This Forum is Closed
March 26, 2023, 11:48:47 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: GGF now has a permanent home:
  Home Help Search Links Staff List Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  General / General Discussion / CENSORED - Government plans to snoop on internet users on: July 24, 2010, 08:02:30 am
From black list to blacked out. Documents on plans to store web surfing data are heavily censored due to the possibility of 'premature and unnecessary debate'.

All materials used in fair use for educational purposes only.

The federal government has censored approximately 90 per cent of a secret document outlining its controversial plans to snoop on Australians' web surfing, obtained under freedom of information (FoI) laws, out of fear the document could cause "premature unnecessary debate".

The government has been consulting with the internet industry over the proposal, which would require ISPs to store certain internet activities of all Australians - regardless of whether they have been suspected of wrongdoing - for law-enforcement agencies to access.

All parties to the consultations have been sworn to secrecy.

Industry sources have claimed that the controversial regime could go as far as collecting the individual web browsing history of every Australian internet user, a claim denied by the spokesman for Attorney-General Robert McClelland.

The exact details of the web browsing data the government wants ISPs to collect are contained in the document released to this website under FoI.

The document was handed out to the industry during a secret briefing it held with ISPs in March.

But from the censored document released, it is impossible to know how far the government is planning to take the policy.

The government is hiding the plans from the public and it appears to want to move quickly on industry consultation, asking for participants to respond within only one month after it had held the briefings.

See the highly-censored document (PDF, 3.60MB)
See government reasons for censoring it (PDF, 3.23MB)

The Attorney-General's Department legal officer, FoI and Privacy Section, Claudia Hernandez, wrote in her decision in releasing the highly censored document that the release of some sections of it "may lead to premature unnecessary debate and could potentially prejudice and impede government decision making".

Hernandez said that the material in question related to information the department was "currently weighing up and evaluating in relation to competing considerations that may have a bearing on a particular course of action or decision".

"More specifically, it is information concerning the development of government policy which has not been finalised, and there is a strong possibility that the policy will be amended prior to public consultation," she wrote.

Further, she said that although she had acknowledged the public's right to "participate in and influence the processes of government decision making and policy formulation ... the premature release of the proposal could, more than likely, create a confusing and misleading impression".

"In addition, as the matters are not settled and proposed recommendations may not necessarily be adopted, release of such documents would not make a valuable contribution to public debate."

Hernandez went further to say that she considered disclosure of the document uncensored "could be misleading to the public and cause confusion and premature and unnecessary debate".

"In my opinion, the public interest factors in favour of release are outweighed by those against," Hernandez said.

The "data retention regime" the government is proposing to implement is similar to that adopted by the European Union after terrorist attacks several years ago.

Greens Communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said the excuse not to release the proposal in full was "extraordinary". Since finding out about the scheme, he has launched a Senate inquiry into it and other issues.

"The idea that its release could cause 'premature' or 'unnecessary' debate is not going to go down well with the thousands of people who have been alarmed by the direction that government is taking," he said in a telephone interview.

"I would really like to know what the government is hiding in this proposal," he said, adding that he hoped that the Attorney-General's Department would be "more forthcoming" about the proposal in the senate inquiry into privacy he pushed for in June.

Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, George Brandis, said the government’s decision to censor the documents showed ‘‘how truly Orwellian this government has become".

"To refuse disclosure of material that had already been circulated among stakeholders, on an issue of intense current political debate on the ground that it might provide unnecessary discussion, shows that the Gillard government has become beyond satire," Brandis said.

Online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia spokesman Colin Jacobs said what was released was "a joke".

"We have to assume the worst," he said. "And that is that the government has been badgering the telcos with very aggressive demands that should worry everybody."

Jacobs said that the onus was now on government to "explain what data they need, what problem it solves and, just as importantly, why it can't be done in an open process".

"The more sensitive the process and the data they want, the more transparent the government needs to be about why it wants that data," he said. "Nobody could argue that public consultation ... would somehow help criminals," he added.

"We have to turn the age-old question back on the government: if you don’t have anything to hide, then you shouldn't be worried about people having insight into the consultation.

