How do we work together?

How do we work together? How do we get past the petty stuff and get down to healing? This planet, the human species is going to hell in a hand basket so to speak and I want to see what you the reader thinks. Before people start posting about how impossible it is. Stop and really consider with an open mind what I'm asking. Please try to give an honest attempt at answering the question. Sending out positivity!

Originally posted by TRGreer
How do we work together? How do we get past the petty stuff and get down to healing? This planet, the human species is going to hell in a hand basket so to speak and I want to see what you the reader thinks. Before people start posting about how impossible it is. Stop and really consider with an open mind what I'm asking. Please try to give an honest attempt at answering the question. Sending out positivity!

Why do you want to work together with people who are going to hell? Working together to save them, yes. Working together just to go with them, no. Please know the time in which you live.

First, get rid of the petty and shallow taboo against parapsychological research in mainstream science. Encourage and fund parapsychologists. Then get rid of policies and laws that prevent research into psychedelics and entheogens. If that makes some uptight and judgmental control freaks uncomfortable, too bad.

I think the first thing to go is money. Forget even the barter system but go to a true free society, thus removing greed. Then get rid of competition and awards in order to get rid of pride and better than thou attitudes. It should be people working together to better each other and the World around us. Then maybe we can get together as a people and move forward.

reply to post by TRGreer


Hey, I am with you Brother/Sister. Every facet of our society is attached to their own view point. "I am right, you are wrong!" The obvious problem is, every single human is unique and experiences the world uniquely, thus how are we all to mend this massive conflict of perspectives? People only join together to take sides against someone/something else, and when they have defeated their opposition then they go back to being conflicted with each other. The only solution seems to be for EVERYONE to lose attachment to their unique perspectives. The problem with this is, as long as even one person is holding on to their own unique perspective as being more correct than others, then they are influencing the others to push back with their own unique perspectives. And so the conflict continues.

Peace

reply to post by TRGreer


ASK ALL* THE CHILDREN OR AS MANY AS YOU CAN FROM ALL SIDES/RACES/LANDMASSES 3RD TO 1RST WORLD COUNTRIES ECT. WHAT DO THEY WANT TO SEE THEY WILL PROVIDE INNOCENT TRUTH ANSWERS FREE OF POLITICAL INFLUENCE. GIVE THEM A STAGE TO VOICE THEIR PARENTS FROM ALL OVER MAY LISTEN. Then have the adults LISTEN to whats been shared and take it from there.
NAMASTE*******

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
reply to post by TRGreer

 

ASK ALL* THE CHILDREN OR AS MANY AS YOU CAN FROM ALL SIDES/RACES/LANDMASSES 3RD TO 1RST WORLD COUNTRIES ECT. WHAT DO THEY WANT TO SEE THEY WILL PROVIDE INNOCENT TRUTH ANSWERS FREE OF POLITICAL INFLUENCE. GIVE THEM A STAGE TO VOICE THEIR PARENTS FROM ALL OVER MAY LISTEN. Then have the adults LISTEN to whats been shared and take it from there.
NAMASTE*******

This is a great post. Very interesting thought and possibly a good start at getting to a solution! Sending out a positive vibe!

reply to post by TRGreer


i think as a collective, the world needs to hit rock bottom. like massive WWIII type status where billions die and the rest are in shock.

then maybe the survivors will agree to never again go thru petty differences that lead to war.

We work together by accepting each other: our faults, our mistakes, our misguided beliefs, our differences.

Only when we all understand that these differences are what make us all the same will we be free.

A commitment to reason + evidence, and a commitment to the non aggression principle and property rights that are the result of that commitment.

Scientists can disagree wildly on conclusions, but they all adhere to a common methodology for resolving disputes - the scientific method. Since they all agree that disputes will be settled under the framework of reason and evidence, no central authority or violence is required in order to settle differences. Thus there is no 'king if science' or 'scientist wars' because disputes are resolved with reference to empirical reality and not by the opinions and manipulations of individuals.

Thus, we need a theory of Universally Preferable Behaviour (morality) that is rational, logical and empirical and that relies on no gods or governments, which are merely violently imposed opinions. Luckily such a theory exists and stands logically, as far as i can tell.

board.freedomainradio.com...

reply to post by TRGreer

I think if we could get rid of capitalism and religion we would have a much better chance of working together as a species. I have no clue what type of system should replace capitalism, I personally like socialism but it has its faults too, maybe something new that encourages general welfare for everyone worldwide and shared prosperity. Religion just causes people to look down on others, condemn each other, and try to control the way other people live their lives because their god or book says this or that. Plus everybody thinks they have the right one which is sort of a problem in and of itself. I think without religion people would be able to accept others with different values or lifestyles more easily.

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by TRGreer

 

I think if we could get rid of capitalism and religion we would have a much better chance of working together as a species.

x2 agreed on getting rid of religion, along with all other superstitious and anti logical thought systems.

