countless discussions have been had about which system is the best one to support us on earth – with wars being fought and millions being killed just to attempt to assert ‘the best system’. with this decision being perceived to ultimately result in either huge success for life on earth or absolute destruction of life on earth – it is obviously valuable to know what really is the true ‘best’ solution. for many of us, answering this has been made much more difficult by the huge amounts of propaganda, deception and confusion that have been generated politically and on all levels of discussion of the issues involved.
my approach here is quite different to that of most observers, in that i am a trained system architect/engineer and although it is usual for those skills to be used in creating computer software systems, the actual base of the subject does not require computers at all – the basis is logic, analysis and the careful application of both scientific and artistic techniques for creating solutions to challenges. in my case i also have a broad range of experience to draw on from other fields and schools of thought, including – but not limited to: martial arts, yoga, meditation, music production, sound engineering, metaphysics, commercial business operations, psychology & holistic health. i feel this gives me an ability to examine this issue of ‘human support systems’ in a way that goes to a greater depth than is common among most others i have found who speak about it (including many who are considered experts) – i say this not to ‘blow my own trumpet’, but just to point to the kinds of experiences that i know for sure help us to better understand the challenges involved here and to explain some of how i came to think as i do. so, first, some quick basics:
wikipedia basically defines a system as: “a set of interacting or interdependent component parts forming a complex/intricate whole.”
so the human body is a form of system, a city is a form of system, a government is a form of system, a cell phone is a form of system and a planet is a form of system.
a system fails the moment it does not achieve it's intended goals.
when defining what exactly our human support systems are intended to achieve as goals, we hit something of a point of controversy, since many people disagree about what exactly the object is. it might at first seem that everyone must surely agree that we need to do what we can to support life and to give everyone a chance - but that is not the intention or agenda of many humans. in fact, many humans that are elevated to positions of control in society actually specifically intend to hold back or even kill large subsets of the population, while attempting to promote their own groups – and they have no problem supporting and using a system such as democracy to do it. if we say that a system is intended to allow everyone to manifest their desires - then these predatory / dominating humans would therefore seek to manifest their desires - just as they do now, in the form of killing many other people.
yes, we can understand what makes a system perfect by looking at, feeling and understanding our own body (or by examination of any number of other systems). our body thrives when it is balanced – it requires just the right PH level for health (not too acidic, not too alkaline), it requires just the right level of many different nutrients, including sunlight and just the right amount of rest – among many other requirements. It is balance that is key in systems – a motor car will be impossible to drive or inefficient if it is imbalanced, a human body will be ill or die if it is imbalanced and a society will suffer and collapse when it is imbalanced. it may be possible to limp along and deny the problems for a while – like a driver who blocks out the alarm lights on his/her car dashboard so that he/she forgets that the car is overheating; but eventually, the true reality will be forced to the surface as a catastrophe strikes. sadly, many of us – when faced with such catastrophe in our lives, will even then just blame someone else instead of accepting our own responsibility in the causation of the problem and I suggest we learn not to do that if we intend balance and success on earth.
balance is defined accurately as being a state where ‘no part or aspect of the whole is overpowered by any other’. so in a car, every component is operating in a way that prevents it overheating or being damaged and in a human body every cell is nourished and free to be exactly as it needs to be.
with regard to human support systems - a system that allows anyone to come to real harm is to some extent flawed. perfect balance is possible.
wikipedia defines capitalism as: “an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system, and competitive markets. In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investment is determined by the owners of the factors of production in financial and capital markets, and prices and the distribution of goods are mainly determined by competition in the market”
obviously this is a very complex approach to life that adds a significant burden to the mental processes of everyone alive. whereas once it was possible to freely walk down an unindustrialised, uncommercialised pathway and commonly find free food growing on trees, now these trees are all but gone (often removed deliberately to attempt to increase the ‘profit’ of those who grow trees commercially) and we are forced to conform to the system of ‘capitalism’ just to access what was once freely our own.
