New World Order - Centralized Kind or Decentralized Kind

[beavis]

 There is a pattern of global events that started long ago and has become stronger every year since then. That pattern will cause its own end soon because it causes and repeatedly amplifies contradictions in its own ways of operating.

I'm going to talk about global events and what motivations in what groups of people they created. Lets leave the politics out and focus on the facts and where they lead.

It started with the creation of intellectual property (IP) laws long ago, and they boosted the economy and motivated creativity.

But in recent years IP laws have had a new effect: Censoring of the Internet, and in more ways than enforcing IP. IP laws created a motivation in businesses, governments, and many other parts of the world, to protect their investment in research and other acts of creativity and invention. To protect their control over their IP, they acted to control the flow of information because that is where IP is most easily Napstered, Gnutella'ed, and generally pirated and file shared, and the IP was and is shared there in huge amounts without paying for it.

That wasn't the end of the Internet censoring. If it had been, it may not have been enough to set in motion its own end. But those in power got greedy. They decided that since We The People Of Earth would accept Internet Censoring for 1 reason, we would accept it for other reasons too.

Using our new communication ability, revolutions were organized through social networking websites like Twitter and Facebook and other forums of communication. Some dictatorships in the East were overthrown by The People of those countries, and some of We The People Of Earth congratulated them on their new freedom.while others complained that they should have asked permission from the dictators for freedom.

That created motivation in the people who "complained that they should have asked permission from the dictators for freedom" to censor flows of information.

Then there's real terrorism but it happens in such small amounts that compared to the biggest global problems, like Cancer and AIDS and a half billion starving people, it looks small. So the media hype and other events were engineered to put it in peoples' faces and get We The People Of Earth to react to terrrorism with higher priority than life-or-death problems that affect a much larger number of people. Why is it that you hear more about terrorism on the news than Cancer and AIDS research?

The need to make terrorism and piracy look more problematic to We The People Of Earth than it really is, created motivation to censor the flows of information.

So those in power built infrastructure and political and economic structures that make it easy for them to control flows of information and it creeped into the Internet until HTTP and a few others are the only practical technical protocol that information can flow, peer to peer software is severely crippled, Facebook and Twitter and Google can turn off your words as easily as flipping a switch on search results. Sometimes they turn it off in whole countries, and of course the conflict escalates more often than The People accept it.

As a reaction to censoring of the flows of information, Wireless Mesh Networks and other kinds of Internet became popular where those in power tried to censor it. RepRap is a 3d printer that can print over half of its own parts. The Open Source movement has for many years become stronger each year. The Zeigeist Movement, Pirate Party, Libertarians, and many other organizations become more popular.

A division forms between patterns in the world. On one side people want to organize things in some centralized hierarchy. On the other side people want to organize things like Wikipedia, a way billions of people can work together directly with eachother.

Every year this division becomes stronger, and it can't last much longer. IP laws set in motion events that created this division.

We are becoming more like a global brain every year. Its clear that the side that organizes things more like brains (decentralized, not hierarchy) is going to become stronger. That's not even yet considering that we're close to figuring out how Human brains work and organining our global flows of information that way, more intuitively and intelligently than any search engine we've yet imagined. When information flows are censored, that is the force its working against. Its like rubbing sandpaper on a mountain lion's butt. You don't want to wake up this animal.

Evolution starts with particles, then DNA, then single celled life, then many celled life (including Humans), then groups of many celled life forms (as Humans learned to work in groups of up to Dunbar's Number size), then proceeds to bigger and bigger groups. We're still working on scaling up from Dunbar's Number to 7 billion and then we will have the ability to interact in an effective way with other intelligent species who would be more interested in talking to us the more we can think like a global brain. Censoring the flow of information is acting against evolution, a force of nature more than able to defend itself and solve complex problems.

Instead of the New World Order as hierarchy that controls everything, we are becoming more like a global brain. Lets work toward that, something almost everyone will be happy we've done after living in it for some time. The alternative is World War 3 as the unavoidable effect of escalation of the division between centralized patterns of the world acting to control everything and decentralized patterns acting toward individual freedom and very needed information flow to become more like a global brain.

[Bedeekin]

It actually started with protein... cell... then DNA. DNA was needed once the cell replicated itself... so more copies could be made as part of a multicellular organism.

Your little article is good.

Read 'Spontaneous Evolution' by Bruce Lipton. It will resonate with what you are saying here.

[Xanth]

It's inevitable that a centralized government form for the world.  It's not something that should be feared.

[Volgerle]

It's inevitable that a centralized government form for the world.  It's not something that should be feared.

