Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
United Earth Government
Comments
-
People (myself included) often derive great satisfaction from doing something or building something for no reason related to personal gain or ambition. Surely we've all done some deed and stood back and said to ourselves 'a job well done is praise enough'
Yeah but quit your job & spend your whole day getting high on satisfaction from helping others. The after 8/9 hours come home, & try to pay all your bills with satisfaction. I'm sorry but our whole society revolves around personal gain/profit/economics. Nothing short of an asteroid will change that, & even then, I bet it'd still be "I'll trade you this half eaten mars bar for your piece of broken mirror".
That aspect of Star Trek that depicts humanity doing away with money, & Earth being a utopia for every man, woman & child....is the biggest piece of sci-fi in the whole show.0 -
Yeah but quit your job & spend your whole day getting high on satisfaction from helping others. The after 8/9 hours come home, & try to pay all your bills with satisfaction. I'm sorry but our whole society revolves around personal gain/profit/economics. Nothing short of an asteroid will change that, & even then, I bet it'd still be "I'll trade you this half eaten mars bar for your piece of broken mirror".
That aspect of Star Trek that depicts humanity doing away with money, & Earth being a utopia for every man, woman & child....is the biggest piece of sci-fi in the whole show.
Ah yes but you missed my point about the cook didnt you? The point extends to the service providers and so on and so forth.0 -
-
Ah yes but you missed my point about the cook didnt you? The point extends to the service providers and so on and so forth.
I didn't really miss the point, as I said its the most fictional thing in the Star Trek universe. There isn't too many people who'd get a kick out of service drinks for free, not when they could be the ones doing the drinking.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Case in point mod; do you get paid to mod this page? I'm guessing no, so what is it that motivates you?
Suppose it was your one job? Suppose I worked for the electricity provider and you got it for free. Suppose another poster provided food?
I'm not saying it would be easy, or right, just saying that it is possible....0 -
I think it could work if the sh1tty jobs were rotational, everyone would have to do them at some point. This may require a kind of society modelled on the form of decentralisation present in the internet, people would be more willing to agree to this contract if it were for the good of their community which they would have direct input into and which would be largely an autonomous entity among a multitude of interconnected autonomous entities. There would need to be an inbuilt defence mechanism with respect to viral authoritarianism of course, ie certain communities attempting to exploit or dominate others. In addition the introduction of robots would in theory solve the sh1tty jobs dilemma such that rotational work would be irrelevant. I'm still baffled by the fact that the Japanese haven't built a robot that can cook with natural ingredients, it would solve the pre made but unhealthy foods vs spending an hour to cook a healthy dinner but which will be consumed in 10 minutes problem.0
-
And what's stopping them enjoying a few?
Who's gonna serve them? More people who get a kick out of mopping up spilled drinks for free? Where is the drink going to come from? Distillers who get a kick out of brewing it for free, brought to the pub by truck drivers who get a kick out of driving for free, in trucks fueled by diesel given to them by oil giants who used to control the world, but then decided it made them feel better to give away fuel for free? Somehow, I doubt it.Case in point mod; do you get paid to mod this page? I'm guessing no, so what is it that motivates you?
Suppose it was your one job? Suppose I worked for the electricity provider and you got it for free. Suppose another poster provided food?
I'm not saying it would be easy, or right, just saying that it is possible....
I don't mind doing it as it doesn't interfere with my daily job. It doesn't cost me anything to do it, I don't mind doing it as I'm generally on boards anyway...but it doesn't pay my bills at the end of the month. It's not possible, not while planet Earth has a class based society.0 -
nyarlothothep wrote: »I think it could work if the sh1tty jobs were rotational, everyone would have to do them at some point. This may require a kind of society modelled on the form of decentralisation present in the internet, people would be more willing to agree to this contract if it were for the good of their community which they would have direct input into and which would be largely an autonomous entity among a multitude of interconnected autonomous entities. There would need to be an inbuilt defence mechanism with respect to viral authoritarianism of course, ie certain communities attempting to exploit or dominate others. In addition the introduction of robots would in theory solve the sh1tty jobs dilemma such that rotational work would be irrelevant. I'm still baffled by the fact that the Japanese haven't built a robot that can cook with natural ingredients, it would solve the pre made but unhealthy foods vs spending an hour to cook a healthy dinner but which will be consumed in 10 minutes problem.
