Ming the Mechanic:
Synergetic Wealth

The NewsLog of Flemming Funch
 Synergetic Wealth2003-03-04 17:23
picture by Flemming Funch

Long article from Timothy Wilken on synergetic wealth and synergetic consensus.
"If we humans synergically reorganized our world, we would all be wealthy beyond our wildest dreams. Today in 2002, if we were to reclaim the gift of all the land and natural resources presently held on planet Earth as individual property. And if we were to further reclaim the gift of Progress from those few who control it today, and then divided these two gifts equally among the 6 billions of us living on the planet, we would discover to our surprise and amazement that every man, woman, and child is wealthy beyond their dreams.

With synergic organization, and careful utilization of the planet’s total wealth for the benefit of all humanity, the carrying capacity of the Earth could be maximized to solve all our human problems and meet our all our needs. And this is without any need to damage the Earth, or degrade our environment.

There would never be any need for humans to earn their livings again. Our livings have already been earned by all those humans who lived and died to give us the great gift of progess. Then all humans would be free to spend their time making their lives meaningful by creating more wealth to be gifted to living and future humanity."
And I agree. There's resources enough on this planet for everybody to live affluently, if those resources weren't squandered and hoarded so much. And the resources could be used in collaboration and in harmony with the planet, rather than in the adversarial relationship that exists now. But it would require a dramatically different way of thinking about things, and a dramatically different way of organizing ourselves. Timothy also talks about what he calls 'Unanimous Rule Democracy', which is very much how I think democracy should work as well. Not rule by the majority, not rule by a dictator, not rule by whoever is first or fastest or richest, but unanimous consensus. Which is something we don't see much of in our current society.
"Synergic consensus is not availability to humanity today. We do not yet know how fast it will be at making decisions. But, I predict that unanimous rule democracy will prove faster than majority rule democracy. Synergic consensus elimates conflict. Recall conflict is the stuggle to avoid loss. Conflict is at the very heart of majority rule democracy. The focus of synergic consensus is very different. The entire group knows from the outset that they cannot lose. They are focused on choosing a plan of action that serves the needs of all the members in the group—to choose a plan of action that causes no one to lose. The synergic veto is not invoked capriciously. The only basis for synergic veto is to prevent someone from losing. This is a mechanism to eliminate loss—to choose the very best plan of action for everyone. This may well speed up the process of decison making. In any event regardless of the speed of decision, implimentation will be rapid. There is no conflict. This is a major advantage over majority rule democracy."
I'm wondering how to demonstrate that, even on a small scale. More on that at another time.

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic]



4 Mar 2003 @ 18:53 by matrxmuziq : might be sooner than we think
I feel you on the concept of asset wealth. America was a republic. Democracy (the chosen few are elected to keep you in the dark) is what we have become. Obviously, the system doesn't work as is. Everything has become a "money-making opportunity." The government(s?) has more fingers in the proverbial pie than a dozen young children at grandma's house for Christmas dinner. Well, first, "these people are selling things to others," so taxes seem like a cool thing to do. "I mean...look at all the money we'd be making."

The first of many freedoms that are taken away. And then I don't want Jimmy So-and-so taking my VCR, so I'll put his eye out next time he sneaks on my property. But we can't have that...because the freedom to carry weapons means that you can defend your property. We made money on previous taxes. We can now afford to "police our people" so that they won't have to do it. Thus we can eliminate *their* need for weapons. ("We don't have to tell them that their lack of arms means we can come in and invade their personal lives.") Another freedom lost. And on it goes.

And goes, and goes.... Where will it end? And how? That depends on us, really(in this case, Americans). The liberties and freedoms that made this country so wonderful are now in great jeopardy. Can you *really* speak your mind? Or is that just "conflict-speak" for "say what you want, so long as it doesn't offend the machine"?

Now, *maybe* the following links represent a concept that is a bit drastic, but I'd be willing to ride the bandwagon, if it'll progress us toward this new frontier with greater ease. Never be afraid to speak out on issues you feel are important. Never underestimate the human will - maybe it will cause us to stand up for what we believe is both right and God-given.


To the common wealth and greater good of mankind,

5 Mar 2003 @ 01:37 by shawa : We actually are ...
...experimenting with that at The Cauldron, and it works! :-)  

5 Mar 2003 @ 19:05 by dcaark : Community Based Economics 101
IMHO we will never be able to solve our problems through any political system. The system we have in America, under the constitution, is as good a place to begin, as any. However, we can change everything by building an effective community based economic system. When we bring more balance into the economy and create ways for everyone to be included, the people will then be able to correct the problems in our political system. Community based economies can only be built by people voluntarily cooperating from the bottom up, and being free to do so. That is precisely what THE ARK and NewMarket concepts are all about.  

6 Mar 2003 @ 19:03 by unity1 : concesus reality
the idea of a governing body consisting of ourselves as in a concensus to me is the only way ....I have been priviy to been in many such meetings and organizations that do work in this way, and although there can be heated moments, most of us work through it and become enriched from it...every angle is nutted out, fears listened to etc...its the only way  

Other stories in
2010-07-10 13:01: Strong Elastic Links
2010-07-08 02:27: Truth: superconductivity for scalable networks
2010-06-27 02:28: Be afraid, be very afraid
2008-07-06 23:20: Laws of social networks
2008-06-20 15:40: Peer material production
2008-05-06 13:57: Why can't we stick to our goals?
2008-02-21 21:16: Open social networks
2007-11-08 01:49: The value of connections
2007-11-07 00:51: Diversity counterproductive to social capital?
2007-07-13 23:42: Plan vs Reality

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic] [PermaLink]? 

Link to this article as: http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_article/_a000010-000618.htm
Main Page: ming.tv