There are many who disagree. Any centralised government could mean less democracy and more totalitarian regime. This is feared by many. Yes, this would not be the case if human (individual as well as collective) consciousness would have evolved enough, then a central government (which would not be a 'govern'ment like we know it nowadays) would be perfect. But human consciousness is not at a point where more centralisation would do it some good. It might happen anyway, but the negative consequences of this is what drives on the continuous rise of the various 'conspiracy', anti-mainstream and alternative protest movements all over the globe (be it Icke, Jones, or groups like Occupy, Attac or any other anti-globalist movement).

[Szaxx]

Makes you think what works best.
A heirarvhical superstructure or a hybrid system.
In the early computers a.single processor did everything. ULA's came along and changed this. Todays systems incorporate several processors.
In all the hybrid system is faster by far.
I wonder if each country would follow this system or wait for big brother to decide....
Not that simple allowing integration either.

[Xanth]

There are many who disagree. Any centralised government could mean less democracy and more totalitarian regime.

It also could NOT mean that.  LoL

As I said, it's inevitable... if we, as a species want to continue, this is the next logical step.

This is feared by many.

Of course it's feared by many.  It's a great change... and most people hate change.  That's never stopped change from occurring though, has it? 

Yes, this would not be the case if human (individual as well as collective) consciousness would have evolved enough, then a central government (which would not be a 'govern'ment like we know it nowadays) would be perfect. But human consciousness is not at a point where more centralisation would do it some good. It might happen anyway, but the negative consequences of this is what drives on the continuous rise of the various 'conspiracy', anti-mainstream and alternative protest movements all over the globe (be it Icke, Jones, or groups like Occupy, Attac or any other anti-globalist movement).

Oh I'm not saying "when" it'll happen... only that, eventually, it's inevitable.  I agree with you whole-heartedly that current humanity isn't ready for it.

[rain_88]

From the viewpoint of science, life and evolution started with autocatalytic RNA molecules,  DNA and proteins appeared later. And the common direction of information flow is DNA-RNA-protein. Sometimes RNA-DNA-RNA-protein.

And I don't want to be an alarmist, but centralized world order or single government is only good for one thing: easier mass control. I don't know anything about your countries but there isn't a single thing the government did for the people who live here except manipulating/abusing/misleading them.

Very innocent and well meaning thought on the surface, but in the case of multiple countries at least you can notice the contradictions and lies - what would would happen if you were fed with "information" from only one source? What would be your reference point? Your own intuition? Which is colored by your own beLIEfs and expectations?

[Xanth]

From the viewpoint of science, life and evolution started with autocatalytic RNA molecules,  DNA and proteins appeared later. And the common direction of information flow is DNA-RNA-protein. Sometimes RNA-DNA-RNA-protein.

And I don't want to be an alarmist, but centralized world order or single government is only good for one thing: easier mass control. I don't know anything about your countries but there isn't a single thing the government did for the people who live here except manipulating/abusing/misleading them.

Very innocent and well meaning thought on the surface, but in the case of multiple countries at least you can notice the contradictions and lies - what would would happen if you were fed with "information" from only one source? What would be your reference point? Your own intuition? Which is colored by your own beLIEfs and expectations?

I'm sorry rain, but that's an extremely fear-based reaction to the possibility.
Can you really not think of any good that could come out of such a situation?

I'm not saying you're right or wrong... but I can see a lot of good coming out of a one-world government.  I guess, it would really depend on the government though, right?

[rain_88]

Well, no . But you could share yours regarding this .

It's none of my concerns if it happens or not, I am not afraid of it, but I guess it would decrease the pool of available experiences for the incarnations who would live during those times.

[Szaxx]

@Rain, Im aware of your concerns having family 170 km north of you. The history  speaks for itself.

[rain_88]

Yeah, I was going to say that about history, but then I was like books and other written stuff are dead and you don't really have too many people around to tell you about what happened hundreds of years ago. But even the recent part of history speaks for itself. And actually that is the part which shows the direction we are moving in IMO.

And I don't really see a tendency that things are changing for "better". But yeah, the outcome would depend on the quality of that government.

[Astralzombie]

Though I believe that is is the goal of some elitists, I can't possibly imagine how it could happen. Even extreme power grabs with brutal force seem unlikely to succeed post ww2. We've seen some brutal regimes come and go since but the Nazi's were the best and I believe the last at world domination. And I see plenty to fear from that example.

To be remotely possible, genocides would have to occur on an apocalyptic level, otherwise forget about a utopian one world gov. Bitterness will grow and grow from one gen to the next unless all historical references were erased forever. In other words, the people will have to be kept completely ignorant in order to instill a conformist ideology in them. The negatives completely outweigh the few "positives" that I can see. And it's a real stretch to call them positive in any real sense.

