Cinci pasi simpli de a te deconecta de la Matrix.

Atata timp cat esti conectat la un calculator, programat sa-ti ruleze realitatea, nu poti scapa, iti controleaza intreaga viata. Esti programat si reprogramat fara sa-ti dai seama doar pentru a uitat cat de puternic esti cu adevarat. Atata timp cat esti programat sa slujesti stapanii inselatori ai vietii tale, nu vei sti niciodata ca poti sa-ti schimbi viata intr-o clipa. Stapanii, corporatiile pentru care lucrezi, religia pe care o adori, societatea pe care incerci sa o pacalesti si sa o copiezi, te-au transformat din clipa in care ai pasit in aceasta viata. Te-au programat sa crezi ca esti mic, neajutorat si neputincios. E timpul sa te trezesti si sa-ti iei viata in propriile maini! Iata cateva metode cu care sistemul te tine inchis:

1. Te hipnotizeaza cu planul lor. Participand la programele media, urmarind show-rile Tv, reclamele agasante, atunci iti programezi singul creierul pe frecventa pe care o doresc ei. Realitatea pe care o prezinta aceste arme folosite cu iscusinta de manipulatori duce catre violenta, ura rasiala, diferente religioase, consumerism exacerbat, distragerea atentiei, nepasare… Fii diferit! Televizorul e pentru scavi iar tu esti o fiinta libera !

2. Otravesc tot ceea ce folosesti. Apa este contaminata cu metale grele, mancarea este intoxicata cu culturi modificate genetic, industria farmaceutica va aprovizioneaza cu medicamente ce provoaca alte si alte boli. Ei va ofera boala si tot ei vin cu solutia… de cele mai multe ori solutia fiind mai daunatoare decat boala in sine. Esti o fiinta naturala asa ca incearca sa te comporti ca atare. Nu poti gandi coerent daca esti imbibat de chimicale, pe care le-ai platit cu banii tai. Fara chimicale si produse ce nu se gasesc in natura! Acest lucru te ajuta atat fizic cat si spiritual.

3. Se folosesc de religii pentru a perpetua minciuni. Un subiect fierbinte pentru foarte multi oameni. Utilizarea religiei este unul dintre cele mai simple moduri de a divide si cuceri omul. Am fost crescuti si indoctrinati sa credem ca “religia noastra este cea adevarata”. Fiecare religie are in centru mesajul de iubire fata de semen si compasiune. Cu toate astea de cate ori apare cineva care nu e de acord cu credintele noastre acest mesaj esta uitat si lasat in urma. Acesta este si scopul… de a ne diviza si de a ne lupta intre noi. Liderii miscarilor religioase stiu cum sa manipuleze pentru a detine controlul absolut. Nu te lasa manipulat !

4. Invatamantul este indoctrinare nu educare. Oamenii ar trebui sa fie educati sa gandeasca analitic si cu scepticism. Insa in toate scolile din lume trebuie sa asculti orbeste de dascal si sa continui propavaduirea celor invatate de la el. Scopul scolilor este de a produce un standard de cetatean, destul de destept si de docil cat sa lucreze pentru sistem. Cazurile izolate de oameni care au incercat sa demonstreze ca anumite paradigme in care credem sunt gresite au fost ridiculizate si date la o parte. Informeaza-te !

5. Te-au convins ca asta este singura realitate si ca nu poti face nimic impotriva sistemului; te-au manipulat sa crezi ca esti prea mic pentru o schimbare; te-au manipulat sa nu iti pese, sa iti ridiculizezi vecinul care e diferit si nu se conformeaza normelor; te-au indoctrinat ca fericirea in viata inseamna doar iluziile cumparate de la ei. Insa tu sti ca nu e doar atat. Tu sti ca poti sa iti contlolezi singur viata… trebuie doar sa vrei. Trebuie doar sa privesti in jur si sa te intrebi daca asta e lumea in care vrei sa creasca copiii si nepotii tai. Trezeste-te !

Sursa: conspiratiisimistere.wordpress.com

Yashraj Atodaria: And most important, the stocks of UNITED AIRLINES had massive shorting and buying of PUT Options on the exchange for the September series from all over the world. Why the hell was everyone suddenly interested in this airline's stock? Obviously they not only designed the catastrophe, they made billions over it.

Peter Er Er: FBI followed the money trail as far as they could. Obviously somebody knew and profited from it, but they were never able (or perhaps allowed) to identify who.
They were able to trace the anthrax attacks that occurred shortly after - the anthrax came from a US government lab and the suspect then turned up dead. Fact.

Yashraj Atodaria: Obviously the trail went cold. It was meant to. One lady who claimed on TV that she will expose US Govt's lies turns up dead, allegedly committed suicide the same night. And Jerry Bennings. Lot of mystery.

Peter Er Er: The UK Iraq weapons expert Dr. David Kelly also turned up dead under suspicious circumstances when he clashed with the government over Saddam having WMDs. Apparently he cut his wrists, then dumped his own body at a different location with no blood at the scene. The paramedics said it definately was not suicide. Official verdict - suicide.

Peter Er Er: John Patrick O'Neill is also worth reading about. He was the FBI top counter-terror expert, investigated the earlier WTC bombings, the attack on the USS Cole and more. He is quoted as saying that the biggest obstacle to investigating terrorism in the middle east, was US oil interests. He clashed with the federal government and senior FBI officials and was pushed out. He retired in August 2001 and took up a new post - head of security at the WTC. He died on 9/11.

Yashraj Atodaria: Also the fireman, forgot his name. He came out alive of the tower after rescuing some of the people trapped. Later he was calling someone from a telephone booth and an explosion went off. His truck's windows were shattered. There's even a video of this on youtube. He said to someone on the phone that he heard explosions, and few days later he is found dead.

Frank Kowalczyk: Could this be where the commercial aircraft were swapped out for military GPS controlled cargo planes?