when we apply a test to capitalism, to find out of if it is balanced or not – we quickly find capitalism is not balanced. since capitalism is an approach that lends itself to empire building and the conglomeration of power structures to attempt to compete with other empires, there is a continued drive within the minds of many of those who use it to continue to expand their ability to affect change on earth via capitalism as a way to maintain their enjoyed position of ‘wealth’ and not be relegated to poverty (along with the majority of people):
just for starters - anyone who has self acceptance enough to know they don’t need or desire to compete with their brothers/sisters, anyone who re-members that life on earth needs to be free, anyone who notices that ‘money’ is an opposite to ‘free’ and who also prefers ‘free’. how are these groups being overpowered? our current capitalist system has been designed to ensure that a monopoly on violence is held by the ‘elected government’ and since the capitalist system equates ‘financial wealth’ with ‘value’ and ‘power', the government systems are dominated by those fervent capitalists who have the most wealth and who intend to keep things that way. they have usually, therefore, used their position to use the state’s monopoly on violence to ensure that any possible deviation from the capitalist control system they represent is disrupted or silenced sufficiently that their artificial hierarchy and empires are not threatened. the system of ‘private ownership’, being powered by ‘money’ - automatically means that whoever has the most money, has the most land and means of production of ‘things’ - yet the process of getting more money is in no way tied to any measure of wisdom or compassion within those receiving it. in other words, there is no check in the system to ensure that money goes to those who intend to create and maintain balance on earth and, in fact, it is often the case that those who get the most money have little or no interest in the topic whatsoever (see the previous video on wealth distribution in america). ironically, it has often been the case that the supporters of capitalism point to equally imbalanced control systems, such as was found in soviet russia and claim that capitalism is the solution to such problems, when in truth it is not really much better.
in short - capitalism is to human support, what modern military war machines are to friendly discussion.
wikipedia defines democracy as: “… literally "rule of the commoners". In modern usage, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. Democracy is sometimes referred to as "rule of the majority"." Democracy was originally conceived in Classical Greece, where political representatives were chosen by a jury from amongst the male citizens: rich and poor.
According to political scientist Larry Diamond, democracy consists of four key elements: (a) A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections; (b) The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life; (c) Protection of the human rights of all citizens, and (d) A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens”
firstly, we need to notice that there are at least two forms of democracy defined here, one is called representational democracy (the kind that involves a parliament and elections) and one is called direct democracy (the kind that is almost unheard of today, whereby all individuals may vote on all decisions, with no intermediary ‘politicians’ involved). So we need to look at both to fully understand the situation here, however, since both share some features that introduce imbalance I will just address those aspects to make my point and then move on.
both forms of democracy result in a situation where a percentage of the population chooses to limit/control everyone by a code or set of rules – which is enforced in some way. even if the human rights are identified to include a right such as ‘everyone has the right to be free provided they don’t overpower anyone else’ (a right which is a REAL right of all of us) – there will still be a ‘wiggle room’ added in practise, due to the control of this ‘right’ through court action and the ‘rule of law’. in other words, while we may define the perfect set of ‘rights’ to be upheld that should create true balance, the practical reality is that the people involved are usually imbalanced within themselves and their biases will be introduced into any action which claims to intend to defend the rights of everyone. this is demonstrated in that in truth, usually, most of those involved in court cases will walk away feeling they have been overpowered. so while it is theoretically possible to create a balanced society that uses democratic principles, in practise the level of success depends entirely on the individuals involved being balanced enough internally to find balance with the others in society and the actual democratic process is, at best, secondary to that deeper aspect of the dynamics involved.
representative democracy of the type we see in the usa region, britain and many other areas adds dramatically more potential for imbalance into the equation, since it specifically ensures that less voices have a direct say in outcomes, rules and the balancing process of the judiciary/courts – which can only ever have the result of more and more people being overpowered and not having their needs met. such a system is one of convenience only and opens the door to all the kinds of fraud, deception and denial that we have seen over and over and over and over again in countries that are afflicted by it.
yes, not only does the issue of balance run right through all of this, but so too does the issue of free will. it is free will that must be fully understood and respected now and it is precisely this that has been repeatedly ignored right the way through our earth story. if a group decides they want to explore making music late at night, for example, no-one is being overpowered if they all unite and do that – provided they are far away from those who don’t want to participate. that is the ideal in that example, since no-one is being involved who does not want to be involved. if however, all the possible venues are controlled (allegedly ‘owned’) by people who do not want loud music at night, then the desires of this group cannot be manifested and we have a tension and dis-ease in society that need not exist. this applies to all such creative desires in life and the tragedy is that it does not take much to adopt a respect for free will and to dramatically improve life for all as a result.