I really am interested in hearing Xanth's opinion on how this could be positive. My motivation in any discussion is never to change someone's opinion. In contrast, I'm always looking to see if I am ignorant to something and if I agree I will research it further or at the very least be more open minded.

[Stillwater]

It actually started with protein... cell... then DNA. DNA was needed once the cell replicated itself... so more copies could be made as part of a multicellular organism

Well, it gets even more technical, haha. First there were stray aminos and little oil globules, and in places like tidepools these sometimes spontaenously assembled into bacterial precursors called "protobionts", which were many in number, but not very functional. Sometimes a protobiont would end up with catalytic proteins in them that assembled from aminos, and even more rarely 2 somewhat advanced chance-assembled protobionts would merge by collision. This happened enough times that eventually a small number even ended up with ribosomes (the things that interpret RNA sequences into proteins), RNA, and enough proteins coded into it to actually be self-replicating. There were probably hundreds of trillions or more protobionts in oil-based membranes before even a number less than 10 such protobionts assembled, but as soon as self replication was stumbled upon, it was all over, and bacterial anscestors soon followed, probably related to "mycoplasmi". DNA probably followed a few tens of million years later and replaced RNA as the primary code repository, probably because of RNA's compartative volatility (although many things like retroviruses still code in RNA). An evolutionary biochemist could proably go into more depth still, by a few orders of magnitude, haha.

----------------------

I have often thought about the role of intellectual property and patents in society too Beavis- I think this is one of your more lucid posts. Intellectual property is essentially a means of extending capitalism further and further over nature, and a means for allowing corporate groups to conquer an ever growing number of resources and abstract fields for personal gain.

For instance, does anyone really own wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum? They are so fundamental to the structure of the universe, how could be they be owned... yet they are.

How could anyone own parts of the human genome? If nothing else, doesn't it at least belong to all humans in tandem? How can a corporation or person own the rights to my own genes, and thus block research on medicines or procedures which my life may later depend on?

How does anyone own something like a strain of plant, which is more a product of nature than anything?

How does a publishing company own a piece of music, which is an abstract collection of physical interactions, and if anything belongs to the person who discovered it, or else humanity as a whole?

How does a computer company own a certain piece of code, which is nothing more than a set of logical rules, and which may in fact be the most efficient way to do a certain task, forcing competitors to expend resources with redundant work arounds?

The list goes on and on to me, lol... intellectual property is helpful to a capitalist society because it blocks competitorsand helps ensure personal income, but I think intellectual property and capitalism in general can be overapplied to the extent where they are at odds with basic human interest, and they can even become counter-productive to progress.

[dreamingod]

There are many who disagree. Any centralised government could mean less democracy and more totalitarian regime. This is feared by many.

Agree.

I'm not saying you're right or wrong... but I can see a lot of good coming out of a one-world government.  I guess, it would really depend on the government though, right?

What government do we currently have?
What type of courts do we currently have?
Is this type of government one which fairly represents the interests of the people
through transparent means, encourages the free flow of information or one that is much fear-ego driven?

Much of my research indicate that we have "corporate" govern-ments and "corporate" courts
which is driven by business interests, non-transparent and compels compliance/contract through ignorance and fear of the people, by creating a myriad of corporate/company policies which
at large limit the creative expression.

This type of govern-ment does in deed govern-minds through its endeavour to monopolise
trade, censor information, restrict technologies, and enforce national boundaries.

We already have the I.M.F. and Federal Reserve Banks which dictates the lives of most people
and minds in this paradigm construct called "Earth" run by an unelected group of people,
who are really the decision makers behind the puppet government talking heads.

Now that many people know this there is a concerted "sovereign" movement to redress this imbalance.

Those who 'know who they are' will be least affected by government, however those who are
unawaken such as the celebrity worship crowd will find their lives more and more restricted.


Do we need governments to govern our minds and lives?
On the individual level I perceive that we deserve what we attract with our beliefs and actions.

From my experiences, know that when one challenges government and refuse to contract,
one can remain "sui juris" and make the government agents accountable.

~

[Xanth]

You missed the part where I said that the current state of humanity isn't ready for a one-world government. 

Humanity has A LOT of growing up to do before this can occur with Love.

Any government (or anything for that matter, concept, idea, etc...) born out of fear, will always succumb to the lowest common denominator.

[Astralzombie]

You missed the part where I said that the current state of humanity isn't ready for a one-world government. 

Humanity has A LOT of growing up to do before this can occur with Love.

