What would an improved society look like?

[an anarchist]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

For me, I believe an morally evolved society would be both anarchist as well as vegan/vegetarian.

I believe that government is inherently immoral. I think anarchism is the only moral governing system.

I believe in not killing other life forms. Imagine all of the negative karma we would no longer produce if humanity ceases killing sentient beings for food. We are smart enough to survive without murder. Once we elevate all life to an esteemed status, I think we will be steering in the right direction.

So, anarchism + veganism/vegetarianism are on my list for society's benefit. What characteristics do you envision for a better society?

I was thinking of adding collective spirituality to the list, but I am unsure if spirituality is necessary at a mass scale. Magical thinking might not be required. But then there is the question of the literal existence of a higher power(s), which might necessitate spirituality for societal growth.

 

[JDMS]

I think the idea of a governmentless world would only work in a perfect human society, rather than simply an improved human society, personally. Some people won't even do something as simple as putting their shopping carts away, currently, so I don't really trust humans to be 100% moral all the time, which would be necessary (imo) for a governmentless world to function. Not to mention, I'm not sure how education or infrastructure would work in that kind of world, as I haven't looked into such things before.

So an anarchist society isn't on my personal list.

I'd like to see education prioritized, as well as empathy and kindness. More looking out for the little guy, so they don't feel like they need to turn to crime to stay alive. Perhaps something to target the fear of "otherness"... all around though, I'm not fully sure. It feels like a difficult question that man has been trying to answer for thousands of years now. And I don't reckon I'm a genius...

 

[Heyo]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

For me, I believe an morally evolved society would be both anarchist as well as vegan/vegetarian.

I believe that government is inherently immoral. I think anarchism is the only moral governing system.

I believe in not killing other life forms. Imagine all of the negative karma we would no longer produce if humanity ceases killing sentient beings for food. We are smart enough to survive without murder. Once we elevate all life to an esteemed status, I think we will be steering in the right direction.

So, anarchism + veganism/vegetarianism are on my list for society's benefit. What characteristics do you envision for a better society?

I was thinking of adding collective spirituality to the list, but I am unsure if spirituality is necessary at a mass scale. Magical thinking might not be required. But then there is the question of the literal existence of a higher power(s), which might necessitate spirituality for societal growth.

An improved society would require a second Enlightenment. Just as the ideas of the Enlightenment enabled people to live in democracies, a new Enlightenment would enable people to live without government. Not only need we dare to think, we need to think. Period. And we need to think things through, weighing the liberties and needs of others against our wishes. And we need to know the difference between tolerance and indifference. We are much to indifferent about the power plays of the ambitious few. A lot more people need to be concerned about policing injustices. Without a government to do that job, it becomes the job of everyone.
We need the homo politicus.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

For me, I believe an morally evolved society would be both anarchist as well as vegan/vegetarian.

I believe that government is inherently immoral. I think anarchism is the only moral governing system.

I believe in not killing other life forms. Imagine all of the negative karma we would no longer produce if humanity ceases killing sentient beings for food. We are smart enough to survive without murder. Once we elevate all life to an esteemed status, I think we will be steering in the right direction.

So, anarchism + veganism/vegetarianism are on my list for society's benefit. What characteristics do you envision for a better society?

I was thinking of adding collective spirituality to the list, but I am unsure if spirituality is necessary at a mass scale. Magical thinking might not be required. But then there is the question of the literal existence of a higher power(s), which might necessitate spirituality for societal growth.

Well, for me, I believe differently. So what comes next?
Your trick is very simple. You think about all humans and how you think is correct for all humans. But the falsification is that other humans do that differently. So you are not thinking as correct for all humans as all humans. Neither am I, but I know that.

 

[Brickjectivity]

What would an improved collective human society look like?

I don't know, but an improved society would avoid extremes such as "All sex is evil." and "We should all have sex, because we are acquaintances." There are many extremes, and society tends towards extremes. We sometimes call them 'Tipping points' where society takes a turn. It reaches an extreme, then turns in the opposite direction: bouncing from one extreme to another. Society seems like it cannot stay in or find a middle.

 

[wellwisher]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

For me, I believe an morally evolved society would be both anarchist as well as vegan/vegetarian.

I believe that government is inherently immoral. I think anarchism is the only moral governing system.

I believe in not killing other life forms. Imagine all of the negative karma we would no longer produce if humanity ceases killing sentient beings for food. We are smart enough to survive without murder. Once we elevate all life to an esteemed status, I think we will be steering in the right direction.

So, anarchism + veganism/vegetarianism are on my list for society's benefit. What characteristics do you envision for a better society?

