further enforce the negative environment that will have caused those behaviours in the first place. Those given authority to prescribe those punishments are required to have no training in current psychology, and are not accountable to those who do. Many of our laws do not stand up to current scientific understanding, or even to common sense. This system of 'justice' is thus far closer to the philosophy of eugenics than to current psychology in its application. Its preservation of the status quo is in direct conflict with human concern. The government's handling of the 2011 riots, and its failure to expose or address its systemic root causes aptly illustrates this flaw.


15. The public have no 'democratic' power to abolish the many laws that directly or indirectly are harmful to their interests. The system of custodial punishment is a failed and obsolete social experiment. The wilful ignorance and hubris of those who benefit from maintaining it as gospel against all reason is a damning indictment of its credibility, and also shows a significant correlation with the observations of Dr Robert Hare discussed earlier. For a government to continue to enforce a system that is so intrinsically incapable of supporting the interests of those it was elected to serve amounts to gross negligence and human-rights violation on a grand scale.

16. The third point I wish to raise concerns impacts of human economic activity on the Earth, and its consequences for the sustainability of life. The 'free' market system demands cyclical consumption of goods, and therefore demands those goods must perish quickly enough to create a demand for their replacements to propagate the GDP that must be generated to keep infinite growth in play. Market competition also demands the production cost of goods cannot exceed that of competitors, mutually assuring intrinsically inferior quality from the outset.

17. Worldwide, millions of tons of obsolete and intrinsically flawed manufactured goods go into landfill sites every year, along with all the precious, hard to mine minerals they contain. The description of the market system as an 'economy' is a grand deception. By its intrinsic nature it is in fact an 'anti-economy' - a race to waste resources for differential advantage. (See the 'Story of Stuff')

18. The artificial barrier created by money prevents us from making the transition into a global renewable energy infrastructure, forcing a continued reliance on fossil fuels whose emissions are causing advancing climate change. In the UK we are witnessing dry winters and spring droughts that are stunting our crops and draining freshwater reserves. Much of our arable land has been reduced to barren clay, as all natural organic material has been stripped from the soil by intensive farming. This land is now completely dependent upon fertilizers produced from natural gas, and upon greater levels of irrigation due the resultant poor water retention. The search for new gas reserves in becoming more desperate, and energy companies are resorting to increasingly unscrupulous practices in trying to access shale gas through 'hydraulic fracturing', despite the irrefutable pollution this causes to groundwater.

19. Meanwhile, scientists are monitoring the northward shift of the melting of the permafrost of the Siberian Tundra due to global warming. If this continues, hundreds of thousands of square miles of ancient vegetation will start to decay, releasing methane which is 23 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. This would further escalate global warming into an extinction level event, which would kill the majority of humans on Earth. And it could happen in as little as 20 years if we remain on our present course.

[Porkins' Wingman]

20. For a government to propagate a socio-economic system that directs its population along this path constitutes criminal negligence and insanity on an unprecedented scale. The continued decay and eventual demise of the monetary-market system is a mathematical certainty. The only question you have to consider is: how much more torment will you allow it to wreak on us all before you let it go?

21. 'You cannot solve problems by using the same thinking that created them in the first place';
'Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results' - Albert Einstein

22. In the following section, I wish to discuss the factors we must incorporate into our redesign of society, followed by the socio-economic solution. As previously stated, this is not subject to political debate, but purely the application of scientific methods to the long term optimisation of human survival and wellbeing.

23. A key factor in the economic crisis is technological unemployment. Successive governments have sought to gain political advantage by resisting the replacement of human labour by mechanisation, declaring themselves as champions of job preservation and creation. But mechanisation is vastly more efficient than human labour, is increasingly self - maintaining, and can work 24/7 with optimum speed and efficiency. It is therefore essential for a company to adopt available mechanised systems if it is to maintain competitive market viability.

24. Digital technology is advancing exponentially, despite the fact that its true potential is being systematically retarded by politics and the market system. It is now possible to replace 75 to 80 per-cent of the world's remaining labour force with mechanisation if we replace our obsolete societal infrastructure using updated methodologies. This means that only one quarter at most of the world's working population are still technically required to contribute their own labour, with the other three quarters trapped in unnecessary and technically inefficient positions of subjugation - just to justify a monetary reward through which their access to goods can be artificially controlled.