"This is a very sensitive and important issue. It raises huge questions about privacy, data security and the burden of increased costs to smaller internet service providers. What really needs to be debated is what particular information they want, because that's where the privacy issue rears its ugly head," he said.

According to one internet industry source, the release of the highly censored document was "illustrative of government's approach to things where they don't want people to know what they're thinking in advance of them getting it ready to package for public consumption".

"And that’s worrying."

The Attorney-General's spokesman declined to comment, referring comment to the department. The department said it had "nothing to add" to the FOI letter it provided.

2  General / General Discussion / Dozens Busted For Child **** At Pentagon! on: July 23, 2010, 09:51:37 pm

Dozens Busted For Child **** At Pentagon!
3  General / General Discussion / North Korea Warns of Nuclear Response to Naval Exercises on: July 23, 2010, 09:15:10 pm

North Korea said it would counter U.S. and South Korean joint naval exercises with “nuclear deterrence” after the Obama administration said the government in Pyongyang shouldn’t take any provocative steps.

North Korea will “legitimately counter with their powerful nuclear deterrence the largest-ever nuclear war exercises to be staged by the U.S. and the South Korean puppet forces,” the National Defense Commission said, according to the Korean Central News Agency.

The maneuvers, which involve 20 vessels and 200 aircraft from the U.S. and South Korea, pose a threat to the country’s sovereignty and security, Ri Tong Il, an official with North Korea’s delegation to the Asean Security Forum, told reporters in Hanoi yesterday.

Ri’s comments came after North Korean Foreign Minister Pak Ui Chun sat in the same room with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Hanoi for a security meeting of Asia’s largest powers. Clinton condemned North Korea for being “on a campaign of provocative, dangerous behavior,” urging Kim Jong Il’s regime to change.

Still, the “door remains open for North Korea,” Clinton later told reporters. “We are willing to meet with them, willing to negotiate, to move toward normal relations” if North Korea commits itself to giving up its nuclear weapons program, she said.

U.S. State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said in Washington yesterday that North Korea “would be better served by reflecting on the current situation, not taking any further aggressive actions or provocative steps.”

USS George Washington

The U.S. said this week it will intensify sanctions against North Korea and conduct military exercises with South Korea in waters surrounding the peninsula. The USS George Washington, a nuclear-powered carrier, and three destroyers called into South Korean ports this week in a show of force.

“North Korea may very well go ahead with missile launches or even a third nuclear test to show it won’t bend to U.S. pressure,” said Yang Moo Jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul. “North Korea must have sensed that the U.S. and South Korea are after its regime’s collapse.”

Ri said the George Washington’s presence threatened security on the peninsula, which has been divided for more than half a century. Pak maintained the need for a peace treaty to replace a cease-fire, signed in 1953, to guarantee the peninsula’s security, Ri said.

“It’s no longer the 19th century with gunboat diplomacy,” Ri said. “It is a new century and the Asian countries are in need of peace and development.”

Cheonan Sinking

An international panel concluded that the March 26 sinking of the corvette Cheonan was caused by a torpedo fired from a North Korean mini-submarine. The United Nations Security Council condemned the attack, which killed 46 sailors, without naming a culprit.

The investigation’s results have been “fabricated,” Ri said, adding that North Korea wouldn’t apologize for the incident as demanded by South Korea.

“If anyone should apologize, it should be South Korea, responsible for driving the situation on the Korean peninsula to the brink of an explosion,” Ri said. “We won’t tolerate any attempt to put the blame on us.”

North Korea’s economy has been battered by UN sanctions limiting cross-border financial transactions, imposed after its nuclear tests in 2006 and last year. North Korea is willing to return to the so-called six-party talks on its nuclear weapons program “on an equal footing,” Ri said, repeating demands that the sanctions be removed.

Japan Role

The disarmament talks, also involving China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the U.S., haven’t convened since December 2008. All members of that forum attended this week’s security meeting in Vietnam.

Japan will send four naval officers to the drills, the government’s top spokesman said today.

Four officers of Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force will board a U.S. ship as observers for the joint military exercise from tomorrow to July 28 in the sea between South Korea and Japan, said Yoshito Sengoku, chief cabinet secretary.

