empty promises

[bitRAKE]

Sataur?, consumption beyond what is needed to live? That has been debated for thousands of years - it is a question of how one defines life and of resource management. Should each person be allocated an exact regimen of nutrients and social interaction (ala 1984, Brave New World, THX 1138, etc)? Maybe once the planet is exhausted and over-populated this will be a valid option for even the most egoistic!

Personally, I don't own a vehicle, TV, or house; and agree with your assessment of excess. To me it's very important to know what I consume and leave behind in waste. I've starting growing some of my own food, and I'm a DIY'er in general. My packrat nature has me reusing everything and thinking in that mindset from the get-go.

Examination of the census data seem to make it clear the US has been postponing an inevitable great depression. This "war" was just another step to stave off the implosion of the medicated bloated populous. Think about it: people don't know how to take care of themselves anymore! [After living through the 1920's depression my grandmother would not live anywhere she could not have a garden! For over 75 years she grew her own food and traded with local artisans.]

We divided from nature when social selection became possible. Humans might have been excluded from the definition of nature from the start?

[Sataur]

I believe your assertions about the prospect of our country (and for the over consuming first-world countries in general) are correct, bitRAKE. We will have a rough transition into living for ourselves once again. Done will be the days of driving 10 to 30 miles to your office job which supplies money to buy food and goods for everyday living. This system has too many holes in it and it leaks far too much.

We will become more direct and one with the land. Instead of large farms producing food for thousands and thousands of people, I believe it is more practical for each or a smaller group of households to have a farm or large garden to supply food for themselves. This liberates us from the need to drive somewhere to make money which then is purchase food which was also shipped from somewhere else to a location where you must drive to in order to achieve possession.

This is only one example of the many changes that will happen to the world's societies. As we decentralize and become more independent, self sufficient entities, government will become less powerful, and eventually I see it evolving into more of a societal guideline for moral behavior in an area. This is one reason the government tries to push more industrialism, consumerism, and large commercial capitalism. Keeping the need for regulations preserves the need for government. Specific countries and borders will no longer be such big issues, and people will [hopefully] become more harmonized with each other.

Unfortunately before we develop such an enlightened and free society we must see a need to, and though some of us can accept the need, others are too entrenched in every-day living, trying to support a family and themselves, to take a step back and see whats going on can and must be changed. Others still refuse to accept a need for change because they are blind that their drive for more 'stuff' and more 'money' is a mere veil of distorted reality engendered by their false identity (ego) with material possessions and physical manifestations. Something universally threatening must occur, which shakes the very bones of every man in every society, before the need for change will become apparent and accepted. I only wish we could avoid this fate, but unfortunately it is the only conclusive answer I have come to.

Just my two cents.

[HopeForHumanity]

The U.S. republic has become to socialist; no one is truly independent anymore. I think we will need something terribly drastic to happen.

[bitRAKE]

Well, that is the very thing I will not accept: I will not demonize others and I will not prophetize the need for some apocalyptic event. Polarization is the very thing that de-harmonizes, imho. Instead we should look at the cycle that has been created and not count ourselves out of having an effect on that process (the good, bad and ugly).

You say decentralization, but I'd rather like to see it as re-localization. This is a great opportunity to build communities with all the positives of ancient tribes while still sharing on the global scale. No governance required should be the label on the box! [This is not a vote for Anarchy - although that would be better than what we have.]

I don't know about the whole morality thing. When it comes to people there is no general moral foundation - we need ethical processes that examine each instance with respect and understanding. Morality is a local (family, community, etc) phenomenon that cannot be institutionalized. Judgements are always wrong because each of us is changing and communication takes time. Isn't this our judicial system? [I'm not even going to talk about the Prison industry.]

To have one ego call another ego 'false' is just absurd! We are self-manifesting our destiny by calling whatever occurs by the names of the prophecies we have created; and then we get to talk of progress as we re-define things. [look at the hydrogen 'fuel' movement; global warming; etc] Yet, nothing has changed - that is the ultimate waste. To bring people together out of fear is the false "super-ego" at work - a cultural or collective conscience trait, and not a malady of any individual. [I really hope that is what you mean. I'm accepting of the idea that I'm full of shit - trying to make a distiction between individual fear and group fear is at best dubious.]

[Sataur]

Perhaps you are correct in the idea that an 'apocalyptic' event is needed for change, but I believe some type of catalyst is required to push society into needing a reason for change. Perhaps the mere possibility of something horrendous happening to our dear earth will be enough, but seeing as how global warming still seems to be more of a political issue than one of humanity, we still have a long way to go.

I agree that re-localization would be a more fitting word for what must occur. When I said decentralize I suppose I just meant the breakdown of old-fashioned capitalized industries for the replacement of more local, 'secular' types of growth.

True, morality is more of an issue that is dealt with and learned within the confines of one's own personal life, and should not be dictated or enforced. One must learn to respect and understand enlightened values, not try to emulate them. What I meant by having a moral guideline was to have some sort of compilation of generally accepted customs in a certain area that may change over geographic distances, not so much the rudimentary morals derived through living and enlightened thought. Those these geographic cultural differences would most likely not be significant enough to be noted down (though in societies with extreme rituals such as cannibalism, it may help to know about it before one enters into it  ).

Yes, if one ego does apply a negative label to itself or another ego, it defeats the purpose of trying to overcome the ego for the flowering of the true identity all together. One must rid himself of any ideas of getting better at something in order to 'look better' than another before he can truly become enlightened. It must be driven by intrapersonal motivators only. I believe you hit the head on the nail with your interpretation. Anything that is to be done with the hope of gain (over another individual or group) in either a personal or collective mind will ultimately end up with a more negative imbalance overall. Like you stated earlier, movements such as global warming which try to drive the people into fear in order to catalyze change will end up creating more egotism in society than before. 'Ego's will feed on this fear, and take advantage of exploitable opportunities. This can also work in the other direction as well, such as with president Bush filtering scientific documents to downplay global warming. By making it seam less of a problem than it really is, he is exploiting the ego's sense of security with what is currently being done is alright (that burning gasoline in large quantities is not bad for the planet), and he is doing this for personal gain.

We must be careful with how we approach these coming years, and people must realize that not only our physical ways are dysfunctional, but also our mental and psychological. We are out of touch with the beauty of life itself, with who we really are. We are not what we have, what we owe, or what we look like. We are the epitome of greatness in the most physical and ethereal way, and we must embrace this through abdicating our want for it (that is, the desire for greatness). In our 'ego'-driven society, people just want to feel important, but they fail to realize that they themselves are magnificent and great in their own right. They fail to realize that their physical possessions and appearances are meaningless, and that desiring and trying to gain only distances them more from happiness. This is unfortunately one of the downsides to a capitalist society, though people tend to refuse to believe it because of the apparent great "success" of capitalism in America. Whilst it may be successful in its physical manifestation, it fails on a deeper level. America is one of the most unhappy, most drugged, and most sick places in the world, and yet we are the richest.

One has to think if we'll reach a critical point of 'insanity' in the world where we all take a collective "step back" and realize that the world really is a lot more dysfunctional and maimed than previously thought.

Just my two cents.