25. But why would they need money at all in a world in which scarcity has been eliminated, and growth is physically impossible? We know a major influence in this debate is the fact that those in positions of power and wealth fear that the removal of money, and the levelling of social hierarchies would rob them of the control, influence and quality of life to which they feel entitled - and leave them vulnerable to those 'have-nots' who have been traditionally envious of their levels of privilege. But in a technical, post monetary society, even the richest individuals from today's society would see an enhancement in their standards of living. Modern psychology shows that traditional elitist desires to hoard excesses and maintain social 'superiority' over others are purely the manifestation of a psychological addictive disorder created by a distorted values system - and harmful to those on both sides of the divide.

26. The other traditionally held belief used to uphold the pro- money argument states that humans need a monetary reward as a motivation to remain active and contribute to society. 'Drive' Author Daniel Pink refers to research by the London School of economics exploring the validity of this belief. This concluded that the 'carrot and stick' money incentive is only necessary in mundane, repetitive jobs, which as we've seen are technically obsolete.

27. Empirically, those jobs that do still require human input are shown to require no such incentive. They are the jobs that require more lateral and creative use of the brain, and which are therefore more therapeutic, and socially rewarding in themselves. Sharing jobs evenly amongst the population would mean only a few hours' work a week would be required from each person, liberating those currently trapped as wage slaves in pointless jobs to embark on programs of free education and development in skills they find genuinely interesting, and which will be of genuine merit to society.

28. The rise of internet and social media access for the masses has allowed the emergence of ever more efficient and organised peer to peer systems using the 'open-source' methodology for the benefit of all kinds of projects. Instead of divisive, secretive, so-called "healthy" competition, collaboration is key, meaning that individuals involved can educate and motivate each other, pool all ideas, and allow those ideas to evolve organically in real time. An early example of a product of such a collaborative effort is the Linux operating system - a highly sophisticated product, well regarded and utilised in the IT community, and which would have cost millions to develop and maintain in a traditional structured corporate institution such as Microsoft. However, it cost nothing to develop as members of the group simply contributed their own creative energies and expertise and bounced their ideas around the group, refining them and spontaneously giving rise to new directions of thought in the process. The model refined and rearranged itself and new and more efficient ideas replaced the less efficient ones.
29. The efficiency of the open source, distributed system of self-governance is due to the fact that is based upon common sense, intelligent reasoning, and a recognition of the fact that the fabric of 'truth' is innately fluid and subjective in nature - dependent upon the present human context of a problem requiring a solution. Individuals participating in such a system seek no differential advantage for the contributions they make, as the structure is horizontal, mutual and leaderless. They also have access to a worldwide pool of knowledge from which to draw their inspiration.

30. Your own Big society initiative in fact represents the foundations of a distributed, self-governance model which has the capacity not only to supplement local government services, but ultimately to replace government entirely. This initiative must now be developed to its logical conclusion.

31. From a perspective of scientific reality, the Earth is a single, synergistically connected biological organism. The obsolete Socio-economic system that keeps us locked into wasteful, inhuman economic and military competition is a cancer to that organism and to its living species. And we must start work on the cure. Termed the 'Resource-based' economic model, the solution is outlined below, with full details at http://www.thevenusproject.com">www.thevenusproject.com: -

32. We must mobilise for peace, as we once mobilised for war. We must recognise that the decaying monetary market system and divisive governing institutions are human evolutionary baggage - no longer valid in this age of technical abundance, knowledge and mass communication, and a barrier to our future survival as a species.

33. We must allow our natural transition into a new emergent socio economic paradigm in which the intelligent and efficient management of the Earth's resources guided by scientific, not political methods is key. We must convert from a competitive growth-based economy to a collaborative steady-state economy - one that actually does 'economise', using the best technology available to ensure our relationship with the environment and each other is as sustainable as possible given current scientific understanding.

34. We must prepare the population for the largest rebuild of human civilisation in history. The Earth and all its resources must be declared the common heritage of all of the World's people, and a permanent state of ceasefire and disarmament declared between all nations. All obsolete and non-essential jobs and related travel must cease, and burning of fossil fuels kept to a minimum, to be phased out with the introduction of renewable energy source - our first priority.

