Optimal

Last week in Episode 139, Extreme, I related my rewatching and sharing of 9/11 videos on Facebook. I sensed there was some sort of inspiration there, some clue. Here's what I know now.

In 2007, Peter Joseph's Zeitgeist blew me away. In contrast to Dylan Avery's Loose Change which came out a couple of years before, and which Zeitgeist referenced. Peter took a meta perspective, starting with a deconstruction of Christianity. As a post Catholic, this was a gorgeous and radical kick off for me. I also imagined that this bold beginning must have pissed off plenty of religious people, a roadblock that kept them from getting to the 9/11 information. In hind sight, this was the best approach, def made a strong impression on me. And in my world, I'm all that matters! 😉

Peter Joseph did other docs after, and Addendum wasn't quite as inspiring. I didn't totally grasp money as debt until I started watching James Corbett. Rewatching Zeitgeist led me down the rabbit hole of what Peter Joseph is doing now and who is Peter Joseph anyway? And what does James Corbett think about him?

James is critical of Peter's advocacy of technocracy, even though he parted ways with the Venus project. I would imagine James is also skeptical of the sources Peter uses in his presentations. Then again, James has got at least one odd bed fellow in Patrick Wood, who espouses biblical prophesy over the predictive power of science.  James and Peter are the most articulate and credible people I've found so far who don't buy the official 9/11 hogwash. Seems like they might celebrate some common ground, or at least establish a respectful public back and forth - which would benefit all of us.

Who knows how this will all work out, but I do love the idea of crashing consumer culture. Stated in the positive, I'm all about expanding the wilds and taking care of each other. And yeah, I'm fine with that happening gradually, gently.

I don't mind exploring an open source stewarding of common resources, like fo instance the global life support system. That to me means mostly leaving it alone, until we really understand how things work, beyond rhetoric and the profit motive.

What concerns me about Technocracy is how humans figure into the inventory and calculations, would the system be set up to optimize human happiness or human freedom? Global health for me implies the health of Gaia, our essential planetary life support, at least until the dominant sentience is powered by solar panels. So do we design a system optimized for humans or for biodiversity? My sense is that they are the same, but I'm just a middle aged white male in America.

The premise of my documentary project Around Lake Michigan was that the seeds of a sustainable civilization are already everywhere, I could find them just by sailing along the shores of Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin. Powerful circular logic - Earth is platform for thriving, therefor in spite of all the apparent horror shows playing out, Earth is going to eventually emerge better than ever, which means a more just, peaceful, free and verdant human civilization is going to show up soonish, ergo it must already be sprouting up all around. Could be that it's always been here.

If you insist that we're doomed, that suckiness consistently prevails, I'd opine that's another little logical circle. If you're right and indeed, we are fucked, I loose nothing by feeling wonderful. So, moving right along.

As a proactive dude, I ponder how my bright future will unfold. If a brilliant open source technocracy was to replace rapacious consumption, how would this get started? What's the future history of our unfolding utopia?

A enlightened human presence on Earth starts with enlightened humans. How can we each become fully alive? What's that look like right now?