the network of free thinkers







Written by sean martin on Sunday, 6/2/2002

Somthing my friend Jed and I talked about is the perfect society. Jed has an aspiration to change the world. He says if he could, he would arrange a point system for all of the cities in the world, and determine a number of people that needed to die. Then based on the points, some certain citied would be destroyed. "Sorry,"he says, "but in the long run, it'll be better. These people would die to save the planet." He says that it'll solve starvation. I guess he ment it would save the planet too, but I dont see how. Anyhow, the way I would see it is this: Everyone gets a few basic things. Everyone in the world would have a house, access to the basic food groups, education, all the known knowledge of the world.electricity, telephone,and some form of transportaton, etc. Basic things you need to live and learn.
If you get a job you can earn credits and trade them in to upgrade things. Different food, bigger house, entertainment, cable, etc. You woulud have basic laws, to stop things like murder, theft, and such. Drugs would be legal(but cost credits) and the basic rule of all is you cant hurt anyone but yourself. Anyone who violated these rules would either lose these freedoms, and be confined and have to work for food and shelter the rest of their lives, or not recieve them. Minor infractions can have credit deductions and if lacking credits, must attain them somehow. All vital information will be stored on a computer(credits, name, DOB, retina data, finger prints, and DNA information. Each person will have a card that indentifies them and carries their number. The central area for HQ for these operations would have to be in a neutrl territory like the Artic or moon if possible. The globe would just be divided into somthing of city-states taking on the boaders of old countries. And everyone could have everything the other has. Well thats about all of refined so far, and it is far from perfect. Id like to hear anyones ideas or thoughts on this subject

article discussion

posted by Jeremy Hammond on Sunday, 6/2/2002:

What you're describing is essentially socialism.. and the problem with this is that giving the government too much power could result in the government abusing their powers, limiting civil rights, telling people what they can own and what job they can have, watching the people all the time, .. making the book 1984 a reality. I'm not saying that your idea would result in this, but it could happen.

I'll soon be writing my own ideas about government.

posted by Jeremy Hammond on Sunday, 6/2/2002:

And in reference to Jed's philosophy.. regardless to how stupid/ignorant/bigoted/destructive/mindless the people are, it's not our right to systematically murder them.. and even if we killed people anyway, who would decide who qualifies for death or not?

I agree, the main problem with the system is that people are narrow-minded non-thinkers... but think, you could purchase an island and build your society free of the morons instead of trying to convert America to your dream government. This way you won't have to kill millions of people like Hitler did.

posted by Jethro on Sunday, 6/2/2002:

Yeah Marlon Brando lives on his own island, and look how good he is doing. he also gets to hide out famous people, Elvis, richard nixon, jimmy hoffa, and many more

posted by Smartyr on Sunday, 6/2/2002:

posted by Smartyr on Sunday, 6/2/2002:

All my thoughts on society are posted in my article " Human and society are inseperable

posted by Cory on Tuesday, 6/4/2002:

How did you know about the island of Marlon Brando? I thought the creed said you are not to speak of it!

posted by Cheeses Crust on Thursday, 6/13/2002:

Sorry to rain on your parade, but there's plenty of food feed everyone, it's just that distribution is very uneven.

I agree with Mr. Hammond, this is just socialism, and it gives the government too much control.

posted by Sean on Thursday, 6/13/2002:

yes, we tried to explain that to jed, that the problem wasnt not enough food or too many people, but simply uneven distribution of wealth and poor countries getting poorer, and the rich getting riches

posted by SMARYTR on Friday, 6/14/2002:

So, since we're all a flock of super geiuses, what would work as far as a great form of government. Anarchy is an impossibility, communism is only good on paper, democracy is the best we have, and no one seems to be happy, so what would work. I'd like to know your thoughts. If I ever come up with a theory you'll be the first to know, but I am stumped as hell

posted by Cheeses Crust on Wednesday, 6/26/2002:

Anarchy does exist in less than model forms today. Take all that fighting in African countries. Once order is established, there's a coup. So back to chaos untill someone else gets power.

This is what people fail to see in anarchy, chaos. They think peace and happieness. That's only the case if everyone's responsible enough to take care of themselves.

posted by jason on Wednesday, 6/26/2002:

i have several ideas about society

Leadership should be deteremined by whoever has the largest potatoes. Whoever gets the most money should be determined by whoever has the most hats, and convictions should be determined by a lucky 8 ball

posted by jethro on Wednesday, 7/17/2002:

what happens when the person with the most money buys all the potatoes, then they have all the hats and the potatoes. what if they put the hats on the potatoes and they have freaky little partys. now wounldnt that be something

posted by jason on Sunday, 9/8/2002:

what happens if a mad scientist breeds a race of super potatoes and conquers the earth with his vegetables? you didnt think about that, did you? i thought not

join the discussion

allowed html tags: <B>, <I>, <U>, <A>. line breaks are converted to <BR> automatically.




users online: 4 guest users.

(C) 2002 Jeremy Hammond