Kirk Farrell: Passed over or took off from ?

Craig Goodwin: Why were there no plane wreckage recovered from the world trade site? not a nut a bolt no flight recorders, nothing and the other 2 crash sites, nothing no wreckage?

Peter Er Er: But a suspects passport survived.

Peter Er Er: Anybody remember the anthrax attacks that occurred immediately after 9/11? The FBI traced the anthrax back to a US government lab, but the only suspect then promptly turned up dead. Look it up. It's all on the record.

Peter Er Er: Also look up Operation Northwoods. You can download the full 12-page declassified document. It was a Pentagon plan, approved by all the Joint Chiefs of Staff which included staging a terror campaign in Miami, DC and elsewhere, fake hijackings and more, all to be blamed on Cuba as a pretext for invasion. It was only vetoed by JFK - a similar plan with a different president may have gone all the way. Jus' sayin'

THIS IS THE REASON I NO LONGER WATCH VIDEO'S POSTED HERE. ANY VIDEO CAN BE MANIPULATED TO BRING OUT A DESIRED RESPONSE OF THE PEOPLE. IT ALSO INCLUDES WHAT THE TELIEVISION MEDIA SHOWS YOU ... AS WHAT WAS DONE ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.

The truth can hurt you, but it can also set you free!

In 2001 when 9/11 happened, the world was in shock and the people did not know how to react, much less suspect it had been orchestrated by the CIA. And when the Iraq war happened, everyone trusted President Bush enough to go into Iraq to get those WMDs that were never found. Yet the whole time, no one had been prepared for the huge psychological warfare operations the Bush Administration was putting in place. Yes, a lot of people called George Bush a fascist, but not much else could be heard. No one mentioned that his grandfather had helped fund Hitler (1), or that his father was still being regularly briefed about new CIA operations and old. And if there was it was marginalized and acclaimed as conspiracy theories, by even George Bush himself. Then, somehow the Patriot act came out from nowhere, as if it had been writ overnight, and in came the Department of Homeland Security (a modern version of Gestapo) as well as Guantanamo (which was even more curious seeing as how we hadn’t trusted the Cubans in over 50 years). And again the people bowed down and did not question.

Now in 2013, we finally have all the facts, and this is how it goes:

2003: Bush Administration monitors anarchist groups in the U.S (Reported by Michael Moore)

2004: Facebook is created with CIA money and U.S Military backing (2). Facebook was originally conceived as a sexist and elitist Harvard tool to rate who was “Hot or Not” .

2006: Oracle billionaire Larry Ellison worked on a CIA project with the code-name “Oracle” (over 3 billion devices use Java by Oracle) (3)

2007: Palantir (officially) starts creating online censorship software for the U.S Military (4), when reports dating back to 2004 state that the Department of Homeland Security had hired up to 50,000 agents to monitor the internet.

2009: FOIA Documents Reveal DHS Social Media Monitoring During Obama Inauguration (5)

2011: Many complaints from anti-war activists and non-profits about censorship start to arise. (6) (7) (8)

2011: EFF.org get $15 million donation from Palantir. (9)

2012: Project Censored puts “US Military Manipulates the Social Media” at #2 (10) on their most censored list (Operation Earnest Voice mentioned), with More US Soldiers Committed Suicide Than Died in Combat as #1.

Now this might all seem pretty abstract to you, but let me put it into perspective now that you have the timeline. The U.S Military thanks to Operation Earnest Voice had the capability to censor Iraqi activists, as well as journalists all over the world working for big publications (with close affiliations to the CIA). Which means that the effects of these psychological operations caused something like this: “When the war ended with tens of thousands Iraqi dead and an electricity and sanitation supply deliberately “bombed into the stone age”, the west followed up with sanctions. It is now estimated by the UN that these sanctions, which have prevented repairs to sewage and water plants on the one hand and denied basic medicines on the other, have been responsible for the deaths of around one million people, many of them children. Other sources put this figure at 1.5 million.” (11)

There had been rumors that the Bush Administration had lied about the number of casualties, only counting those actively killed by U.S Soldiers, and not those who died from lack of basic necessities. And to think that meanwhile the U.S Military and CIA were developing software to be used in our homeland, by Homeland Security still to this day seems surreal. Not to mention that the CIA would rig elections for George Bush and Obama (who had worked for CIA front companies in the past, and whose mother was an advocate for the IMF’s devastating free-market capitalist policies, in countries like Chile under Pinochet).

As an internet activist and founder of an anarchist non-profit, I have been attacked, harassed, and censored by the U.S Military since 2009 (when my non-profit was still a blog gaining a large audience). Our members and volunteers have also encountered the same issues. One volunteer was even given death threats by an angry U.S soldier who lost composure while attacking us with fake personas. And a teenage member’s parents were questioned by the FBI for their son visiting our Facebook page. We also had a member who I have not heard of since, who set up an Occupy protest in front of Facebook Headquarters in Palo Alto, and was censored on Facebook. Therefore only 12 people came to her event. At the event they were met immediately by Palo Alto police, who apparently were very violent and put our volunteer into a coma. All attempts since by our non-profit to expose this were “astroturfed” by Google and Facebook. Our website has since been under continuous DoS attacks ever since by government hackers. And our Paypal account was immediately shut down by Paypal. Last month Facebook shut down our page for over 6 out of 30 days, with no reason, and activated it again when too many people started asking questions about us (we have a very small but strong group of supporters and volunteers on Facebook, whom have been endlessly persecuted by “CIA Facebook”). We even set up a social network on our website which was compromised and hacked into. And many anti-war activists are reporting similar damages. Even lawyers are getting hard to find in order to demand retribution, since no lawyer likes going up against the United States Government.