35. The Big society needs to be expanded into a network of neighbourhood self-governance communities that are as self-sufficient as possible in terms of meeting the immediate needs of communities - including food/freshwater provision, renewable energy production, waste recycling, education, transport, health, distribution of goods, and high capacity internet access. All local authorities should be instructed to guide the formation of these groups and provide the hardware and training and support necessary.

36. We must collaboratively develop an integrated global resource management system, which will provide a complete inventory of the Earth's minerals, flora and fauna, potential for renewable energy production, seismic activity and land use potential. This system would track the usage and replenishment rates of those resources, and provide a guiding framework for the global rebuild program. All industries must be reorganised into collaborative bodies whose only goals are to support the present wellbeing of all people, and to engage in the development, design and execution of the global rebuild using scientific guidance and the best technologies available. The designs must be based around the most efficient possible infrastructure for living, and local production and distribution of goods and services. Every part of the new infrastructure must also be designed to allow for continual updates as new and more efficient technology becomes available.

37. It is already technically possible to create such a system, and provide an optimised standard of living for every man, woman and child in the world. Malnutrition and poverty would be wiped off the face of the Earth.

38. Note that all those eager to preserve our national architectural and cultural heritage would have far more freedom then they do at present to give their time and efforts directly to these causes as volunteers. As spiritual leader to the British people, Her Majesty the Queen would have an important role to play, particularly during this time of transition.

39. Please accept this letter as a formal declaration of no confidence in the British Government institution, and in its ability to continue to serve the interests of the British population under a monetary system. This should also be taken as a declaration of no confidence in all the sovereign Governments of the world.

40. From this time forward Your Government must cease and desist: -
All actions that serve to aid and abet the perpetuation of the market monetary system and its intrinsic toxic manifestations as described above.
All other actions that wilfully obstruct Britain's transition to a sustainable, steady-state economic system.

41. I trust that having read the above arguments, you now realise that your government's failure to act in accordance will constitute a crime against humanity. I have asked her Majesty The Queen to launch a full public inquiry to ascertain the directions that must now be taken, and a consortium of socially responsible citizens are prepared to assist with the conduct of this inquiry.

42. I look forward to your expedient action in bringing civilisation to our country and the world before it is too late.

Yours Faithfully,

Shoulda been 'Yours sincerely' of course, which also detracts from the credibility a bit.

[kingred]

This is an interesting read.

Hello electric company, I would love to pay my bill with good intentions?

Hello?

....

[Throbbi]

It's a dream. It's a very wonderful dream, that I would probably be prepared to give up everything for, but it's still just a dream. There are to many people/corporations/governments who are stereotypically greedy and inhumane for this to even begin to happen.

It's a great piece of writing (with the exceptions of 40-42 of course) but it will come to nothing.

Perhaps that's a part of the general problem. I've been abused by that very system for so long now I've given up all hope (barring a lottery win) of ever getting away from it (I exist, I do not live etc.) and I personally know dozens, if not hundreds, of people who feel the same - worldwide this must be a couple of billion. When the people who are likely to benefit the most from an idea such as this have no faith in it, why will those who will benefit less make such an effort?

[Elton]

It isn't a bad piece of writing. That sad part is, you can't expect an ideal scenario to happen. We've been conditioned to look at the short term. A few months, a few weeks. If there's no profit, then we drop it.

It's moronic, but we insist upon it. All it takes really is a culture that looks beyond the happenings and project things into not tomorrow, but next year, the next decade. I know I sound relatively optimistic if not a bit naive about this. But I'll be honest, this is a pipe dream. We've been taught life only works in one way. And unless we awaken. We shall trudge on the same way.

[Da_Rude_Baboon]

As a bit of intellectual ego stroking masturbation it is an entertaining read but even with my limited understanding of much of the topics he raises he is wrong, mistaken or does not understand how they work. The author also fails to grasp how people actually make decisions in the real world.

I find it very ironic that this plan has been suggested by anonymous, a collection of computer hackers who's entire existence as an organisation owes every thing to capitalism. It's not a perfect system, but it's the best one we have and has raised more people out of poverty and advanced us as a species technologically faster and further than anything else.

[Archtronics]

Things like this sound great on paper but in practice not so much as someone always ends up wanting power and control, the 20th century has shown this rather well.

[mars-bar-man]

We need a nuclear war to make money obsolete and go back to a time before all what has been mentioned. Back when you could trade services.