“It’s important to promote coordination among Japan, U.S. and South Korea,” Sengoku told reporters in Tokyo.

To contact the reporters on this story: Bomi Lim in Hanoi at; Bill Varner at the United Nations at
4  Science & Technology / Tech Talk / camstudio - record whatever is on your screen on: July 23, 2010, 08:31:32 pm
Not sure where to put this, you spot something, need to record FAST, this is for you


CamStudio Updates Info And Support Here:

What is it?

CamStudio is able to record all screen and audio activity on your computer and create industry-standard AVI video files and using its built-in SWF Producer can turn those AVIs into lean, mean, bandwidth-friendly Streaming Flash videos (SWFs)

Here are just a few ways you can use this software:

    * You can use it to create demonstration videos for any software program
    * Or how about creating a set of videos answering your most frequently asked questions?
    * You can create video tutorials for school or college class
    * You can use it to record a recurring problem with your computer so you can show technical support people
    * You can use it to create video-based information products you can sell
    * You can even use it to record new tricks and techniques you discover on your favourite software program, before you forget them

“Nick, here is what I think I'll do; rather than fork out the $300.00 bucks for [CENSORED], I'll just keep using CamStudio.

“I am a self-employed consultant that works in the public safety community (cops, fire, ems, dispatch etc). What I have planned is to use CamStudio to capture on screen video for training vids.

“Thanks for a great product and your help!”

Joe Borgione


Don't like the sound of your voice? No problem.

CamStudio can also add high-quality, anti-aliased (no jagged edges) screen captions to your recordings in seconds and with the unique Video Annotation feature you can even personalise your videos by including a webcam movie of yourself "picture-in-picture" over your desktop.

And if all that wasn't enough, CamStudio also comes with its own Lossless Codec that produces crystal clear results with a much smaller filesize compared with other more popular codecs, like Microsoft Video 1.

You have total control over the output of your video: you can choose to use custom cursors, to record the whole screen or just a section of it and can reduce or increase the quality of the recording depending on if you want smaller videos (for emailing to people, for instance) or you can have "best quality" ones for burning onto CD/DVD.

But all of these features would be worthless if CamStudio wasn't easy to use ... fortunately that's not the case. CamStudio can be learned in a matter of minutes and comes with a comprehensive built-in helpfile, so if you do manage to get stuck, you can simply hit "Help" and get the answers you need.


So where can I get it and how much does it cost?

You can download and use it completely free - yep - completely 100% free for your personal and commercial projects as CamStudio and the Codec are released under the GPL (for more details on this license, click here.)

There are no royalties or any monies to pay - although if you do use it for a commercial product, I wouldn't say no to a copy of whatever you produce
Designed For XP - Windows Vista Capable

Download Links

CamStudio: CamStudio20.exe

Lossless Codec:

Support Forum:


To manually install the codec, download the zipfile version, extract the contents to a folder, right click the camcodec.inf file and select Install.

If you don't have a lot of experience or just plain can't be bothered with all that mucking around [grin], download the EXE version and double click it to begin the install process.

Here is the project page on SourceForge where you can download the files if the above links don't work:

CamStudio on SourceForge:

Not sure how to download CamStudio from Sourceforge? Click here to watch a video or you can download the video from here.

Close the new window to return to this page.

You'll always find the latest version of the CamStudio program, the Lossless codec and the source code on SourceForge.


CamStudio's History

Over the last few months, quite a people have asked me about CamStudio's history and the confusion with the V2.1 that's around, so I thought I'd explain what the situation is, as I understand it ...

CamStudio was originally released by a company called RenderSoft who were subsequently bought by a company called eHelp who used some of the technology in their program, RoboDemo ...

Some time later, eHelp was bought by Macromedia who wanted RoboDemo (which was to become Captivate) ...

Knowing that CamStudio did some of the stuff RoboDemo did for free (mainly export to streaming Flash), it looks like they released a newer version of CamStudio (2.1) which fixed some bugs but most importantly, removed certain features. Gone was the ability to create SWFs, added was the requirement to register to use it, and over time, links to the various webpages that had CamStudio and its source code, became broken.