The numbers are still not clear, but the U.S Military has definitely been censoring millions of anti-war voices and even “impeach Bush” voices since 2004(12). And we now know that Google was working with the U.S Military prior to the creation of Facebook. Nothing more than a great National Socialist PR campaign, with merchandising, lots of censorship and a global pro-capitalist police state set up. When we cannot forget that the United States since World War 2 has killed more people for the same corporations and banks who funded Nazis all over Europe, the business plan (Investigated by a Rockefeller) and continued through the CIA since 1947 (13). These are the same people who funded General Franco and went to his funeral (funeral attended by Rockefellers), as well as those who funded King Constantine and the Shah of Iran. Not to mention that these are also the same people who murdered and censored European anarchists and after world war 2, and even before world war 2 in the U.S.

After the French revolution, the working class demanded that anarchists be (left) and hierarchists be (right), this idea was obscured with communism and socialism which were hierarchist systems (systemically fascist), and would later murder anarchists and jail them in gulags, just like the fascists in Europe with concentration camps. In other words what can be called the perpetual and conscientious culling of the masses by the ruling class. “Taking out the weeds”. And as it so turns out, I recently discovered that the Swastika was chosen by the Nazis, because it represented the brutal caste system in India, which for thousands of years has ritualized the murdering of lower castes by upper castes as a divine right (14).

We are right in the middle of global class warfare being played out by the 1% who own over 60% of this planet’s wealth and assume none of the responsibilities. The 1% (about 10 million millionaires and billionaires) who pollute our planet, allow 16,000 children a day to die from starvation, and millions to die from toxic products in their environments, which were originally sold for quick profit. We are being run by a bunch of lunatics who have covered our planet with nuclear bombs and proxy wars, ordain that this perpetually hierarchist system is flawless, and that mass slavery and servitude are inevitable. But in reality, it goes against thousands of years of collective history. To try and go against 6 billion people today is absolute folly. And if they succeed, their empire will eventually fall to barbarism and feudalism just like every empire in the past. Then this planet will be remembered as nothing more than a shooting star, which crashed because the pilots thought they were too divine to share shifts and/or profits.

SOURCES: anarchadia.com

1.      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar “George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany. The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.”

2.       http://youtu.be/UJqGbA2tLww

3.       http://in.rediff.com/money/2006/aug/11oracle.htm

4.       http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks

5.       https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/10/new-foia-documents-reveal-dhs-social-media

6.       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4OLrta3OTg

7.       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnldBxyRlkU

8.       http://anoncentral.tumblr.com/post/21205475182/facebook-censorship-2-0

9.       http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/eff-palantir/

10.    http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/2-us-military-manipulates-the-social-media/

11.    http://anarchism.pageabode.com/andrewnflood/the-2001-bombings-of-iraq

12.    http://www.causes.com/causes/647954-stop-facebook-from-deactivating-accounts-and-censoring-what-we-can-and-can-not-view/invite

13.     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip

14.     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYpvnMks1HE

Gitmo guard Terry Holdbrooks served at the Guantanamo Bay prison from 2003 - 2004. Late on he wrote the book "Traitor" where he documented many of his experiences. RT's Sam Sacks spoke with Terry and asked him what sort of instructions he was given as a guard when it comes to dealing with detainees.

Russia Today Video.

Former Guantanamo guard talks about conditions inside detainee facility: We were told not to treat inmates as humans.

“La Siria sta pagando un prezzo altissimo per una partita che serve a stabilire nuovi equilibri mondiali e in Italia la verità non viene detta, viene raccontata un’altra realtà”. E’ quanto afferma Mimmo Srour, siriano, ingegnere, ex assessore della Regione Abruzzo e della Provincia dell’Aquila, ex sindaco di Sant’Eusanio Forconese, comune in provincia de L’Aquila.
Srour è nato a Nakib, in Siria, dove è rimasto fino al momento di intraprendere gli studi universitari. Il suo vero nome è Mahmoud ma tutti lo chiamano “Mimmo” fin da quando venne in Italia, nel 1969, per laurearsi in Ingegneria presso l’Università dell’Aquila, città dove ha deciso di restare mettendo sù famiglia.

Mimmo Srour conosce bene la Siria e anche in questi momenti così delicati e complessi continua ad essere in contatto costante con persone, che ricoprono vari incarichi, che vivono in Siria. L’aspetto che mette in evidenza e che non riesce ad accettare riguarda l’informazione di parte che viene portata avanti in Occidente. “Un po’ di tempo fa alcuni giornalisti italiani, di giornali anche blasonati, sono andati in Siria – afferma – e una volta tornati nessun giornale gli ha dato la possibilità di scrivere e raccontare quello che avevano visto. E’ stato imposto il silenzio su quanto sta accadendo in Siria”.

The research was conducted by the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. The Nanoparticles carry melittin, which is the principal active component of bee venom. Melittin fuses with the HIV virus and destroys it’s protective envelope while molecular bumpers prevent the nanoparticles from harming the body’s normal cells. Bee venom is known to disrupt cellular walls and destroy tumour cells as well.

Bee venom contains a potent toxin called melittin that can poke holes in the protective envelope that surrounds HIV, and other viruses. Large amounts of free melittin can cause a lot of damage. Indeed, in addition to anti-viral therapy, the paper’s senior author, Samuel A. Wickline, MD, the J. Russell Hornsby Professor of Biomedical Sciences, has shown melittin-loaded nanoparticles to be effective in killing tumor cells.

The new study shows that melittin loaded onto these nanoparticles does not harm normal cells. That’s because Hood added protective bumpers to the nanoparticle surface. When the nanoparticles come into contact with normal cells, which are much larger in size, the particles simply bounce off. HIV, on the other hand, is even smaller than the nanoparticle, so HIV fits between the bumpers and makes contact with the surface of the nanoparticle, where the bee toxin awaits. (1)

Most anti-HIV drugs inhibit the virus’s ability to replicate. This is an anti-replication strategy that does nothing to stop the infection, and many strains of the virus have found ways around these drugs and continue reproducing. Given this discovery, a new vaginal gel could possibly be used in places where HIV is prominent. It can be used as a preventative measure to stop the initial infection and prevent the spread of HIV. The bee venom HIV study was published a several days ago in the journal Antiviral Therapy.