Sod it, I'm gonna join the Amish.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[stonedsurd]

Originally Posted by mars-bar-man

We need a nuclear war to make money obsolete and go back to a time before all what has been mentioned. Back when you could trade services.

Sod it, I'm gonna join the Amish.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

You'll have to give up that Galaxy Nexus.

[Elton]

Originally Posted by mars-bar-man

We need a nuclear war to make money obsolete and go back to a time before all what has been mentioned. Back when you could trade services.

Sod it, I'm gonna join the Amish.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

The Amish can't escape a nuclear war.

[Da_Rude_Baboon]

Originally Posted by mars-bar-man

We need a nuclear war to make money obsolete and go back to a time before all what has been mentioned. Back when you could trade services.

The problem with the barter system is you to have negotiate the value of your item(s) or services every time you want to do a trade. If the person you want to trade with has no need for what you have then your screwed. The whole point of money is that it has a set value that can be traded for anything. I think a lot of people fail to realise how useful money actually is.

[Porkins' Wingman]

Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon

As a bit of intellectual ego stroking masturbation it is an entertaining read but even with my limited understanding of much of the topics he raises he is wrong, mistaken or does not understand how they work. The author also fails to grasp how people actually make decisions in the real world.

I find it very ironic that this plan has been suggested by anonymous, a collection of computer hackers who's entire existence as an organisation owes every thing to capitalism. It's not a perfect system, but it's the best one we have and has raised more people out of poverty and advanced us as a species technologically faster and further than anything else.

"wrong, mistaken or does not understand how they work" - well here's your chance to explain why that is, do you have any specific examples of what's wrong and why? I don't think the author does fail to grasp much and demonstrates an understanding of the fundamental issues. The author makes reference to psychological aspects of society so to imply they're ignoring this aspect seems inaccurate.

"advanced us as a species..." - advanced us to what, and at what cost? The letter isn't denying the reality of the 21st Century, but the author is focusing on the issues that have demonstrably failed to function as they were intended - e.g. approaches to crime and disorder, economics.

[Nexxo]

It's a nice treatise on "What's wrong with the world today" but offers no realistic solutions.

Moreover it seems to assume that the government didn't already understand all this, and that ordinary people do. Most ordinary folk don't even take responsibility for the aspects of their own life that they can control. What makes them think that they will even reflect on the bigger picture?

[Porkins' Wingman]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

It's a nice treatise on "What's wrong with the world today" but offers no realistic solutions.

Moreover it seems to assume that the government didn't already understand all this, and that ordinary people do. Most ordinary folk don't even take responsibility for the aspects of their own life that they can control. What makes them think that they will even reflect on the bigger picture?

I read it differently. I read it like the author isn't writing this primarily for the Prime Minister's understanding, but for the public's, like it was written so as to provide a single document or webpage that could be disseminated across the web in an attempt to unite the public to stand behind this letter to say "Enough is enough!", with the subsequent consequence that the government is backed in to a corner. That's why I posted it here, because I thought it would be a good testing ground to see if the content of the letter actually held water with some of the finest thinkers around I've only read it once myself and haven't had the time to explore the vailidity of each line the author took on each subject, but my first impression was that it deserved some initial attention.

The more something like this spreads on the web, the better in my books. There's alot of stuff in there that I wonder whether average Joe has stopped to think about - so many people just seem to blindly go about their conveyor-belt lives without any critical appraisal - and if this could actually gather some momentum and awaken people then it can only have a positive effect I reckon. I don't think even the author is expecting Cameron to read it and say, "Yeah, it's a fair cop, we've been ignoring many issues that aren't going to go away and as of NOW we're going to rip up the statute book and start again", but if this stuff was accepted by the public consciousness then a trickle effect could at least begin.

[Nexxo]

Your logic is sound, but the problem is that we are dealing with the average population: an IQ of 100 (which is not as much as you'd think), a reading age of an 8 to 12-year old, the emotional maturity of a 12 to 16-year old and a moral development to suit.

That does not mean that people's should not be exposed to these ideas; just that you should not expect much in response.

[Da_Rude_Baboon]

Originally Posted by Porkins' Wingman

"wrong, mistaken or does not understand how they work" - well here's your chance to explain why that is, do you have any specific examples of what's wrong and why? I don't think the author does fail to grasp much and demonstrates an understanding of the fundamental issues. The author makes reference to psychological aspects of society so to imply they're ignoring this aspect seems inaccurate.

