Collective Effort

Collective Effort

How much labor - work - activity is serialized, is additive, adds up to something, adds up to more than its single parts today ? Not much, and in fact there is a very precise, but hidden as usual, invisible, intentionality to create a lot of work that doesn’t add up to anything, but in many cases subtracts down from what is already present. For example, wars in general subtract down from what is present by breaking things up and in fact the US spends billions upon billions in a kind of collective effort that on one side adds up to a power relationship and statement of status, but on another side breaks up material constructions.

Why is this so ? Why is there such a great aversion and brainwashing today for anything that can possible add up to something more, for anything that creates “common wealth” and more for the “common good” ? To atomize and divide people from each other, to create a psychological and social environment where people are constantly in conflict with each other, instead of building things together, instead of building a better world for the “common good”.

If work or everyday activity was not geared to useless conflicts, to fights essentially, to much ado about nothing we could create a huge amount of wealth for everyone.

Some examples of work that doesn’t add up to anything can be millions of lawyers, and eventually billions to regulate all kinds of conflicts based on all kinds of ever increasing complex laws, thousands of new imagined (and therefore invented as in a self fulfilling prophesy) sicknesses and therefore drugs that subtract down from an already fragile person and conflicting and conflicted minds and social patterns of behavior. Like if you are not fighting others you end up fighting yourself, or maybe you end up fighting both yourself and others in a never ending infinite recursion. What else ? Maybe millions of psychologists trying to fix up broken minds and brains, breaking them up even more and therefore needing even more drugs, psychologists, new sicknesses, and psychologists themselves needing other psychologists (and lawyers themselves needing lawyers) creating millions of “new jobs”, millions of “new, advanced, service economy jobs”, that are oh so needed, and oh so useful.

But if you stop one minute to really think: a company or entity or economic unit that has for example 100 workers, each working 8 hours a day for something that adds up, for something where each effort is adding up and helping to construct something larger, with all the know how and technology available, how much could really be produced ? A mind boggling amount of wealth and well being for everyone.

Imagine 8 hours of work of just 1 person in that company that is really used completely for a precise sequence of actions, physical and information manipulations that are actually really constructing, that are precise and efficient (just like building a Skyscraper or in manufacturing processes, or in SPACE PROGRAMS) instead of wasting it on fluff, office politics, fighting each other and oneself and everything. Now multiply it by 100 workers, each really working, as in adding up, as in serializing effort, as in a collective effort that is building something larger than the parts.

In fact, manufacturing is a kind of collective action but there is a tendency to consider it as some kind of bad activity, something not worthy, something that must be hidden as opposed to wall street hustlers, doctors making millions, house flipping, financial “services” and “products” (nothing more idiotic on earth, financial products as if they are an entity and not one giant mega ripoff of everyone against everyone).

Science and Technology are in a sense serialized activities, add up to something, although the way that people want to apply it becomes a theater of huge never ending conflicts (also thanks to the crappy cumbersome “democratic process” where everyone wants to express their opinion always against everyone else in a never ending fight that just dissipates effort and energy), atom energy yes or no, global warming yes or no, etc.

Now imagine a society with millions of workers all (but even a very small percentage, even maybe just 10% would already create a mind boggling amount of free wealth in the end) putting effort into serialized, collective actions, where things add up.

But the present economic system along with all of its ideology and brainwashing has created and wants to create a completely atomized, divided society of everyone against everyone, millions of useless jobs that just add to the conflicts, that create ever more useless jobs (like all the office idiots responding to blackberries and creating useless meetings, etc.) instead of large, ambitious public - private projects that add up to the wealth of everyone.

Facebook is a good example: get millions of people to waste their time on so many single events, on so many short sentences and thoughts (the shorter the better, long - complex thoughts tend to add up to something, are serialized) on all activity that doesn’t add up to anything.

That is why I insist on large scale projects that add up, Skyscrapers, Rockets to Mars, High Speed Trains, BUSes, but the amount of brainwashing most of the world has undergone against anything that serializes and adds up effort is way too great for any possible hope that any of these projects ever take off, especially in the USA.

Obama, should have said “By the end of this decade, by the year 2020 we will put a Man on Mars, we meaning only the effort of the USA, and we will create all the companies and entities (public and private, as in private capitalist corporations that can make profits on it too) that are needed to do this, to advance civilization”.

He didn’t say this, he said, we need “more entrepreneurs” and “small businesses”, we need more “innovation” and “education” (never explaining what on earth these abstract words mean, and they mean nothing, it is an excuse to not propose anything at all but fluff), more “flexibility” (which means hire and fire, always changing jobs and kinds of jobs so any possible serialization of effort, effort that adds up, is killed from the outset), etc.

This is the battle ground: serialized - collective effort that adds up, or an atomized, divided society of lawyers, doctors, hustlers, etc. that subtract down.