More than 34 million people are living with HIV/AIDS worldwide, and over 3 million of them are under the age of 15. Everyday, thousands of people contract HIV around the world.

It is also important to note the debate surrounding HIV and AIDS. Findings suggest there is not solid scientific evidence that exists today to prove the existence of HIV. AIDS is also under great debate as in some countries it is considered to be one thing while in another, it is something totally different. One can literally be diagnosed with AIDS in one country but not in another. AIDS is often is simply a term for a HUGE umbrella of potential diseases. The only common factor found amongst definitions is if the body’s T-cell count reduces below a specific level. Why is there such a lack of distinction about what AIDS truly is? Why so many different definitions?

“Because it has been surrounded with so much emotion, very few people are capable of looking at AIDS logically.”
- Mark Gabrish Conlan, AIDS researcher

“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.”
- Dr. Kary Mullis, Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry.

“Up to today there is actually no single scientifically convincing evidence for the existence of HIV. Not even once such a retrovirus has been isolated and purified by the methods of classical virology.”
- Dr. Heinz Ludwig Sanger, Emeritus Professor of Molecular Biology and Virology, Max-Planck-Institutes for Biochemistry, Munchen.

“…instead of trying to prove his insane theories about AIDS to his peers…he went public. Then, with the help of Margaret Heckler, former head of Health and Human Services, who was under great political pressure to come up with an answer to AIDS, the infamous world press announcement of the discovery of the so-called AIDS virus came about. This great fraud is now responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands… It was no accident that Gallo just happened to patent the test for HIV the day after the announcement…Gallo is now a multi-millionaire because of AIDS and his fraudulent AIDS test.”

Until a complete verdict is in on HIV, it is important to realize that it is unclear whether or not HIV truly exists and we may not fully understand it as much as we think. This is NOT a conspiracy. Among the scientific community this has been a debate for many years. Its critical we do not simply pass this off as a conspiracy cause if it were that simple there would not be such a huge debate. You can read more HERE if you choose.

Sources:

collective-evolution.com - Author: Arjun Walia

(1) http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/25061.aspx

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/257437.php

http://blogs.mercola.com/sites/vitalvotes/archive/2007/02/01/A-Warning-About-HIV-Treatments-and-Testing.aspx

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/09/05/hiv-aids.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/09/bee-venom-kills-hiv-cells_n_2843743.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/11/analysts-cautious-toward-hiv-solution/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS

Anche a Gesu‘ piaceva la cannabis. Un’affermazione di questo tipo potrebbe scandalizzare qualcuno e fare gridare alla blasfemia qualcun altro se non fosse il risultato di uno studio britannico. A stabilire che il Messia faceva regolare uso di marijuana è stato il ricercatore Chris Bennett. Le sue analisi sono poi state pubblicate già anni addietro da varie testate, come la rivista High Times o il quotidiano The Guardian.

L’ingrediente “magico” presente negli olii delle unzioni praticate da Gesu’ conteneva un ingrediente chiamato kaneh-bosem che da allora è stato identificato più semplicemente come estratto di cannabis.

Tutto lo studio realizzato da Chris Bennett pubblicato in un articolo dal titolo “Gesù era uno sballato?” su High Times, arriva alla conclusione che l’olio di cannabis era usato quotidianamente da Gesu’ e dai suoi discepoli, e che addirittura perfino l’incenso usato durante le abituali cerimonie conteneva un estratto di cannabis.

La vicenda avrebbe anche un chiaro riscontro storico: secondo il professore di Mitologia Classica alla Boston University, Carl Ruck, questo fatto è del tutto verosimile. Ruck ha infatti affermato: “Ci possono essere pochi dubbi sull’effettivo ruolo della cannabis nella religione giudaica“, perchè era prassi comune fare uso di marijuana, all’epoca. Il professore di Boston ha poi aggiunto: “Ovviamente la facile disponibilità e la lunga tradizione di utilizzo della cannabis nel giudaismo antico le ritroviamo inevitabilmente anche nella cultura dei primi cristiani“.

Le guarigioni miracolose di Gesu’ quindi potrebbero essere state il risultato delle proprietà medicamentose della marijuana, che sotto forma di olio veniva anche assorbita massicciamente proprio attraverso la pelle.

Concludendo, Bennet ci fa riflettere: “Se la cannabis è uno degli ingredienti principali di questi oli, la ricezione di questo olio è ciò che ha reso Gesù il Cristo, e i cristiani suoi seguaci, e oggi perseguitare coloro che fanno uso di cannabis potrebbe essere considerato anticristiano”.

Fonte: qnm.it

A new study conducted by the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Public Health, and published in the newest issue of the Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, has found that cannabinoids can reduce up to 90% of skin cancer in just a 20 week period. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jphp.12082/abstract)

For the study, researchers used synthetic cannabinoids (natural, cannabis-derived cannabinoids are typically even more effective) on mice with skin cancer in a 20 week study, and found that the cannabinoids had a hugely positive effect, reducing skin cancer by up to 90% as well as "inhibiting tumor promotion".

Researchers conclude:

"This is the first report indicating the structure–activity relationships for the anti-inflammatory activity of synthetic cannabinoids on TPA-induced inflammation in mice. Naphthoylindoles, JWH-018, -122 and -210 [synthetic cannabinoids], had the most potent anti-inflammatory activity and also markedly inhibited tumour promotion by TPA in the two-stage mouse skin carcinogenesis model. The present results suggest that synthetic cannabinoids, such as JWH-018, -122 and -210, may be used as cancer chemopreventive agents in the future."