However, I've managed to find the earlier version 2.0 complete with the related CamStudio video codec (comparable to Techsmith's excellent TSCC), the source code for both and just put the website up so people can download them ...



A number of people have mentioned having trouble viewing SWF videos generated by CamStudio. It turns out there's a bug which means you can't see anything if you try watching them with Netscape or Firefox (Internet Explorer works fine) ...

The next update (2.5) will fix this but until then, here's a temporary workaround:

Open the related HTML to the SWF you've just generated and look for the line starting with the "EMBED SRC" command ...

Change the Width and Height values in this line to match values in the line starting with "OBJECT CLASSID".

Save the file and you should be good to go ...

I seem to be getting a lot of questions about a registration code ... the version of CamStudio available from this site (v2.0) doesn't require registration AND has more features, so uninstall v2.1 from your system, download and install v2.0 from here and you're good to go!

If your computer's memory or virtual memory usage starts climbing rapidly when viewing a SWF authored by CamStudio to the point when your PC locks up so you have to reboot it, recreate the SWF from your source AVI file and in SWF Producer, make sure you select the Advanced tab and check the Memory Management tickbox (Manage Flash player internal memory). That should sort the problem out. Thanks to Ben Ward for the fix.



AudioFlash is free audio recording software that will record you speaking via your computer and put it on your website with some nifty SWF control buttons.

Just wanted to let you know, I've released another tool called Podcast Autocue, which you can download as well from here: Podcast Software

There's now a "proper" blog for CamStudio where I'll post all the latest information, including updates on CamStudio V2.5. Click here to go to the blog


CamStudio Update List

If you'd like to be notified when I have some news related to CamStudio, signup using the form at the top of this page and you'll be "in the loop" ...

Obviously, I won't be spamming you and your details won't be sold, given, traded or hired to any other third party under any circumstances.

Enter your details here to add yourself to the CamStudio Users Update List

Spread The Word ...

I'd love to get CamStudio into the Top 10 Most Popular downloads at SourceForge ... for no other reason than ... um ... I'd like to, so tell as many people as possible ...

If you'd like to link back to this site, here's some example code you can use:

<a href="" target="_blank">
CamStudio - Free Streaming Video Desktop Recording Software</a>

A Plea For Help ...

I've got big plans for CamStudio and want to continously improve it and the Codec as well ... but I'm not a programmer.

The potential for CamStudio to be used as a professional training and support tool is huge and not just in the information technology and internet marketing arenas, but also in diverse markets and tasks like home eduation, recording online geneological research, keeping a video record of special offer prices on your favourite snowboarding (or whatever) website - you get the idea ...

It doesn't matter if you're at home in Las Vegas or on an Alaskan Cruise - if you've got a laptop or PC you can use CamStudio.

So if there are any Visual C++ programmers out there that have Flash, video encoding and codec experience who'd like a challenge, please get in touch.

So, at some point in the near future I'd like to start accepting donations so any coders that work on this project will get some kind of financial reward in addition to the warm, fuzzy feeling they get from helping to resurrect this cracking piece of software ... so if you're feeling generous, please get in touch at the email address above and let me know.

I'd also love to get your feedback on CamStudio ... what you liked, what you thought sucked and what you think is missing.

Support Forum:
5  Multimedia Center / MSM Internet TV / NEWS Streams on: July 23, 2010, 08:28:35 pm
Please move to correct forum

CNN International




BBC World

I've also been looking around and found some cool news feeds:

MSNBC FEED (This is the one used during the debates)







6  General / General Discussion / THE ENGLISH IDEOLOGY AND WIRED MAGAZINE by Mark Stahlman on: July 23, 2010, 08:25:43 pm
Author: Mark Stahlman

Last year, a critical essay entitled The Californian Ideology by Richard Barbrook and Andrew Cameron (University of Westminster) appeared on the Internet and quickly became a focal point for growing criticism of the glossy and widely influential Wired magazine. However, the author’s difficulty in sorting out the origins of the ideas behind Wired and it’s version of the “Digital Revolution” was painfully obvious in their essay.

