Re: This is the future of mankind anyway

"Al" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
> The society you envision would do this. You wrote that society would
choose
> the values it felt most important, and then assign to each individual a
> value ('the productive power of man') that reflected how many of those
> values he had. By definition, the values that commanded the greatest and
> widest support in society would be the lowest values supported by most
> people: the lowest common denominator.
>
> It is popular to say "Blame the immigrants! Send the home!", and wise to
say
> "Immigration improve our country! Welcome them in!". In your 'Democratic
> Anarchy', what is popular is more important than what is wise; what
> gratifies immediately the largest number of people is more important than
> what is best for the longer term.
> --
> Al

I am glad you did not complain to rules established by the consensus of
political parties that will create the value of productive power of man.
That rules will be the most important ones at the beginning and they would
never make "Blame the immigrants! Send the home!" because at least one party
will never allow it.

Also in my system the "immigrant problem" will be a totally non existent one
and you may find more about it by reading my book However, I am taking the
"Immigrant problem" as metaphor for all others non acceptable opinions and
behaviour that exists in today's society. First of all, my society will be
totally different one and that means it will probably generate totally
different problems. Here is a sample: If your chief is a jerk, most likely
you would not have guts to respond to him but you may be hard to someone
else just because of it. Do you believe that kind of behaviour is the main
origin for nationalism and racism? In my system there will not be privileged
people so that such problem would hardly exist. But it may exist of course.
For that reason I said the power of evaluation among the people will at the
beginning probably be one cent. If you get hundred negative evaluations it
will cost you one dollar. No one would actually care about one dollar. The
most important information that such receiver will get is that a 100 people
do not like something about him. Well it is up to the gay who receives such
evaluation to find out who is to blame, him or these hundred people? I would
know the answer immediately right now even in today's society. He may
correct himself for his own good and then make a better society or not and
everything would be as it is today. The only people who have to care about
one cent evaluation is the people who might receive hundred millions bad
evaluations that would cost them hundreds millions cents like George Bush
for example. No leader of any country would dare to be a criminal any more,
to wage an illegal war or aggression to any country. That is a direct
benefit of one cent evaluation in my system. Imagine the people through the
practice find that the evaluation is cool and in order to make it more
efficient rise the power of evaluation to let's say one dollar. Then this
guy who receives a hundred negative evaluations will start to reconsider his
behaviour and the society will benefit from it.

Through the history of mankind the power was never in the hands of the
people. There have always been authorities who said what is good and bad.
Those people are dictators without matter whether they are good or bad. That
is a problem. We need power to the people and society will be remarkable
better after that.

Sunday morning I am taking a week long vacation where internet does not
exist, but will response to everyone when get back.

Aleksandar Sarovic
www.sarovic.com