Source: TheJointBlog.com - link to image: http://www.turismoassociati.it/public/cannabis-WileyOnLineLibrary-9.PNG

No Money or Market System
Automation of Labor
Technological Unification of Earth via "Systems" Approach.
Access over Property.
Self-Contained/Localized City and Production Systems.
Science as the Methodology for Governance
1) No money or market system.
Market theory assumes a number of things which have proven to either be false, marginally beneficial, or outright socially detrimental.

The core problems to consider are the following:

A) The need for "Infinite Growth" which is mathematically unsustainable and ecologically detrimental. The entire basis of the Market System is not the intelligent management of our mostly finite resources on this planet but rather the perpetual extraction and consumption of them for the sake of profit and "economic growth". In order to keep people employed, people must constantly consume, regardless of the state of affairs within the environment and often regardless of product utility. This is the absolute reverse of what a sustainable practice would require, which is the strategic preservation and efficient use of resources.

B) A "Corruption Generating" Incentive System. It is often said that the competitive marketplace creates the incentive to act for the sake of social progress. While this is partially true, it also generates an equal if not more pronounced amount of corruption in the form of planned obsolescence, common crime, wars, large scale financial fraud, labor exploitation and many other issues. The vast majority of people in prison today there because of monetary related crime or non-violent drug offenses. The majority of legislation exists in the context of monetary-based crimes.

Also, if one was to critically examine history and peer into the documented biographies/mentalities of the greatest scientists and inventors of our time, such a N. Tesla, A. Einstein, A. Bell, the Wright Brothers, and many others - it is found that they did not find their motivation in the prospect of monetary gain. The interest to make money must not be confused with the interest to create socially beneficial products and very often they are even at odds.

C) A disjunct, inefficient industrial complex which wastes tremendous amount of resources and energy. In the world today, with the advent of Globalization, it has become more profitable to import and export both labor and goods across the globe rather than to produce locally. We import bananas from Ecuador to the US and bottled water from Fuji Japan, while western companies will go to the deprived 3rd world to exploit cheap labor, etc. Likewise, the process of extraction, to component generation, to assembly, to distribution of a given good might cross through multiple countries for a single final product, simply due to labor and production costs / property costs. This "cost efficiency" generates extreme "technical inefficiency" and is only justifiable within the market system for the sake of saving money.

In a RBEM, the focus is maximum technical efficiency. The production process is not dispersed, but made as centralized and fluid as possible, with elements moving the very least amount, saving what would be tremendous amounts of energy and labor as compared to methods today. Food is grown locally whenever possible (which is most of the time given the flexibility of indoor agriculture technology today) while all extraction, production and distribution is logically organized to use as little labor/transport/space as possible, while producing the "strategically best" possible goods. (see more below) In other words, the system is planned, to maximize efficiently and minimize waste.

D) A propensity for "Establishments". Very simply, established corporate/financial orders have a built in tendency to stop new, socially positive advents from coming to fruition, if there is a foreshadowed loss of market share, profit, and hence power. It is important to consider the basic nature of a corporation and its inherent need for self perpetuation.

If a person starts a company, hires employees, creates a market and becomes profitable, what has thus been created, in part, is the means for survival for a group of people. Since each person in that group typically becomes dependent on their organization for income, a natural, protectionist propensity is created whereas anything that threatens the institution thus threatens the well being of the group/individual. This is the fabric of a "competition" mindset. While people think of free market competition as a battle between two or more companies in a given industry, they often miss the other level- which is the competition against new advents which would make them obsolete, outright.

The best way to expand on this point is to simply give an example, such as the US Government and 'Big Oil' collusion to limit the expansion of the fully Electric Car (EV) in the US. This issue was well presented and sourced in the documentary called "Who Killed the Electric Car?". The bottom line here is that the need to preserve an established order for the sake of the well being of those on the pay role, leads to an inherent tendency to stifle progress. A new technology which can make a prior technology obsolete will be met with resistance unless there is a way for the market system to adsorb it in a slow fashion, allowing for a transition for the corporations ( ie - the perpetuation of "Hybrid" cars in the US, as opposed to the fully electric ones which could exist now, in abundance.) There are also large amounts of evidence that the FDA has engaged in favoritism/collusion with pharmaceutical companies, to limit/stop the availability of advanced progressive drugs which would void existing/profitable ones.

In a RBE, there is nothing to hold back developmental/implementation of anything. If safe and useful, it would immediately be implemented into society, with no monetary institution to thwart the change due to their self-preserving, monetary nature.

E) An inherent obsolescence which creates inferior products immediately due to the need to stay "competitive" This little recognized attribute of production is another example of the waste which is created in the market system. It is bad enough that multiple companies constantly duplicate each others items in an attempt to make their variations more interesting for the sake of public consumption, but a more wasteful reality is that due to the competitive basis of the system, it is a mathematical certainty that every good produced is immediately inferior the moment it is created, due the need to cut the initial cost basis of production and hence stay "competitive" against another company... which is doing the same thing for the same reason. The old free market adage where producers "create the best possible goods at the lower possible prices" is a needlessly wasteful reality and detrimentally misleading, for it is impossible for a company to use the most efficient material or processes in the production of anything, for it would be too expensive to maintain a competitive cost basis.

They very simply cannot make the "strategically best" physically - it is mathematically impossible. If they did, no one would buy it for it would be unaffordable due the values inherent in the higher quality materials and methods. Remember - people buy what they can afford to. Every person on this planet has a built in limit of affordability in the monetary system, so it generates a feedback loop of constant waste via inferior production, to meet inferior demand. In a RBEM, goods are created to last, with the expansion and updating of certain goods built directly into the design, with recycling strategically accessed as well, limiting waste.