For some reason I couldn't see the likes of Brian Cowen donning a pair of Dynarod overalls & getting stuck into unblocking something at the back of Harneys house, simply because its his turn. Its all fantasy folks. The earth's clock ticks to the beat of multi-billionaire corporates, nothing I can envisage will change that any time soon.0 -
For some reason I couldn't see the likes of Brian Cowen donning a pair of Dynarod overalls & getting stuck into unblocking something at the back of Harneys house, simply because its his turn. Its all fantasy folks. The earth's clock ticks to the beat of multi-billionaire corporates, nothing I can envisage will change that any time soon.
They're the excrement of their society I guess, for example we wouldn't tolerate individuals like Genghiz Khan or Beria or [insert random murderous authoritarian here] because our society has evolved to become more civilised, though we're way off civilisation yet. You are right though, multi billionaire corporations aren't dissapearing anytime soon but their existence is finite in that they are functions of a particular era in history.0 -
Advertisement
-
nyarlothothep wrote: »They're the excrement of their society I guess, for example we wouldn't tolerate individuals like Genghiz Khan or Beria or [insert random murderous authoritarian here] because our society has evolved to become more civilised, though we're way off civilisation yet.
Indeed, many now homeless London residents would agree with that.nylarothothep wrote:You are right though, multi billionaire corporations aren't dissapearing anytime soon but their existence is finite in that they are functions of a particular era in history.
Well the resource might change, be it from oil to something else. But one man will always have what another man wants, and commerce is born. I don't see big corporations going away any time soon either, I in fact see them shaping the road the future takes unfortunately.
Also to bring the thread back to a Star Trek level, I think the alternate universe version of first contact is much more likely. A war ravaged Earth, filled with desperate, hungry people? I'd wager they'd kill & pillage the Vulcan & his craft tbh.0 -
.Indeed, many now homeless London residents would agree with that.
Well the resource might change, be it from oil to something else. But one man will always have what another man wants, and commerce is born. I don't see big corporations going away any time soon either, I in fact see them shaping the road the future takes unfortunately.
Also to bring the thread back to a Star Trek level, I think the alternate universe version of first contact is much more likely. A war ravaged Earth, filled with desperate, hungry people? I'd wager they'd kill & pillage the Vulcan & his craft tbh.
If we last long enough as a species those pursuits may eventually shift to other ones. Farms could be equivalent to corporations but as technology improves we may not need farms any more, just as we didn't require the nomadic toolset when agriculture was invented. Not all people are interested in commerce or owning things which others have, instead they purchase things to serve their interests, granted there are a lot of people who aren't like this at all. I like to think of human evolution as a messy soup with different players influencing the future result. But at the same time I think a lot of change is directed from the top, so yeah corporations could be informing the future world of humanity and given their track record on the environment, social justice and so on, they leave a lot to be desired.
I don't know if things would really get that dystopic, I imagine there would be a lot of hysteria, inter governmental conflict and the usual human silliness followed by an acceptance of our alien overlords. It would just be the usual beige/grey business as usual set up from then on.0 -
The only way that we are ever going to get a united earth government is if the governments step up and begin to control breeding. There should be certain criteria met before people are allowed reproduce.0
-
nyarlothothep wrote: ».
If we last long enough as a species those pursuits may eventually shift to other ones. Farms could be equivalent to corporations but as technology improves we may not need farms any more, just as we didn't require the nomadic toolset when agriculture was invented. Not all people are interested in commerce or owning things which others have, instead they purchase things to serve their interests, granted there are a lot of people who aren't like this at all. I like to think of human evolution as a messy soup with different players influencing the future result. But at the same time I think a lot of change is directed from the top, so yeah corporations could be informing the future world of humanity and given their track record on the environment, social justice and so on, they leave a lot to be desired.
I don't know if things would really get that dystopic, I imagine there would be a lot of hysteria, inter governmental conflict and the usual human silliness followed by an acceptance of our alien overlords. It would just be the usual beige/grey business as usual set up from then on.
Thats it really, and as the winds of profit change so do these guys. Always one step ahead of the game, always a new angle on profit. As long as its possible to be rich, you'll have class based society, & in a class based socity...you'll have the fat necked amoral banker at the top of the food chain, & the guys flipping burgers in chippers. No offense to any or either, but thats the way it is, & thats how its going to be for a very, very long time.