I’d like to argue that the group which has consistently promoted the worldview expressed by Wired and, in effect, publishes and writes the magazine today isn’t American at all — it’s the English. If anything, Wired represents yet another attempt to invade American culture and to undermine American political and economic initiative — another of the attempts which have characterized American relations with the English for many centuries.

Wired magazine is not an American institution, nor is it even distinctly Californian (although its association with San Francisco is certainly undeniable). And, it’s ideology is also not nearly as novel as Barbrook/Cameron and some other European commentators seem to suggest — although, arguably, it is appearing in a new and, therefore, potentially confusing form. Each of the magazine’s elements, including free-market economics, hedonic lifestyle, techno-utopianism and, crucially, complete disdain for the uniqueness of human consciousness are all specifically and historically English.

For that matter, the magazine’s sponsors are all English (or self-confessed Anglophiles). Its themes are largely English in origin and its strategy of world-domination through techno-utopian revolution is English (specifically H.G.Wells) to the core. Indeed, Wired is a house-organ for the modern political expression of British radical liberalism and it’s philosophical partner British radical empiricism. Politically, philosophically, financially and psychologically, Wired is a concrete expression of the English ideology.

The Wired project began when the director of MIT’s Media Lab, Nicholas Negroponte (an Anglophile who’s ideal digital-slave is an AI-spawned robotic English butler), plucked Louis Rossetto and Jane Metcalfe from obscurity in San Francisco’s European sister-city, the other Anglo-Dutch “experimental” metropolis, Amsterdam. Before Wired, Rosetto’s greatest previous literary achievement had been a book describing the high-budget nudie shenanigans at the filming of Caligula. This movie, in turn, was the boldest effort by Penthouse magazine’s Bob Guccione, whose introduction to ****-production was under English tutelage in Tangier and who sent his sons to British military finishing schools.

Negroponte’s apparent goal was to meld Rosetto/Metcalfe with the now flagging San Francisco-based Whole Earth project of his longtime associate, Stewart Brand (who had previously contributed the book/marketing-brochure Media Lab). First to join the Wired editorial team was Brand protege and Whole Earth editor, Kevin Kelly, in what was billed as an ambitious relaunch of the original effort designed to amp-up the graphics, capture consumer product advertisers and spearhead the, now digital, techno-Utopian world revolution. Sex, Drugs and Rock & Roll were now “tired”; Wired was now “wired.”

Wired, which positioned itself as the journal of this post-psychedelic world revolution, was launched with seed money from Negroponte (buying him the back page and ultimately a best-seller) and from game designer Charlie Jackson. But the glossy mockup failed to attract the crucial second round of investment and Wired appeared to be still-born until Negroponte introduced them to the San Francisco-based private bank, Sterling Payot, which fronted the money for the magazine’s launch. Continued existence, however, was still in doubt until the notoriously Anglophile (a polite word for English in American clothing) publisher Si Newhouse’s Advance Publications stepped in for the last push. (No, despite its name, the Newhouse published magazine, The New Yorker is actually not an American publication — it’s English.)

In this tumultuous process involving financial reorganizations, whatever notions of editorial independence which might have been initially entertained at Wired were quickly contained. The editorial content of the magazine from its inception has been heavily influenced by the larger utopian agendas of Brand and his Whole Earth-to-Wired editorial colleague Kevin Kelly. In particular, the multi-national scenarios-planning company co-founded by Brand and previously London-based Royal-Dutch Shell futurist Peter Schwartz, the Global Business Network (GBN), has been decisive in shaping Wired’s “content.” From promoting GBN’s consultants endlessly with cover-stories and interviews to actually producing a “special issue” on the future totally with GBN resources, Wired handed over its editorial reigns to GBN and it’s New Dark Age scenarios (more on this below) from day one.