Any government (or anything for that matter, concept, idea, etc...) born out of fear, will always succumb to the lowest common denominator.

I didn't. But if you don't mind, I am still interested in your ideas. We must help each other to overcome our ignorance.

[Xanth]

I didn't. But if you don't mind, I am still interested in your ideas. We must help each other to overcome our ignorance.

I have no ideas.  At least not for "humanity".

I have ideas and I have initiated for myself in order to change MY reality.  Everyone has to change themselves at their own pace.
I say that we need to grow up spiritually as a species.  This requires everyone to grow individually. 

[dreamingod]

We are becoming more like a global brain every year. Its clear that the side that organizes things more like brains (decentralized, not hierarchy) is going to become stronger. That's not even yet considering that we're close to figuring out how Human brains work and organining our global flows of information that way, more intuitively and intelligently than any search engine we've yet imagined. When information flows are censored, that is the force its working against. Its like rubbing sandpaper on a mountain lion's butt. You don't want to wake up this animal.


Instead of the New World Order as hierarchy that controls everything, we are becoming more like a global brain. Lets work toward that, something almost everyone will be happy we've done after living in it for some time.

I agree. The communication networks looks more like a global brain.
In essence, I think this better reflects how consciousness operates.


Anyone who is familiar with peer-to peer sharing can check this out themselves.
Eg. Vuse Bittorrent Client
Select File shared > [right click] Show Details > [Tab] Swarm
Each sharer is spawning a swarm  


There is an interesting article in Scientific American: Could the Internet Ever Be Destroyed?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=could-internet-ever-be-destroyed


Partial map of the Internet based on the January 15, 2005 data found on opte.org.
Each line is drawn between two nodes, representing two IP addresses.
The length of the lines are indicative of the delay between those two nodes.

Full image here http://i.livescience.com/images/i/23728/original/Internet_map.jpg?1327068646


~

[Bedeekin]

That looks remarkably like brain cells and synapses.

[Lionheart]

I have no ideas.  At least not for "humanity".

I have ideas and I have initiated for myself in order to change MY reality.  Everyone has to change themselves at their own pace.
I say that we need to grow up spiritually as a species.  This requires everyone to grow individually. 

I agree with this 100%. I had been getting down on Humanity, as you could tell by a couple of rants I made here on the Pulse. 

But then, on Saturday morning I awoke in a Lucid Dream where I got to see what the World would look like if all of a sudden we awoke to what we once knew long ago and it definitely was not a pretty site.

In this vision I had, people had awoken to their higher consciousness, but still had their ego, greed, materialism etc. So, what this did is just amplified all their wishes and desires. There was chaos everywhere.

In other words, once again I saw what I needed to see. Another lesson well taught, courtesy of the NPR. 

[newmethod]

I have often thought about the role of intellectual property and patents in society too Beavis- I think this is one of your more lucid posts. Intellectual property is essentially a means of extending capitalism further and further over nature, and a means for allowing corporate groups to conquer an ever growing number of resources and abstract fields for personal gain.

For instance, does anyone really own wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum? They are so fundamental to the structure of the universe, how could be they be owned... yet they are.

How could anyone own parts of the human genome? If nothing else, doesn't it at least belong to all humans in tandem? How can a corporation or person own the rights to my own genes, and thus block research on medicines or procedures which my life may later depend on?

How does anyone own something like a strain of plant, which is more a product of nature than anything?

How does a publishing company own a piece of music, which is an abstract collection of physical interactions, and if anything belongs to the person who discovered it, or else humanity as a whole?

How does a computer company own a certain piece of code, which is nothing more than a set of logical rules, and which may in fact be the most efficient way to do a certain task, forcing competitors to expend resources with redundant work arounds?

The list goes on and on to me, lol... intellectual property is helpful to a capitalist society because it blocks competitorsand helps ensure personal income, but I think intellectual property and capitalism in general can be overapplied to the extent where they are at odds with basic human interest, and they can even become counter-productive to progress.

I agree.
It is mad! truly, insanely mad!
In regard to this sort of madness people are only taking a limited view and being trapped in the capitalist society. There is no outlook (or virtually none) made toward the future especially long futures like hundreds of years. People are often only interested in the the next 5-10yrs, 20 at most.

If understandings about nature and technology weren't controlled by IP surely there could often be further significant advances made more quickly.

The problem here is the monetary system.

Who even says just because you are the group mining something from the ground that you are the owner of it and therefore can sell it and make a profit from it. Is it not the Earth producing it over millions of years? It's a bit like 'finders keepers'.