You will notice the term "strategically best" was used in a statement above. This qualification means that goods are created with respect to state of affairs of the planetary resources, with the quality of materials used based on an equation taking into account all relevant attributes, rates of depletion, negative retroactions and the like. In other words, we would not blindly use titanium for, say, every single computer enclosure made, just because it might be the "strongest" materials for the job. That narrow practice could lead to depletion. Rather, there would be a gradient of material quality which would be accessed through analysis of relevant attributes - such as comparable resources, rates of natural obsolescence for a given item, statistical usage in the community, etc. These properties and relationships could be accessed through programming, with the most strategically viable solution computed and output in real time. It is mere issue of calculation.

F) A propensity for monopoly and cartel due to the basic motivation of growth and increased market share. This is a point that economic theorists will often deny, under the assumption that open competition is self regulating that monopolies and cartels are extremely rare anomalies in a free-market system. This "invisible hand" assumption holds little validity historically, not to mention the outstanding legislation around the issue, which proves its infeasibility. In America, there have been numerous monopolies, such as Standard Oil and Microsoft. Cartels, which are essentially Monopolies by way of collusion between the largest competitors in an industry, are also persistent to this day, while less obvious to the casual observer. In any case, the "free market" itself does not resolve these issues - it always takes the government to step in and break up the monopolies.

This aside, the more important point is that in an economy based on "growth", it is only natural for a corporation to want to expand and hence dominate. After all, that is the basis of economic stability in the modern world - expansion. Expansion of any corporation, always gravitates toward monopoly or cartel, for, again, the basic drive of competition is to out do your competitor. In other words, monopoly and cartel are absolutely natural in the competitive system. In fact, it is inevitable, for again, the very basis is to seek dominance over market share. The true detriment of this reality goes back to the point above- the inherent propensity of an "Establishment" to preserve its institution. If a medical cartel is influencing the FDA, then new ideas which void that cartel's income sources will often be fought, regardless of the social benefits being thwarted.

G) The market system is driven, in part, by Scarcity. The less there is of something, the more money that can be generated in the short term. This sets up a propensity for corporations to limit availability and hence deny production abundance. It is simply against the very nature of what drives demand to create abundance. The Kimberly Diamond Mines in Africa have been documented in the past to burn diamonds in order to keep prices high. Diamonds are rare resources which take billions of years to be created. This is nothing but problematic. The world we live in should be based on the interest to generate an abundance for the world's people, along with strategic preservation and streamlined methods to enable that abundance. This is a central reason why, as of 2010, there are over a billion people starving on the planet. It has nothing to do with an inability to produce food, and everything having to do with an inherent need to create/preserve scarcity for the sake of short term profits.

Abundance, Efficiency and Sustainability are, very simply, the enemies of profit. This scarcity logic also applies to the quality of goods. The idea of creating something that could last, say, a lifetime with little repair, is anathema to the market system, for it reduces consumption rates, which slows growth and creates systemic repercussions (loss of jobs, etc.). The scarcity attribute of the market system is nothing but detrimental for these reasons, not to mention that it doesn't even serve the role of efficient resource preservation, which is often claimed.

While supply and demand dictates that the less there is of something, the more it will be valued and hence the increased value will limit consumption, reducing the possibility of "running out"--- the incentive to create scarcity, coupled with the inherent short term reward which results from scarcity driven based prices, nullifies the idea that this enables strategic preservation. We will likely never "run out" of oil, in the current market system. Rather, the prices will become so high that no one can afford it, while those corporations who own the remaining oil, will make a great deal of money off of the scarcity, regardless of the long term social ramifications. In other words, remaining scare resources, existing in such high economic value that it limits their consumption, is not to be confused with preservation that is functional and strategic. True strategic preservation can only come from the direct management of the resource in question in regard to the most efficient technical applications of the resource in industry itself, not arbitrary, surface price relationships, absent of rational allocation.

2) Automation of Labor
As the trend of what appears to be an exponential increase in the evolution of information technology, robotics, and computerization- it has become apparent that human labor is becoming more and more inefficient in regard to meeting the demands necessary for supporting the global population. From the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, we have seen an increasing trend of "technological unemployment", which is the phenomenon where humans are replaced by machines in the work force. This trend, while debatable in regard to its ultimate long term effect on employment, creates a propensity to displace the worker and hence the consumer, slowing consumption.

That stated, this issue is actually overshadowed by a larger social imperative: That the use of machine labor (mechanization) is provably more efficient than human performance in virtually all sectors. If one was to track, for example, the performance output of factory production such as within the steel industry in the US for the past 200 years, we find that not only do less than 5% of the workforce now work in such factories, the efficiency and output capacities have increased substantially. The trend, in fact, now shows that "Employment is Inverse to Productivity." The more mechanization that occurs, the more productive an industry becomes.

Today, there are repetitive occupations which simply do not need to exist given the state of automation and computerization ("cybernation"). Not only would mechanization in these areas reduce the mundane burden and allow more free time for people, it also would, more importantly, increase productivity. Machines do not need breaks, vacations, sleep, etc. The use of mechanization on its own means to create many forms of abundance on this planet, from food to physical goods.

However to do this, the traditional labor system we have simply cannot exist. The reality is that our labor for income system is stifling progress in its requirement to "keep people working" for the sake of "economic stability". We are reaching a stage where the efficiency of automation is overriding and making obsolete the system of labor for income. This trend shows no sign of slowing, especially in regard to the now dominant Service Industry, which is increasingly being automated in the form of kiosks, robotics and other forms. Likewise, due to phenomena related to Moore's law and the growing in-expense of computers and machines, it is likely that it is simply a matter of time before corporations simply can not rationalize keeping human labor anymore, as the automation systems will become too cheap. Of course, this is a paradoxical market phenomenon, called by some theorists as "the contradiction of capitalism", for it is, in effect, removing the consumer (laborer) itself and hence reducing consumption.