I will go through specific points below but my main objections is they fail to understand that humans are irrational and are very bad at making long term decisions. Why do smokers smoke? Why do we over eat when we know its bad for us? Why do people living on less than 99 cents a day go hungry so they can buy a TV? The author assumes that people will take the rational choice when it's offered to them. Or, to put it another way, you can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

"advanced us as a species..." - advanced us to what, and at what cost? The letter isn't denying the reality of the 21st Century, but the author is focusing on the issues that have demonstrably failed to function as they were intended - e.g. approaches to crime and disorder, economics.

To where we are now. The reality is the what we have now is built on the foundations of capitalism. The website your posting this on, the computer your using, the electricity it uses is all the product of profit making organisations. With out competition and money from investors, the rich the author complains about, none of that would be available to you today. Look at soviet Russia, once you removed the competition of capitalism technological development ground to a halt. The only areas they really excelled in where military and space technology where they competed directly with the US. Competition has driven us forward.

Is the cost of that development worth it? I don't know but I would rather be alive here and now than any other time prior to this.

10. It is now widely acknowledged that world oil production passed its peak around 2005, and is in decline as remaining reserves become more hazardous and energy exhaustive to extract - as was illustrated by the Deep water Horizon incident in April 2010.

Is it? Peak oil has fallen off the radar lately because as we are getting more and more efficient at extracting oil. We used to only be able to get 20% of the oil from a well, we are now at 70% and it's rising all the time. Peak oil will still happen but the date has been pushed back a long way.

12. It is also worth noting that Dr Robert Hare, the eminent authority in the study of psychopathy has carried out research into the relationship between personal qualities advantageous to career advancement in today's corporate structure, and the personality traits of the psychopath. He has concluded that there is a significant correlation. The propensity for predatory manipulation, false charm, distorted self-worth, and lack of empathy for the wellbeing of others is evident in - and is an undeniable advantage to - many of those who are the most ambitious, successful and politically influential players of the economic game.

Studies have also shown that psychopaths perform extremely poorly in these positions. They get there through social manipulation not merit. People who perform badly in prominent positions don't stay there for long.

13. Secondly, I would like touch upon the legislative and legal processes that your government continues to enforce. Extensive research conducted by Doctors Gabor Mate, James Gilligan, Robert Sapolsky and other eminent experts in the field has determined that all human social behaviour is the product of its environment, and even if individuals manifest the strongest genetic pre-disposition to violent or antisocial behaviours, then they will still develop into law abiding and supportive members of society if all they are nurtured from the foetal stage in an environment that meets all their emotional and physical needs (a condition which as we've seen is intrinsically guaranteed not to be met for many under the 'free' market system) Hence different genes are shown to be switched on or off in response to environmental stimuli. This is termed an epi-genetic effect. The psycho-social stress already discussed is an illustration of this effect. Thus the concept of 'blame', presuming complete choice and free will of the perpetrator, irrespective of environment is fundamentally flawed. Those induced into antisocial behaviours are victims of culture.

Eh? Explain the bit in bold please. Also his definition of epi-genetic effects is correct but there seems to be a miss-understanding of its cause and effects. Environmental factors such as lack of food and poor health in your parents and grand parents has an epi-genetic effect but "social stress"?

Market competition also demands the production cost of goods cannot exceed that of competitors, mutually assuring intrinsically inferior quality from the outset.

That's were Apple has been going wrong lately.

The search for new gas reserves in becoming more desperate, and energy companies are resorting to increasingly unscrupulous practices in trying to access shale gas through 'hydraulic fracturing', despite the irrefutable pollution this causes to groundwater.

Fracking is controversial because it's effects are unknown as not enough study has been done. I don't think it's at the "irrefutable" stage yet.

An early example of a product of such a collaborative effort is the Linux operating system - a highly sophisticated product, well regarded and utilised in the IT community, and which would have cost millions to develop and maintain in a traditional structured corporate institution such as Microsoft.

Linux is a wonderful product but it's isoteric and unfriendly. Exactly what everyone wants.

I am actually quite surprised by your support for this idea Porkins as in your previous posts you seem to be very much in favour of individual choice. To me this manifesto seems to want to hand control of the world over to an intellectual elite who will make all lifes decisions for us.