I believe i could like in a world without money where the only cost thought about would be the cost to the community, the environment (everything), and the Earth itself. I for one would still do 'my thing' and help support the community that supports me it would be virtually natural. But maybe i am fairly alone in this. I've expressed this thought to different people at times and they sound like if it wasn't for the fact of needing money they would spend most of their time sitting around watching TV and drinking beer! OMG.

Though i hope i'm not entirely alone. I believe some people would still have the desire to teach, people would still have the desire to be doctors, people would still be hairdressers or farmers or whatever. I think if we could do away with money and people followed their own flow and inner desires (real ones) that we could live in a more vibrant spiritually advanced community and world. There would be no poverty because the community owns everything and shares everything that is needed. Obviously this would only work if we as a race were much more spiritually advanced because otherwise there would always be people that would take advantage of this system.

In this

You missed the part where I said that the current state of humanity isn't ready for a one-world government.  

Humanity has A LOT of growing up to do before this can occur with Love.

Any government (or anything for that matter, concept, idea, etc...) born out of fear, will always succumb to the lowest common denominator.

Agree.

I can see a lot of good coming out of a one-world government.  I guess, it would really depend on the government though, right?

Agree.

And i think this could ONLY work if the wisest most spiritually advanced people were forming this government.

The only way i can see this being able to be done was if small community groups were wise enough to choose the wisest most spiritually advanced minds to be their representative/s. Then these representatives could meet other "local" representatives and choose from them the most spiritually advanced people to represent this "wider" community. Up and up it could go until we were left up at state, country and possibly world levels. Obviously those representatives would need people around them skilled in certain areas to help provide for the community. Though these people would be required to be 'somewhat' advanced also.

In my mind this could possibly (to borrow its_all_bad's word) produce a UTOPIA of sorts.

Obviously we as a race are miles from being evolved enough. It's still like the middle ages out there. People in certain positions would look to overthrow the 'representatives' etc. But WHEN we evolve enough as a race i think a UTOPIAN partly decentralised, partly centralised - community focussed, environment focussed, Earth focussed, spiritual evolutionary focussed government formed by the right people could be quite a pleasant and possibly very evolving place to be born into.

Though i think without evolved spiritually advanced benevolent aliens landing on Earth any time soon it could be millennia before any type of society similar to this would be possible on this planet.

Just my 'two cents'

[Astralzombie]

The kind of spiritual evolution that we're talking about, would negate any need to have a gov in the first place. This much spirituality would prevent corruption and thus prevent the need to stop corruption.

Unfortunately, I'm starting to think this is against the "rules" here in the physical but is of course the goal in the non physical. I think most of will agree that there are some negative beings in the NPR, although they are nothing like the Christian version IMO. Well. it then makes sense to me that to evolve spiritually further, these types are the ones that keep getting sent back to the physical to continue evolving. TBH, I'm sure I'll be "sent" back here unless I can live to be a couple hundred years old.

I'm getting carried away here, but my point is that I'm starting to feel like a utopian physical world is actually the end game. Once every existing energy has evolved enough spiritually, the utopia we all "dream" about will be realized in the NPR and there will be no more need for a physical world. I'm starting to believe in reincarnation because of the sciences that try to discredit most of this stuff. Since energy can not be destroyed, only dispersed or transferred, there must be a finite amount of existing consciousness's which are themselves a form of energy.

Can you Imagine how much energy will be available to the NPR once it is no longer needed to sustain a physical reality?

[Bedeekin]

Can you Imagine how much energy will be available to the NPR once it is no longer needed to sustain a physical reality?

Hardly any really... in comparison to the amount of energy it uses to create almost infinite other realities and experiments.

Have you read My Big TOE?

[Astralzombie]

No. You mentioned it before but I forgot. I'll look and see if I can get it for my kindle. I'm on my third one by the way and went back to the first version. The more options they have, the more that goes wrong with them.

[Bedeekin]

Campbell has released the books to view free online.

Yeah... it's just that what you speak of and theorise about will be greatly put into a structured form if you read MBT.

I had already arrived at most of the answers that Tom had... or rather.. I suspected that consciousness was digital in nature and had many jumbled ideas that fitted together somehow. He just supplied the glue and reason. My NPMR experiences changed for the better... and NPMR is an acronym from Tom. So is PMR.

The energy you are talking about though isn't energy as we know it. We think of energy as a power or excitation of molecules that needs a source and is reliant on mass... E=MC2.  The energy that creates this reality is more akin to the results of a process... it's almost a reduction of energy to constrain it rather than a creation needed to make it. There is no 'mass' in the nonphysical to warrant energy.

Anyway.. Tom describes it infinitely better than I.