To be sure, proclaiming the gloomy truth of the GBN scenario-planned and social-engineered future is not exactly Wired’s public mission. Wired is all about the “optimism meme” and is committed to catalyzing the creation of a “better world” — at least for the 5% of the population who are expected to comprise the new Information Age rulers. This new “class” even has a name — the “Brain Lords” (and what else would the English call the Information Age aristocracy, anyway?) — according to Michael Vlahos, a policy analyst at Newt Gingrich’s think-tank, the Progress and Freedom Foundation. Editorial support for Gingrich’s brand of “revolution” as well as consistent backing of his technocratic policy advisers, most notably Alvin Toffler, has been a Wired commitment from its earliest issues.

The project which preceded Wired, the Whole Earth Catalog (and its various off-shoots, such as the computer conferencing system known as the Well and the newer Electric Minds), had been the product of Stewart Brand et. al’s 1960’s efforts to engineer a utopian counter-culture which, it was hoped, would broadly transform society at large. So, aren’t I confusing my history here? Isn’t Brand all American? No, I don’t think so. Scratch a Stewart Brand and what will you find? None other than the English anthropologist Gregory Bateson, of course. And, it is from Bateson’s lifelong commitment to re-program a humanity which he deeply despised and, in particular, his explicit drive to destroy the religious basis of Western civilization by replacing God with Nature, that the Whole Earth project was born. It was literally the beginning of a new religion with Nature at its center and mankind portrayed as the dangerous ape threatening to destroy it all.

Bateson’s British (and American) intelligence sponsored takeover of the nascent field of cybernetics in the 1950’s from its creator, Norbert Wiener, led directly into Bateson’s LSD-driven experiments on schizophrenia and creativity in Palo Alto, which in turn, were the origins of Ken Kesey’s Merry Pranksters and their house band, the Grateful Dead. Indeed, Stewart Brand’s own career as a publicist for what was first conceived of as drug and then computer-based techo-utopian revolution owes much to Bateson’s cybernetics guidance. Brand was among the first to recognize that personal computers and computer networks might have even greater potential to re-program the humans who “used” them than the psychedelics which fueled his earlier efforts. Indeed, based on Brand’s success at promoting LSD at his Trips Festivals, he was hired by Doug Englebart to stage the first mass demonstration of the mouse and windows system which Englebart had invented at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI).

Bateson is the son of the English geneticist, William Bateson, whose attacks precipitated the suicide of his principle Continental rival, Otto Kammerer, is chronicled in Arthur Koestler’s Case of the Mid-Wife Toad. And, if the Englishman Bateson doesn’t satisfy your hunger for a proper genealogy for psychedelic San Francisco, one might consider Captain Al Hubbard (no relation to L. Ron), the Johnny Appleseed of LSD. He was born in Kentucky but by the 1950’s had renounced his U.S. citizenship and sailed right up to Vancouver, British Columbia, to become a commodore in their very English yacht club. That’s where he set up the world war-room to target the destruction of Western culture (through San Francisco) and from this base that he joined forces with Humphrey Osmond (English military psychiatrist, lead English MK-ULTRA researcher and the originator of the term “psychedelic”) and Aldous Huxley (English black-sheep godson of the original techno-utopian, H.G. Wells) to spread LSD among the intelligentsia to achieve the world revolution. To be sure, San Francisco’s cultural scene has long been shaped by its close association with English/Anglophile intellectuals and social engineers.

But, it’s not sufficient to demonstrate the intellectual genealogy of Wired to fully describe their tight affiliation with the English ideology. There is a crucial component of the technological and biologically deterministic utopian worldview at the core of Wired’s “content” which must be carefully situated as well. Wired’s techno-utopianism is merely the modern expression of H.G. Wells’ attempts in the first half of this century to construct a technocratic global empire ruled by a new elite — much like the audience that Wired seeks to rally behind its now digital but still self-consciously revolutionary banner.

In its various forms, following Thomas More’s coining of the term Utopia with the publishing of his book with that title in 1516, utopian writing and, indeed, utopian social experiments tended to be pastoral and, if anything, anti-technology. It was H.G. Wells who changed all that with his 1905 publication of his novel, A Modern Utopia (one of the few of his 20th century works which is still in print). And, it was Wells who initiated the entire inquiry into a technology-defined future (and, indeed, launched the field now known as futurism) in his seminal 1902 essay, Anticipations.