Apart from those issues, it is important to also consider human labor contributions based on social relevance, not monetary gain. In a RBE, there would be no reason to have such occupations as Banking, Trading, Insurance, Cashiers, Brokers, Advertising... or anything related to the governance of money.

All human actions in the form of institutionalized labor should also have the highest social return. There is no logic in wasting resources, time, and energy on operations that do not have a direct and tangible function. This adjustment alone would remove millions of jobs, for the idea of "working for money" as a purpose would no longer exist.

In turn, all the poor demographic, shoddy goods, vanity items and culturally contrived creations designed to influence people for reasons of status (for the sole sake of profit) would also no longer exist, saving countless amounts of time and resources.

One final note on this issue: Some hear this and they assume that this voids the Communicative Arts and personal and social expression as far as painting, sculpture, music and the like. No. These mediums of expression will likely thrive like never before, for the amount of free time made available to people will permit a renaissance of creativity, invention, along with community and social capital. The burden of labor obligation will also reduce stress and create a more amiable culture.

There is a difference between creating for the sake of keeping society sustainable and efficient, focusing on resource preservation, product efficiency and strategic allocation of labor for those things which generate a tangible social return - and creating for personal expression, exploration, experimentation, and hence art, which has been a staple of human evolution since the dawn of time.

3) Technological Unification of Earth via "Systems" Approach
We live in a symbiotic/synergistic planetary ecosystem, with a cause-effect balance reflecting a single system of earthy operation. Buckminster Fuller defined this well when he referred to the planet as "Spaceship Earth". It is time we reflect this natural state of affairs in our societal affairs on this planet. The fact of the matter is that the human societies, which are dispersed across the globe, require resources which are also un-uniformly dispersed across the globe. Our current procedure for enabling resource distribution comes in the form of corporations which seek and claim "ownership" of our earthly resources, which they in turn "sell" to others, in the name of profit. The problems inherent in this practice are numerous again due to the self-interest based disposition inherent in selling anything for personal gain, as denoted before. But, this is only partially the issue in the larger scheme of things when it come to the reality that we live on a finite planet and resource management and preservation should be the number one concern in regard to human survival- especially with the population explosion of the last 200 years.

Two people are born every second on this planet and each one of those humans needs a lifetime of food, energy, water and the like. Given this fundamental need to understand what we have, the rates of depletion and, invariably, the need to streamline industry in the most efficient, productive way, a Global System of Resource Management must be put in place. It is just common sense. This is an extensive subject when one considers the technical, quantitative variables needed for implementation. However, for the sake of overview, it can be stated that the first step is a Full Global Survey of all earthly resources. Then, based on a quantitative analysis of the properties of each material, a strategically defined process of production is constructed from the bottom up, using such variables as negative retro-actions, renew-ability, etc. (More on this can be found in the section called Project Earth in the ZM lecture called "Where Are We Going?"). Then consumption statistics are accessed, rates of depletion monitoring, distribution logically formulated, etc. In other words, it is a full Systems Approach to earthly resource management, production and distribution; with the goal of absolute efficiency, conservation and sustainability. Given the mathematically defined attributes, as based on all available information at the time, along with the state of technology at the time, the parameters for social operation in the industrial complex become self evident, with decisions arrived at by way of computation, not human opinion. This is where computer intelligence becomes an important tool for social governance, for only the computation ability/programming of computers can access and strategically regulate such processes efficiently, and in real time. This technological application is not novel, it is simply 'scaled out' from current methods already known.

4) Access over Property
The concept of property, unannounced to most people today, is a fairly new social concept. Before the neolithic revolution, as extrapolated from current hunter and gatherer societies existing today, property relationships did not exist as we know them. Neither did money or even trade in many cases. Communities existed in an egalitarian fashion, living within the carrying capacity of the regions and the natural production built in. It was only after direct agricultural development was discovered, eventually proceeding with resource acquisition by ship traders and the like - up to the modern day of power establishments and corporations, - that property became the highly defined staple of society as we know it today.

With that understood, which dismisses the common notion that property is a result of some kind of empirical "human nature", the notion of "no property" is also today often blindly associated with "Communism" and the works of Karl Marx. It is important to point out the TZM advocation of no property is derived from logical inference, based almost explicitly upon strategic resource management and efficiency, not any surface influence by these supposed "Communist" ideals. There is no relation between the two, for communism was not derived from the needs to preserve and manage resources efficiently. Communism, in theory and practice, was based on a social/moral relativism which was culturally specific - not environmentally specific - which is the case with a RBE.

The real issue relevant to meeting human needs is not ownership - it is access. People use things, they do not "own" them. Ownership is a non-operational, protectionist advent, derived from generations of scarcity over resources, currently compounded by market based adverting which supports status/class division for the sake of monetary gain . To put it another way, ownership is a form of controlled restriction, both physically and ideologically. Property as a system of controlled restriction, coupled with the monetary value inherent and hence the market consequences is unsustainable, limiting and impractical.

In a RBEM, the focus moves from static ownership to strategic access, with a system designed for society to obtain access as needed. For example, rather than owning various forms of recreational sporting equipment, Access Centers are set up, typically in regions where such actions occur, where a person simply "checks out" the equipment- uses it and returns it. This "library" type arrangement can be applied to virtually any type of human need. Of course, those reading this who have been conditioned into a more individualistic, materialistic mindset often objects with claims such as " what if I want green, custom golf clubs and only white are available?". This is a culturally contrived, biased reservation. The issue in question is utility, not vanity. Human expression has been molded by the needs of the current market based system (consumption) into values which are simply nonfunctional and irrelevant. Yes, this would require a value adjustment to quality, rather than identity. The fact is, even for those who object from the standpoint of their interest in personal identity, the overarching social ramifications of such an social approach will create benefits that will greatly overshadow any such arbitrary personal preference, creating new values to replace the outdated ones.