Wow, there’s a lot in there to respond to but let me try.

While I do think some of you specific points are a little naive, I do whole-heartedly agree with the general thrust of your argument about the fragmentation of society in general.

Society HAS become atomised, but it is important to remember that this is BY DESIGN. It is crucial for the current system of control of the Human species that people should be discouraged as much as possible from ineracting directly with each other in any meaningful way.

People who spend time together not only find ways to work together and share resources without the need of money, but they also start to formulate some dangerous ideas about how maybe that sort of thing could work on a wider scale. This is something that our financial overlords want to discourage as much as possible.

Again, psychological disorders are now more common and widespread than ever as a result of people’s deep seated anxiety about their own tenuous position in society given that it is so dependant on being financially independant. In our world, if you don’t have money, you don’t have anything and you don’t matter.

Wars happen now, as ever before primarily because of the division and separation of nations and the desire to protect one’s own resources. So few conflicts are ideological these days. And even when they are, the moneyed nations invariably use these conflicts as an opportunity to consolidate their grip on the resources.
Take a look at the recent events in Libya. Internal unrest has cast uncertainty over the supply of oil and so under the guise of “Humanitarian interest” the most oil dependant nations have begun to get involved. Their general tac is that they are “protecting civilians”. Yet I find it odd that they will commit millions of pounds worth of military help to a country that is in the throes of a civil war and yet will do nothing to stop the epidemic of rape of women and children that is going on in the Congalese Republic.

Also look at Japan, hundreds of thousands of people need assistance there, surely we could have sent some of our military there to help out with the re-building if our interests are purely humanitarian?

Because the bottom line here is that unless what you are doing serves the system it is seen as worthless. We are encouraged to work hard to make more money for ourselves which allows us to funnel that money back into the pockets of those who control the resources, we are constantly bombarded with media images of celebrities as if they should be seen as heroes just because they have money and fame, as if that is really doing anything lastingly worthwhile.

What is needed is a change at the most fundamental level imaginable and it starts with gettintg rid of the monetary system and moveing to an economy that is based around the fair and equitable distribution of resources. With access to all the resources of our planet we could not only advance technology rapidly and further than we dare to imagine but we could ensure that EVRYONE has enough. That no-one goes without.

There is already a movement that is working towards this, if you are interested i suggest watching the Films “Zeitgeist: Addendum” and Zeitgeist: Moving Forward" and reading up about the Zeitgeist Movement thezeitgeistmovement.com.

DEx

From:

atimes.com/atimes/Global_Eco … 4Dj01.html

The Power of Collective Action:

"The Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, at a time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment public-works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began. "

“What Germany had in 1933 was full sovereignty through which the Third Reich was able to adopt policies of economic nationalism to full effectiveness.”

“The United States as the dominant victor of World War II was determined to perpetuate its hegemony by suppressing national planning everywhere to prevent the emergence of economic nationalism and socialism.”

"The economic power of full employment
From the very outset of his rule, Hitler, whose main short-term goal was the economic revival of Germany with the help of German nationalist bankers and industrialists, won popular support of the nation. Hitler adopted an aggressive full-employment campaign. Between January 1933 and July 1935 the number of employed Germans rose by a half, from 11.7 million to 16.9 million. More than 5 million new jobs paying living wages were created. Unemployment was banished from the German economy and the entire nation was productively engaged in reconstruction. Inflation was brought under control by wage freeze and price control. Besides this, taking into account the lessons learned during 1914-18, Hitler aimed at creating an economy that would be independent from foreign capital and supply, and be well protected from another blockade and economic war. For Germans, all of the above was proof that Hitler was the one who had not only brought Germany out of economic depression but would take it directly to prosperity with new pride. German popular trust in the Fuehrer rose dramatically. "

SO IMAGINE WHAT COULD BE DONE TODAY, WITH ALL THE TECHNOLOGY, SCIENCE, KNOW HOW, AUTOMATION AND ROBOTS OF TODAY, AND MILLIONS MORE PEOPLE (Collective efforts of South Korea + USA + EU + Brazil added together, etc.) , ETC. A MIND BOGGLING AMOUNT OF WEALTH FOR ALL BY A LONG SHOT.

And you all whine about overpopulation and resource scarcities. Never has there been a greater lie told and implanted in the minds of millions.

Instead we have all these puny USA and EU ideologies of “grow your own food”, “peak oil”, “small businesses”, “entrepreneurs”, “be your own puny boss” ideas creating weaker and weaker, conflicted, and all against all societies that will be completely overrun by those who know how to use collective effort.

I can concede 1 thing to the Right : There is the possibility that instead of mind boggling wealth, a nation as large as the USA or Brazil or China(?!?) adapting a Nazi Hitler style of full employment and collective effort could turn into a mind boggling Fascist State hell bent on conquering the world and triggering WW III.