I was thinking of adding collective spirituality to the list, but I am unsure if spirituality is necessary at a mass scale. Magical thinking might not be required. But then there is the question of the literal existence of a higher power(s), which might necessitate spirituality for societal growth.

An improve society would require people stop playing the zero sum game, since this divides people. A zero sum game assumes a fixed amount of resources, such that if we try to make things fair, it requires both losers and winners. For example, the quota system does pull some people up. However, this occurs at the expense of hurting others. Winner and losers is the only way to make the math add to a zero sum; positive plus negative equals zero sum. This zero sum game is more connected to the government mentality, which has a fixed budget and has to distribute it, with more needs than money.

An improved society would get beyond the zero sum game and start using a positive sum game, where everyone can win. This is more connected to the way the free market works. The GNP or gross national product is almost always positive; adding value. The GNP is not a fixed sum, but it grows. It does not need to increase the numbers of losers to offset more winners. It is possible to add winners without adding the same amount of losers. When computers appeared in culture; 1990's, we all won since it added value to all. The GNP rose.

Losers start to appear when the GNP starts to get smaller; less positive.The GNP is connected to creating value, instead of being stuck at a fixed amount. In such a system; positive sum game, bringing people up, does not require we also bring someone else down; quota system. Both can rise in a positive sum game. When all can rise, this avoid the social conflicts that the zero sum game always creates.

One of the biggest reasons for so much social conflict in the USA is the national debt. This means that government is no longer even a playing a zero sum game, but is operating more like it is playing a negative sum game; more losers than winners. The tax payer gets a negative rate of return, due to the interest on the debt. This lowers the final tax revenue, value. The result in governemt is as we build up A, B has to fall even more to compensate for the negative sum. The government gets crooked, with in fighting, wasting resources in the negative sum game, with the tax payers losing even more; recession.

I would create a Constitutional Amendment to force at minimum a zero sum game in government; balanced budget, with the future goal of Government learning to become competent enough to turn a profit, so it can lead a positive sum game; tax decrease for all.

Electric cars are good, but the way this change was instituted, was part of a negative sum game. It required making fossil fuel the big loser, which made everyone a loser, due to rise in all prices, since trucking merchandise and electric generation are still very dependent on fossil fuel. More bad was done, than good, if you do the math. The debt create negative sum mentality.

A better way would have been a free market way, where both electric and fossil get to be winners; free market. The country would not become divided due to all the new losers now fighting for fairness. The Political left, which does not like the free market, does not understand a positive sum game. They seem to always act like there is only a zero or negative sum game. They need to be educated or else they will sabotage even a positive sum game.

 

[Ponder This]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

For me, I believe an morally evolved society would be both anarchist as well as vegan/vegetarian.

Collective by definition is done by people acting as a group.
Anarchy by definition is a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority or other controlling systems.

Collective anarchy is fundamentally self-contradictory as collectivism requires a societal pact between individuals and collectives. A societal pact by definition involves the surrender of some freedoms and submission to an authority.

Thus an improved collective society would be one of voluntary non-anarchy.
However, not all collective societies are worth improving. Some collectives do not provide the protection of rights and maintenance of social order of their societal pact.

 

[an anarchist]

Anarchy by definition is a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority or other controlling systems.

Common misconception.

Anarchy means "no rulers" not "no rules". Depending on the anarchist, there are different theories on how order would be established absent of a government. I'm a capitalist myself, and believe the free market would be the governing force. But that's a niche view, even amongst anarchists.

 

[Ponder This]

Common misconception.

The definition of anarchy I gave is from Oxford Languages (google); it is a common definition.

Anarchy means "no rulers" not "no rules". Depending on the anarchist, there are different theories on how order would be established absent of a government. I'm a capitalist myself, and believe the free market would be the governing force. But that's a niche view, even amongst anarchists.

"no rulers" not "no rules" suggests to me that you have a Utopian view of anarchy where people follow the "rules" in the absence of "rulers".
However, you then propose that the free market could be a "governing force" (aka a "ruler" or controlling system). This makes no sense to me in many ways. First of all, free markets consist of privately owned businesses (Collective Anarchism advocates the abolishment of private ownership of the means of production). Second of all, unregulated free markets lead to monopolies (oligarchy). And third of all, a "governing force" is a ruler.

I think my assessment stands that Collective Anarchy is self-contradictory.

 

[Yerda]

Every person would be encouraged and supported to explore their potential to its fullest.

 

[metis]

I believe that government is inherently immoral. I think anarchism is the only moral governing system.

Anarchy is way too unstable, which is why there has never been such a society that last long having that. Matter of fact, they usually devolve and adopt more authoritarian procedures so as to try and restore peace.

 

[We Never Know]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

For me, I believe an morally evolved society would be both anarchist as well as vegan/vegetarian.