But, respectfully i ask...

What part of my possession are mine and yours are yours, and the non initiation of force to deprive persons of life or property (property is an extension of the body) do you believe are negative or harmful?

Capitalism = property rights and non aggression. perhaps youre referring to the merger of capital and the state (money + gun), aka corporatism, aka fascism?

edit: sorry if that came across as confrontational. but im genuinely curious!

I will tell you, but you're all not going to like the answer.

We have been so conditioned in certain ways of thinking, each of us are guilty of it, it's how we are raised, how we perceived everything around us as us. We cannot simply erase what has been done, nor can we truly heal all of it.
We need to honestly be distracted from such for a period of time where we all have a common goal, survival.

We only seem to react the most positively during times of chaos and need. During major human calamities we band together, ignoring differences and past experiences and focus on the true issue, human preservation.

reply to post by Moneyisgodlifeisrented


hehe now thats a grim outlook, and hopefully untrue, as i think you would agree! the experience of history shows us clearly, i believe, that violence suffering only begets more of the same, hence the cycle of ever increasing hardship and calamity that we are now approaching the apex of. I would argue that the exact opposite is true - that humans need to be raised in a peaceful and win - win world where resources can be acquired via trade in a mutually beneficial manner, a world where negotiation and non aggression is king, and not the gun.

our destructive capacity simply will not allow our species to recover from another world wide calamity or war, at least for another 100 000 years.

non aggression + property rights is the only way forward.

reply to post by Neo_Serf


I think your property is anything that you worked to obtain. I don't really understand the second part of that question. By capitialism I did mean more corporatism or fascism the lines are really blurred between them right now in my opinion.

reply to post by acmpnsfal


Non aggression is the flipside of property rights, as the only way to deprive someone of their justly earned/created property is via violence. (or fraud, a flavour of aggression) Therefor 'capitalism' (the word has been sullied by the opponents of freedom) is simply defined as a respect for property rights, which manifests as non aggression, theft or fraud.

Socialism, on the other hand, rests on the bloody altar of the violation of property rights by groups of individuals who call themselves the 'government' who claim the monopolistic right to violate property rights via aggression at will and by decree.

Capitalism simply means no gun.

Originally posted by soon2beaher
reply to post by TRGreer

 

i think as a collective, the world needs to hit rock bottom. like massive WWIII type status where billions die and the rest are in shock.

then maybe the survivors will agree to never again go thru petty differences that lead to war.

I think we hit rock bottom. Here in the states our political system is riddled and rotted with corruption. The middle east is at war for the most part and most people of the world suffer from a stagnate apathy. I think what WE are doing right here and now is whats needed. Open honest communication striving for answers that work for everyone. Religion, philosophy, spirituality, atheism, are not the problems in and of themselves. I have read many schools of thought and by far the majority send a message of love and acceptance. I have never really liked organized religion. I think when you start letting others define the tenets of ones faith that's when things begin to go horribly wrong. My thoughts are that we should practice personal spirituality, religion, philosophy, atheism. That's not to say we don't share but the key word here is share. Sharing by my definition is to offer up something with absolutely no strings attached. In the case of sharing these views we are free to take what we need and leave what we don't. Our individuality in my opinion might be one of our greatest assets so to say that we have to give that up like I have seen in other post is absurd as far as I am concerned. So to reiterate it all starts with people willing to open their minds and work together because I think we can all agree that this house of cards is falling down all around us. Now is the time to open up the lines of communication to everyone. Sending out positive vibes to you all. Thank you all for posting!

reply to post by Neo_Serf

Therefor 'capitalism' (the word has been sullied by the opponents of freedom) is simply defined as a respect for property rights, which manifests as non aggression, theft or fraud.

How the heck did you come up with this definition? Capitalism is an economic system concerned with private ownership of capital creation. This means whatever you create is yours, no matter how you create it and no matter what that means for the people around you. Because this promotes excessive imbalancements within society there is the need for state intervention. The state sets forth policies such as mandatory minimum wages to put a cap on the level of exploitation capitalists can do against wage laborers. Property rights is another policy granted by the state (Republic). Private property is state-protected/regulated monopolies of certain objects or privileges which are used to exploit others. Therefore the two, state (force) and capitalism (exploitation) are married together.

As Rousseau states:

"The first man who, having fenced off a plot of land, thought of saying, 'This is mine' and found people simple enough to believe him was the real founder of civil society. How many crimes, wars, murders, how many miseries and horrors might the human race had been spared by the one who, upon pulling up the stakes or filling in the ditch, had shouted to his fellow men: 'Beware of listening to this impostor; you are lost if you forget the fruits of the earth belong to all and that the earth belongs to no one.'" ["Discourse on Inequality," The Social Contract and Discourses, p. 84]

reply to post by TRGreer


Am I allowed to say it's impossible yet?

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by TRGreer

 

Am I allowed to say it's impossible yet?

If you prefer extinction?