Your right though in that not everyone is so materialistic. There are those with vision, sadly though, the ratio of these to the above is so low it matters not.The only way that we are ever going to get a united earth government is if the governments step up and begin to control breeding. There should be certain criteria met before people are allowed reproduce.
There will never be a UEG, it would involve corrupt governments handing over soverignty & control of entire nations, to even more corrupt folks. I've said it before & shall again, the only things politicians for are money and/or conquest. The politician who actually does care on a moral/human level, either doesn't go very far before getting a taste for the high life, or doesn't go very far at all.0 -
Thats it really, and as the winds of profit change so do these guys. Always one step ahead of the game, always a new angle on profit. As long as its possible to be rich, you'll have class based society, & in a class based socity...you'll have the fat necked amoral banker at the top of the food chain, & the guys flipping burgers in chippers. No offense to any or either, but thats the way it is, & thats how its going to be for a very, very long time.
Your right though in that not everyone is so materialistic. There are those with vision, sadly though, the ratio of these to the above is so low it matters not.
There will never be a UEG, it would involve corrupt governments handing over soverignty & control of entire nations, to even more corrupt folks. I've said it before & shall again, the only things politicians for are money and/or conquest. The politician who actually does care on a moral/human level, either doesn't go very far before getting a taste for the high life, or doesn't go very far at all.
The guys at the top in th 19th century would be probably horrified by the all the freedoms we have now. Were they ahead of the game? I don't think corporations are these infallible all powerful institutions, they are based on a social contract.
Also I think the description of society would apply to many but not all societies. Its not the way it has to be if the culture were changed and the only way to do that is to get your voice heard. I bet in the middle ages the idea that there would be no more monarchies would seem absurd but yet here we are. If Star Trek teaches us anything it is to hope for change, so that change may come to pass, yay.0 -
nyarlothothep wrote: »The guys at the top in th 19th century would be probably horrified by the all the freedoms we have now. Were they ahead of the game?
And the guys at the top today laugh at how little control was had in the 19th century, whats your point?
Monarchies have been replaced by other things mostly, but fundamentally, you have rich, middle class & poor just as it was back then. Names/titles may have changed, & our standard of living has obviously improved, but are we any closer to a Roddenberrry type society? Not a hope, if anything, we've gotten further from it. Ferenginar maybe.0 -
And the guys at the top today laugh at how little control was had in the 19th century, whats your point?
Monarchies have been replaced by other things mostly, but fundamentally, you have rich, middle class & poor just as it was back then. Names/titles may have changed, & our standard of living has obviously improved, but are we any closer to a Roddenberrry type society? Not a hope, if anything, we've gotten further from it. Ferenginar maybe.
I think we have more freedom to express our viewpoints, to control our own destinies, to protest at injustice, even to hold elites to greater account (yes I know this last one seems a bit ridiculous but I think relative to previous eras members of the elite are more open to being prosecuted) but I grant that its a pendulum which swings back and forth although in my opinion it has been swinging towards increased liberalisation and peace. For example I don't think governments in the West at least could get away with drafting entire populations into mindless wars and I would attribute these improvements to the fact that certain quarters of society have rejected irrational and flawed to their societies, have challenged hierarchy, and through their efforts have slowly chipped away at ingrained attitudes which lead to many forms of discrimination, prejudice and barbarity. Its a contested battlefield but simply to accept conditions as they are is defeatist.
I don't think its as simple as exchanging one set of rules for another. The actual relationship of power is different largely because of the efforts of those who sought to challenge authoritarian structures. I also think technology and an increase in living standards due to the more efficient harnessing of energy and resources may be attributable to this. Are you essentially arguing that power, domination and greed characterise human nature?0 -
nyarlothothep wrote: »For example I don't think governments in the West at least could get away with drafting entire populations into mindless wars and I would attribute these improvements to the fact that certain quarters of society have rejected irrational and flawed to their societies, have challenged hierarchy, and through their efforts have slowly chipped away at ingrained attitudes which lead to many forms of discrimination, prejudice and barbarity. Its a contested battlefield but simply to accept conditions as they are is defeatist.