I believe that government is inherently immoral. I think anarchism is the only moral governing system.

I believe in not killing other life forms. Imagine all of the negative karma we would no longer produce if humanity ceases killing sentient beings for food. We are smart enough to survive without murder. Once we elevate all life to an esteemed status, I think we will be steering in the right direction.

So, anarchism + veganism/vegetarianism are on my list for society's benefit. What characteristics do you envision for a better society?

I was thinking of adding collective spirituality to the list, but I am unsure if spirituality is necessary at a mass scale. Magical thinking might not be required. But then there is the question of the literal existence of a higher power(s), which might necessitate spirituality for societal growth.

"I believe in not killing other life forms"

Even vegetarians kill "other life forms".

We don't give plants enough thought. They are aware of their surroundings. Crown shyness shows that. But how aware are they Is the question.

Trees avoid touching each other. Grass sends out distress call. Plants know when deer are eating them.

Trees avoid touching each other due to "crown shyness." The results are beautiful webs of leaves.

Trees avoid touching each other due to "crown shyness." The results are beautiful webs of leaves.

Trees might be tall and strong, but they are still a bit sheepish. Crown shyness describes the phenomenon of a tree’s leaves withdrawing from the leaves of other trees. It results in beautiful webs of almost touching canopies, but why do trees do it? There are a few theories for trees’ bashful...

www.mcgill.ca

That ‘fresh-mown lawn smell’ is actually a distress call to insects

That ‘fresh-mown lawn smell’ is actually a distress call to insects – Research@Texas A&M | Inform, Inspire, Amaze

research.tamu.edu

Researchers Have Found That Plants Know They Are Being Eaten

Researchers Have Found That Plants Know They Are Being Eaten

Vegetarians and vegans pay heed.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Soandso]

A solar punk future would be nice

But I'm afraid a cyber punk future is far more likely

 

[an anarchist]

Anarchy is way too unstable, which is why there has never been such a society that last long having that. Matter of fact, they usually devolve and adopt more authoritarian procedures so as to try and restore peace.

That is certainly one popular theory why it hasn't worked yet. I blame individuals, not the system.

"Moral government is way to unstable, which is why there has never been such a society that last long having that. Matter of fact, they usually devolve and adopt more authoritarian procedures..."

 

[Koldo]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

For me, I believe an morally evolved society would be both anarchist as well as vegan/vegetarian.

I believe that government is inherently immoral. I think anarchism is the only moral governing system.

I believe in not killing other life forms. Imagine all of the negative karma we would no longer produce if humanity ceases killing sentient beings for food. We are smart enough to survive without murder. Once we elevate all life to an esteemed status, I think we will be steering in the right direction.

So, anarchism + veganism/vegetarianism are on my list for society's benefit. What characteristics do you envision for a better society?

I was thinking of adding collective spirituality to the list, but I am unsure if spirituality is necessary at a mass scale. Magical thinking might not be required. But then there is the question of the literal existence of a higher power(s), which might necessitate spirituality for societal growth.

Better sharing of resources, in other words no financial elite.
No war. No famine. No one dying of easily treatable diseases. No one going bankrupt to pay for ordinary medical services. More cameras so getting away with crimes becomes much harder.

 

[Nimos]

What would an improved collective human society look like? What would be some of if characteristics?

Despite how much of a utopian society it might sound like, I think that The Venus Project in many cases comes close to a realistic idea of what a future society might look like.

At least I haven't really seen any other suggestions that seem to dare question or propose another solution to how things are being done today in regards to the challenges that we face.

 

[metis]

That is certainly one popular theory why it hasn't worked yet. I blame individuals, not the system.

I would say both.

There's an old English adage that if there were two Englishmen stranded on a deserted island, the first thing they would do would be to form a government.

 

[syo]

Pagan.

 

[icehorse]

I would take the "7 generations" idea very seriously. So social programs would all have to be assessed from a long term sustainability and impacts perspective.

I'll use "what to eat" as an example. First off, we all get eaten in the end. I eat very little red meat, but I do eat a little. Whatever life form we eat should have had the best life we can create for them, and the most humane death we can muster. That's better than a lot of humans get : )

And to say more, it's simply not sustainable for 7 or 8 billion humans to eat a lot of subsidized meat. Without subsidies, beef would probably cost $30 / pound or more. That's what it SHOULD cost. That's the cost to our environment to produce beef.

And once again, I'll bang my main drum - oligarchy / kleptocracy is NOT sustainable. So if we were to really take sustainability seriously, we'd eliminate oligarchs and kleptocrats. To be clear, I think we ought to have free markets, and we ought to reward invention and innovation. But that does NOT mean we have to accept corruption.