These include : (a) No Property Crime: In a world of access rather than ownership, without money, there is no incentive to steal, for there is no resale value. You can not steal something no one owns and you certainly couldn't sell it. (b) Access Abundance: It has been denoted that the average automobile sits in parking spaces for the majority of its life span, wasting space and time. Rather than having this wasteful consequence of the ownership system, one car could facilitate a large number of users in a given region, with only a fraction of the production/resource needs. [c) Peak Efficiency of Production: Unlike today, where the market system must perpetuate inherently inferior products for the sake of economic turnover, we could actually design goods to last, using the best materials and processes strategically available. We no longer make "cheap" products to serve a poor demographic ( which is the majority). This attribute alone will save cataclysmic amounts of resources, while also enabling a society to have access to goods and services they would never have had in a world based on money, inherent obsolescence, and property.

5) Self-Contained/Localized City and Production Systems.
There are many brilliant engineers who have worked to tackle the issue of industrial design, from Jacque Fresco, to Buckminster fuller to Nicola Tesla. Behind such designs, such as Jacque Frescos' famed Circles cities or Fuller's Geodesic Dome, rests a basic train of thought : Strategic Efficiency and Maximization of Productivity.

For example, Fresco's "circular city" is constructed of a series of "belts", each serving a social function, such a energy production, research, recreation, living, etc. Each city is a hence a system, where all needs are produced in the city complex, in a localized fashion, whenever possible. For example, renewable energy generation occurs near the outer perimeter. Food production is produced closer to the middle in industrial sized greenhouses.

This is very different in its logic from the "globalization" based economy we live in today, which wastes outrageous amounts of energy and resources due to unneeded transport and labor processing. Likewise, transportation within the city is strategically created to eliminate the use of detached automobiles, except for rare cases, such as emergency vehicles. Homes are created to be micro-systems as well, with as much power generation occurring internally, such as from sunlight absorbed by the building structure using photovoltaic technology. More information on these city system can be found at www.thevenusproject.com.

The Geodesic Dome, perfected by Buckminster Fuller, offer another efficiency oriented medium within the same train of thought. Fuller's goal was to build designs to do more with fewer resources. He noticed problems inherent in conventional construction techniques, and recognized the indigenous strength of naturally occurring structures. The advantages include: much stronger than a conventional building while using less material to construct; domes can be built very quickly because they are of a modular prefab construction and suit being mass produced; They also use less energy to keep warm/cool than a conventional box structure. More information can be found at http://www.bfi.org.

In the end, the fundamental interest is, again, sustainability and efficiency on all levels, from the "housing deign" to the "earth design". The market system actually fights this efficiency due to the broken, competitive nature inherent.

6) Science as the Methodology for Governance
The application of "the scientific method for social concern" is oft-repeated mantra for the basis of social operation in a RBEM. While the obviousness of this in regard to industry is simple enough to understand, it is important to also realize its value in regard to human behavior. Science, historically speaking, has often been derailed as a cold, restrictive discipline, reserved for the sake of mere technology and invention. Little regard seems to be currently given to its use in the understanding of human behavior.

Superstitious thought, which has been powerfully dominant in human evolution, has worked on the basis that the human being was somehow detached from the physical world. We have "souls"; "spirits"; we are "divine"; we are related/guided by an all seeing, all knowing, controlling god, etc.

Conversely, yet oddly similarly, there is an argument that humans have "free will" in their decisions and that we have the open ability to choose our actions, absent of the influence of our environment or even education. Now, while the vastness of the prior two statements and many reading those could find numerous cultural arguments to claim the contrary, this doesn't change the basic reality that we humans have historically liked to think that we are special and unique from the rest of the organisms and natural phenomena around us.

However, as time has gone on, it has become increasingly obvious that we are not special and that there is no such thing as "special" in the natural world...for everything is special based on the uniqueness of all organisms. There is no reason to assume the human being is any more important or intrinsically different or special than a mole, a tree, an ant, a leaf or a cancer cell. This isn't "New Age" rhetoric - it is fundamental logic. We are physical phenomena - nothing more or less.

We are greatly influenced by our culture and our values and behaviors can only mostly be a result of our conditioning, as external phenomena interacts with our genetic predispositions. For example, we have a notion called "talent", which is another word for a genetic predisposition to a given behavior, or set of behaviors. A piano prodigy might have an inherent ability that enables them to learn more quickly and perform in a more acute way than another, who has spent the same time in practice, but doesn't have the genetic predisposition. Be that as it may, that "talented" person still had to learn 'what a piano was' and how to play it. In other words, genes are not autonomous initiators of commands. It takes an environmental trigger to allow for the propensity to materialize.

At any rate, it is not the point of this article to expand on the argument of "nature and nurture". The point is that we have proven to be scientifically defined and a product of a traceable causality and it is this understanding that can allow us to slow and even stop the aberrant, or "criminal" behavior we see in society today such a abuse, murder, theft and the like. The logic, once the effects of human conditioning are understood, is to remove the environmental attributes which are enabling the reactions.

Just as an abused dog who has been starved for a week might have a knee jerk reaction to react very violently to an otherwise innocuous passerby, we humans have the same behavior dynamic. If you don't want people to steal food, do not deprive them of it. It has been found that prisons are now generating more violence than they are curbing. If you teach a child to be a hateful racist, then he will carry those values into the rest his life, very often. Human values and hence human behavior are shaped by the environment in a cause and effect based way, no different than a leaf being blown by the wind.

In a RBEM, the central focus in regard to removing aberrant human actions is not to "punish them", but to find the reasons for their offensive actions and work to eliminate them. Humans are products of their environment and personal/social reform is a scientific process.

Source: http://thezeitgeistmovement.com

Any other names are invented and any similarity to real names is accidental and coincidental.

The content of this web site should in no way be construed as factual.

It is a work of fiction and all content on this site are for the purposes of satiric criticism and comment.

Source: http://hipsterhitler.com