Well that's hard to verify one way or the other. Should the next Hitler ever arrive, & pose a threat to our very way of life, I don't think drafting is entirely something that we wouldn't see happen.nyarlothothep wrote:Are you essentially arguing that power, domination and greed characterise human nature?
I suppose I am really. Looking back on our whole civilisations recorded history, all it has ever been in a nutshell is one group killing another over religious belief or land mass conquest. What was going on since before medieval times is still happening today, albeit under a different guise. Sure there are uplifting examples of human character all through history too, but they are so heavily outweighed by mans greed its hard for them to shine through.0 -
Well that's hard to verify one way or the other. Should the next Hitler ever arrive, & pose a threat to our very way of life, I don't think drafting is entirely something that we wouldn't see happen.
I suppose I am really. Looking back on our whole civilisations recorded history, all it has ever been in a nutshell is one group killing another over religious belief or land mass conquest. What was going on since before medieval times is still happening today, albeit under a different guise. Sure there are uplifting examples of human character all through history too, but they are so heavily outweighed by mans greed its hard for them to shine through.
Yeah if the next Hitler or genocidal aliens appeared on the scene I guess the draft would be acceptable to many, it would be a matter of survival. But so many other wars which required the draft were completely silly and I don't think governments can get away with this now, eg Iraq war attracted demonstrations in Britain and a bipartisan split in the US, that's an improvement over the jingoism that typified many colonial adventures in the past.
I think human nature is undefinable in that it varies from person to person and even then its complicated by the fact that people will have varying ratios of positive or negative traits. When I look back at history I largely agree that its been typified by wars, hysteria, stupidity, irrationality, arrogance, greed, foolishness, insanity, eg the holocaust, prejudice, bigotry and so on. However the opposites of these traits can also be found. Maybe its confirmation bias. I think we're living in the best times yet for humanity overall if you compare it to previous periods in history although we have a lot of challenges, economic, political and environmental and we may lurch back into a new dark ages. Even then I think the achievements of the present could then be taken up in the future and built upon as with those of the ancient world in relation to the renaissance which was followed by the age of reason, the industrial revolution and the present day.0 -
nyarlothothep wrote: »I think we're living in the best times yet for humanity overall if you compare it to previous periods in history although we have a lot of challenges, economic, political and environmental and we may lurch back into a new dark ages. Even then I think the achievements of the present could then be taken up in the future and built upon as with those of the ancient world in relation to the renaissance which was followed by the age of reason, the industrial revolution and the present day.
There are many, in places such as Somalia who wouldn't agree. And in these places throughout the world, the reason is commonly warfare, & huge governmental debt which will never be paid off due to the colossal interest rates of which loans were granted. Conquest & economics, alive & well in 2011. No amount of charity or donations can help these places, & in fact many charities have spawned some truly rich individuals. I wouldn't even guess at how much money is owed to the US by African countries, & I can't even guess at the interest rates either.
You've half the planet in desperate poverty (India, Africa, Asia (parts of)), you've half the planet trying to kill the other half over a difference in religious belief, you've whole countries at war over who owns what land, you've countries invading other countries over natural resources, & god knows how many other examples. It may be the best time for humanity to date, but we've a lot of growing up to do. There's NASA about to become a passenger in space exploration because the funds arn't there to commit to scientific study. Yet they're pumping out Black Hawks, F18's, F22's & UAV's because apparently we can afford to go to war?
I actually think we've taken a few steps backwards over the last three or four decades.0 -
Advertisement
-
There are many, in places such as Somalia who wouldn't agree. And in these places throughout the world, the reason is commonly warfare, & huge governmental debt which will never be paid off due to the colossal interest rates of which loans were granted. Conquest & economics, alive & well in 2011. No amount of charity or donations can help these places, & in fact many charities have spawned some truly rich individuals. I wouldn't even guess at how much money is owed to the US by African countries, & I can't even guess at the interest rates either.
You've half the planet in desperate poverty (India, Africa, Asia (parts of)), you've half the planet trying to kill the other half over a difference in religious belief, you've whole countries at war over who owns what land, you've countries invading other countries over natural resources, & god knows how many other examples. It may be the best time for humanity to date, but we've a lot of growing up to do. There's NASA about to become a passenger in space exploration because the funds arn't there to commit to scientific study. Yet they're pumping out Black Hawks, F18's, F22's & UAV's because apparently we can afford to go to war?