a great example of this is cannabis – a freely growing plant on earth. think of how many have had their lives ruined in the american region alone, not by the plant – but by the controlling/dominating agenda of those who claim to be ‘protecting society’ by caging anyone who wants to use the plant. it has taken decades of campaigning to get the situation to start to change, even after it was proven that the plant specifically treats (very successfully) numerous serious diseases such as parkinsons’ disease and cancer:
if free will had been respected all along, by allowing individuals to explore the use of this plant in their own bodies, we would be collectively FAR more balanced and happy. the prisons would be far less packed and far more people would be productive and enjoying life than they are now. the fact is that it IS possible to be harmed by cannabis too, through overuse and ignorance, just as it is possible to be harmed by water, peanuts or potentially even feathers (if you have enough of them!). It is not for anyone to decide what someone else may put into their body, provided the act does not overpower anyone/thing.
firstly, you need to know now that most/all of the capitalist democracies that are held up to be in any way successful, have in fact – since day one – been covertly designed to offer zero democracy. while this statement may be met with shock and denials, it is the truth. these alleged democracies are, in fact, just facades designed to deceive as many as possible into thinking that they have a voice and a means of creating change, when in fact they do not. this is not a theory. not only have countless points of evidence of this surfaced over the years, but we even have an ivy league historian that was commissioned to (secretly) write the history of the group/network that covertly orchestrates the fake democracy in america for their own use. he, unexpectedly to that network, published the book publicly! but the book is so academic and not well known that few have read it or know about it. you can learn about the book here:
another insightful and inspired exposure of our current ‘democracies’ is found in this animation:
when we examine the mechanics of capitalist ‘democracy’ we find that, in fact, the idea that ‘capitalism generates the best solutions to problems’ is a total lie with no evidence to support it that cannot easily be refuted. what has occurred is that the most deceptive individuals on earth simply use this falsehood to continue their domination of everyone else - even to the extent that the publicly available educational textbooks on many subjects are deliberately warped and data manipulated to paint a false picture of the effects of capitalism and to spread a totally false version of ‘science’ and associated belief systems. this deception now extends through agriculture, medicine, military, finance and most other areas (sub systems) of life. in short, capitalism is part of the cause of our problems and solves nothing at all. you can, for example, explore the process of money creation and although it may take a few days to grasp fully, you will see how the entire foundation of capitalism and ‘money’ is based on 100% total fraud:
on the question of what systems are better, i prefer the idea of systemlessness, because it results in the closest possible to total free will - by systemlessness, i am referring mainly to an absence of rules and control over the parts of what would otherwise be defined as a system. it is free will that is the foundation of successful life on earth and any rules/system inherently limits that to some extent. a way of life that I see working well on earth is one with various names, such as ‘voluntaryism’, ‘ubuntu’ and to some extent ‘anarchism’. the problem we currently have with discussing ‘anarchism’ is that there are many who misunderstand what the word means and that itself is partially a result of a deliberate misinformation campaign by the highly organised octopus of empire builders - since to fully understand anarchism in it’s true sense is to find a significant key to escape our enslavement (by the empire builders). the word anarchy literally translates as ‘without rules/rulers’, so it can be taken to mean, in a practical sense, ‘the agreement to live peacefully without rules’. to support such a way of life requires significant healing, balancing and evolving on the part of individuals first – which is something that is done voluntarily, rather than through any kind of pressure or centralisation.
examples of this way of being do exist in some senses in some tribes around the world who live in harmony with the planet and their ways are being ‘modernised’ presently in various places, particularly in south africa by the ubuntu movement. you can learn about them here in these videos with michael tellinger:
regardless of whether we adopt a system or aim for systemlessness, the fact remains that we need FREE WILL just to survive and adapt at all on earth and thus we need to always fully respect free will, rather than inflict control on earth and each other. to do this requires us to learn much that many of us have not yet learned, to balance our own minds, emotions, hearts, intentions and bodies and to evolve our aspects that have become frozen in time – whether due to our own reluctance to change or due to traumas incurred during our lifetimes.
tried and tested methods already exist for those to use who desire to heal now and it is largely to aid in that process that I am creating the social network at www.ureka.org. If you are inspired by the ideas shared here or are just looking for a place to call home that respects balance and free will, then I recommend making a profile here and joyning in!
wishing you well.