[mucgoo]

My impression was wealth of nations,ron paul, 1984, and the last bit read like eco vs tycoons in anno.

I've also got the impression that they're advocating some kind of global technocracy, communist mash-up. If somebody can make that system of government work in its idealistic form then I'm all for it. Good luck with that though.

[GMC]

Haven't read the whole article but can say with certainty that point 12 misrepresents the work and writings of Hare. I suspect they read 'snakes in suits'. Good book, with useful observations but misrepresented here in an alarmist manner to justify an unrelated argument to a degree that I would expect from the daily mail.

Not impressed.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD using Xparent Red Tapatalk 2

[Porkins' Wingman]

Originally Posted by GMC

Haven't read the whole article but can say with certainty that point 12 misrepresents the work and writings of Hare. I suspect they read 'snakes in suits'. Good book, with useful observations but misrepresented here in an alarmist manner to justify an unrelated argument to a degree that I would expect from the daily mail.

Not impressed.

I was interested to see this post, as I certainly mistrust anything that seeks to deliberately misrepresent something for coercion purposes. However, having taken a look at 'Snakes in Suits' I'm not sure it's such a blatant misrepresentation as you make out, but I do agree that the references to psychopaths and genocide are alarmist and unnecessary. The author of the letter is welcome in my view to draw on the self-preservation characteristics of Conservative policies, but by using the alarmist tactic it detracts from the core message.

Good work, have some rep.

Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon

Why do smokers smoke? Why do we over eat when we know its bad for us? Why do people living on less than 99 cents a day go hungry so they can buy a TV?

Are these not all related to issues of self-worth and insecurity, which is exactly what marketing/advertising practices over the last 60-odd years have sought to exploit in the pursuit of profit? Companies making money by selling corrosive products airbrushed lifestyles?

Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon

Peak oil has fallen off the radar lately because as we are getting more and more efficient at extracting oil. We used to only be able to get 20% of the oil from a well, we are now at 70% and it's rising all the time. Peak oil will still happen but the date has been pushed back a long way.

I agree that the author fails to provide sufficient evidence to assert that peak oil has already occurred. But at the same time, oil prices have never been higher and have to be far and away the number one reason for the excessive inflation we've seen in the last couple of years because virtually everything else we do is dependent on oil in some way and I think is brushed over whenever the latest inflation figures are announced.

Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon

Fracking is controversial because it's effects are unknown as not enough study has been done. I don't think it's at the "irrefutable" stage yet.

I agree, I'm not aware that the evidence is there, but at the same time I have seen signs that it will be adopted in spite of its effects - which is fair enough if the cost/benefit analysis justifies it, but if the effects are 'covered up' to ease public acceptance then that's not nice.

Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon

I am actually quite surprised by your support for this idea Porkins as in your previous posts you seem to be very much in favour of individual choice. To me this manifesto seems to want to hand control of the world over to an intellectual elite who will make all lifes decisions for us.

I am most definitely in favour of individual over social (in its centralised form), but the author clearly requests a move towards 'neighbourhood self-governance communities that are as self-sufficient as possible' so I don't accept your interpretation about handing control over to anyone.

In my early twenties I was quite idealistic, but I gradually shed more and more of those ideals through my twenties. Nowadays I'm very much a 'que sera, sera' person. If banks and politicians want to rip us off, so be it, I don't crave the things they crave. If the global population is going to experience a mass fatality episode due to nuclear war/climate change/aliens, so be it, it will be interesting to watch happen. But in the same way, revolutions are interesting to watch. I'm not motivated enough to campaign for revolution myself, but if revolution were genuinely on the cards then I'd merrily jump on board in order to push it through, just to see what will happen... anything to make a change from the banal and predictable way in which life seems at the moment

[walle]

Originally Posted by mucgoo

I've also got the impression that they're advocating some kind of global technocracy, communist mash-up.

They seem to be working towards global socialism yes, and socialism leads to the destruction of the individual and the crushing of the human spirit. That is what socialism and nanny state paves the way for. The system is highly anti-human in sentiment.

Their latest victim seem to be the United States. A country founded on the rights of the individual. Well, look at it now.

I didn't like this letter at all, it scared the living daylights out of me, and it pissed me off!