I actually think we've taken a few steps backwards over the last three or four decades.
I agree that the rate of progress is not uniform, that serious corruption exists and that a few steps backwards have been taken. Although these problems aren't insurmountable, its really up to people as to what kind of world they want to live in.
I think with NASA part of the problem is mismanagement, I read somewhere that the focus is on just keeping employed in manufacturing the same components again and again rather than developing new propulsion systems. In addition there is big money in manufacturing military aircraft, irc there was a proposal to modify the F16 I think by basically putting in an extra engine or something like that, it was summarily dismissed by congress for being wasteful because thats just what it was, primarily because it was intended to funnel profits into Lockheed and Martin, irc. I think also that a major part of it is scientists haven't come up with a good means for space propulsion. Imo ftl is the only way to go, otherwise we're never going to get much further than our solar system, so there is probably a malaise and boredom with space travel because it isn't going anywhere.0 -
nyarlothothep wrote: »I agree that the rate of progress is not uniform, that serious corruption exists and that a few steps backwards have been taken. Although these problems aren't insurmountable, its really up to people as to what kind of world they want to live in.
I think with NASA part of the problem is mismanagement, I read somewhere that the focus is on just keeping employed in manufacturing the same components again and again rather than developing new propulsion systems. In addition there is big money in manufacturing military aircraft, irc there was a proposal to modify the F16 I think by basically putting in an extra engine or something like that, it was summarily dismissed by congress for being wasteful because thats just what it was, primarily because it was intended to funnel profits into Lockheed and Martin, irc. I think also that a major part of it is scientists haven't come up with a good means for space propulsion. Imo ftl is the only way to go, otherwise we're never going to get much further than our solar system, so there is probably a malaise and boredom with space travel because it isn't going anywhere.
Agreed. Though FTL are you serious? I agree of course that its the only way to see the things we want to see, but its a rather lofty goal given the economic mess we're in, the fundamental physical boundaries, & well, our lack of knowing how to get even remotely close to it.
Thats interesting re the F16, are they that audacious just to roll money into Lockheed etc? And I also agree with you that space travel, at least in the eyes of the tax paying citizen, has become boring & routine. Personally I think we've done all we can, & the next step involves massive commitment & the huge risk to human life (manned trip to Mars). I think the Americans are happy to let the Chinese & Indian government burn up money doing the things that were done 10/20/30/40 years ago. There's nothing new to learn, nothing new to discover in low Earth orbit. The moon is barren, & not much else lies in plain sight. So why waste the dollars?
I suppose at this juncture we're getting way off topic regards UEG's, but I think between us, we both ackowledge that humanity has come a long way in a very short space of time....but we've a much, much longer way to go before we get to anything resembling a Roddeberry'esque vision.0 -
Agreed. Though FTL are you serious? I agree of course that its the only way to see the things we want to see, but its a rather lofty goal given the economic mess we're in, the fundamental physical boundaries, & well, our lack of knowing how to get even remotely close to it.
Thats interesting re the F16, are they that audacious just to roll money into Lockheed etc? And I also agree with you that space travel, at least in the eyes of the tax paying citizen, has become boring & routine. Personally I think we've done all we can, & the next step involves massive commitment & the huge risk to human life (manned trip to Mars). I think the Americans are happy to let the Chinese & Indian government burn up money doing the things that were done 10/20/30/40 years ago. There's nothing new to learn, nothing new to discover in low Earth orbit. The moon is barren, & not much else lies in plain sight. So why waste the dollars?
I suppose at this juncture we're getting way off topic regards UEG's, but I think between us, we both ackowledge that humanity has come a long way in a very short space of time....but we've a much, much longer way to go before we get to anything resembling a Roddeberry'esque vision.
Yeah these are pretty much my thoughts. I think FTL is a long way off if not impossible at least in terms of how we're conventionally thinking about it but given that the distances in space are so vast, we need something like this to make space travel have a point beyond having a little backyard in our solar system. On the other hand the amount of energy required to warp space time is god like. If the universe is a simulation it would be an audacious act on the part of the simulants "to mess around with the program" which is why I don't think its permitted lol. We also need to develop terraforming as a science. It may not be as far off as it seems though, technological progress is "sprinting." I'd say we could have terraforming tech in 500 years time.0
Advertisement