But then maybe the reason the powers that be (invisibly) need to atomize society is to eliminate the very real threat of a country getting way to powerful and rich beyond any control, also thanks to the power of Science and Technology and the sheer number of workers available today so as to become another WW II Germany, but this time on steroids.

So the real reasons are for “pacifism”, ok, I’ll take it all back, grow your own food and cut the electric line everyone.

From:

kunstler.com/blog/2011/03/make-no-mistake.html

Right Wing Thug says:

"So Old6699er mate where are these future new resources, (food, minerals, and fresh water) to be found amongst Gaia current ever depleting resources?

As you’re such a ‘visionary’ futurist perhaps like Star Trek you think that come 2050 we’ll just simply magic them endlessly out of mini wall based replicator, presumably? "

I answer:

"have written it in many posts here and on ilovephilosophy, check out the links: we have a very large number of ways to generate energy, we have all the room in the world for people, skyscrapers, and even hundreds of floors underground (for thousands of trillions of people who are productive resources, working for the Man, the Man being collective action and effort for the common good…), genetic produced food, and on and on for hundreds of pages: actually all the pages of all the scientific papers published in the last 50 years. And then we have the possibility to re-engineer our mind - brain, chip in brains, virtual reality: get real, there is no resource scarcity.

Now, for the serious stuff: did you read my last few posts last week ? Are you giving in then ? I could really use some peace of mind…"

And anyways population growth is rapidly decreasing worldwide, we won’t even reach a puny 15 billion.

And then resources depend upon behavior, what behavior patterns (therefore thought patterns) are chosen by a group of people to execute: if they are programmed in such a way that they need a trillion giant Cadillacs each to feel fulfilled and rewarded, then maybe, at least in the short run, there are some resource scarcities until we figure out a way to produce them for each person. If you just need a TV and no physical body at all because the content of the TV shows is sufficiently rewarding and fulfilling, then we can give that to thousands of trillions of people by making them live in giant underground skyscrapers with their brains extracted and chips connected directly to them playing the show. In that case there is no “resource scarcity”.

And anyways, there is always a time limit, if the state of being tied to the TV is to last only an hour after which you are turned off (die…), then it is an Infinite Resource System, if you need the trillion giant Cadillacs in a minute and they must last you a trillion years (because you live a trillion years) then it is a 100 % Resource Scarcity System, there are no resources at all.

Just read another economics article, it says:

“the gap between the requirements of the workplace and the “skill sets” that our workforce has is growing, not declining”.

Has anybody ever heard anyone else ever challenge this ? Has anyone ever asked exactly what “skill sets” are necessary (just like the “innovation” and “more education” buzzword) for exactly which workplace? I am always astonished by the fact that everyone, virtually everyone accepts these sentences as a given, as laws of physics, I have never heard not even one economist or anyone for that matter ever cast even the slightest doubt on these absolute “laws of physics”, either from the left or right.

And there is a reason why: these words have been chosen BY DESIGN since they are so abstract, so impossible to define, such moving targets: anything can become a “needed skill set” today and tomorrow morning it is no longer needed (according to the quirky random whims of some employer just desiring them from out of the blue sky), any “innovation” can be defined as such today (like cell phones with cameras or even digital cameras, when what they are are just old fashioned cameras put in a new package) and tomorrow “no longer necessary”. Don’t even get me started on the more training or education crap. Anything you learned today or trained for today, even if it took you years can become obsolete and no longer needed in the blink of an eye because the “skill sets” needed have changed and “innovation” has hosed you once again.

The real problem is that people have no ability to doubt all these concepts, no ability to challenge them, they are a given, they have been brainwashed by all of this BS. The truth is, all of this talk is just a justification (especially in the victim’s mind) that it is his fault he can’t find a job. Not that the economic system is biased towards kicking out as many people as possible from jobs by using as many possible fake excuses as possible.

Or the excuses may be real, but because the corporations and the competitive nature of the economy, by design create ever changing standards, technologies, interactions, patterns of behaviors and “new needs” to filter out as many people as possible from labor. In short there is always a precise intentionality behind it, and a precise class warfare being waged by the rich against the poor, capital against labor.

From:

kunstler.com/blog/2011/03/make-no-mistake.html

“decided to do the responsible thing and take the bus. I’ll say two things. One, a 15-20 minute drive took 2 1/2 hours each way. Two, never again.”

This too is by design, there is a precise intentionality to make public transit horrible. Since what you use is the only kind of public transit you can imagine, America is completely brainwashed that it is either like this or it is cars. No one ever tries to even imagine a better system, no one even tries to think up a better system, no one ever challenges this either.

It would cost nothing at all to completely put BUSes across all of the USA (something like 50 billion dollars, peanuts compared to the hundred billions given to banks for free or quantitive easing, etc.). But no one wants it because BUSes are that crap I took yesterday.