While Wells is popularly known as the first true science fiction writer, he lived for 50 years after he completed his cycle of four major sci-fi novels in 1897. During this half century, he was very busy designing the future of the British Empire — the Third Rome as he put it (or as Toffler would later put it, the Third Wave) — as a vision of a world knit together by communications and transportation technologies and controlled by a new class of technocrats. What Wells’ described in volume after volume throughout the rest of his life (both in fictional and essay format) is indistinguishable from the digital revolution Wired hopes to lead. It’s a post-industrial world that has abandoned the nation-state in favor of Wells’ World State, that has scrapped the premises of it’s industrial past, embraced the scarcity of an anti-growth economics and based itself on the emergence of a newly indoctrinated post-civilization humanity.

Wells had devoted himself to organizing a world revolution based on technology, synthetic religion and mass mind-control — the same revolution discussed monthly in the pages of Wired. In Wells’ A Modern Utopia, the rulers are called the “New Samurai” and they are a caste of scientist/priests who social-engineer the global society Wells called the “World State.” John Perry Barlow’s Wired-published, Declaration of Independence for Cyberspace would have made Wells very happy, I have no doubt. Yes, that’s Wells’ “World State” lurking in the margins of Barlow’s manifesto despite his waffling on the specifics of future forms of “governance” — except to say that the future of politics will be conveniently (from the social engineer’s standpoint) “post-reason.”

But, aren’t I heading straight into the jaws of an overwhelming and categorical contradiction? Wells was certainly no free-marketeer. He was a professed socialist and Wired appears on its face to be thoroughly free-market capitalist. How could I claim any affinity between the British radical liberals and Wells (and with both and Wired)? Aren’t I just gluing together two sets of intellectual forebears — who both just happen to be English? How do I avoid the “bizarre fusion” description favored by Barbrook/Cameron? In the end, doesn’t my English ideology argument collapse as just another curious historical accident combine with an overworked imagination?

I don’t think so. Despite the naked attempt to rescue Well’s socialist legacy in a recent biography by the past-head of the British Labour Party, Michael Foot, Wells was indeed a very strange socialist. Likewise, when the substance of its arguments are carefully considered, Wired strikes the pose of a very odd sort of capitalist. I’m convinced that they both choose to adopt protective coloring to enhance their stature in their respective times and places but that, just beneath the surface, they are both simply utopian/corporativists — the same ideological impulse which gave rise to Fascism — and not what they may appear to be to the more casual and, too often, more credulous observer.

Both Wired and Wells are, in fact, utopians and elitists with overarching ambitions of leading a world revolution. This revolution is intended to produce radical economic and political transformation which would put their ilk in charge of running a new worldwide empire. From a strategic standpoint — fundamental goals and premises — Wells, Wired (and their common antecedent the anti-human radical Liberals) were/are all fighting for the same new imperial outcome. While there are certainly many tactical twists and turns in this plot over the centuries, this entire grabbag is precisely what I’ve been referring to as the English ideology — the ideology behind a global empire which combines an anything-goes small-scale private life (libertarianism) with rigidly defined large-scale constraints (technocracy). If you would like another description of the same utopian ying-yang, refer to Jaron Lanier’s November 1995 editorial in the Spin magazine issue on the future and his characterization of the Stewards (technocrats) and the Extropians (libertarians) as the post-political poles of discourse.

Wells’ dalliance with the Fabian Society (he tried to take it over by promoting free-love to the wives of its board members) may be one of the sources of confusion leading to Wells’ apparent “socialist” credentials. But, as even a cursory reading of Wells’ quickly demonstrates, their was absolutely no room for working class revolt (or certainly working class leadership) in Wells’ worldview. He was thoroughly convinced that the downtrodden could never lead or even comprehend the revolution he saw coming. Wells’ life was dedicated to organizing a completely new class of technical and social scientific experts — technocrats — who would assume control of a world driven to collapse and ruin by workers and capitalists alike. Wells wanted to completely re-program humanity — through the creation of a synthetic religion — and, like all utopians, had no affection for the commoner of his time at all. Wells considered socialism, in its various Social Democratic to Marxist manifestations, to be a string of completely anachronistic failures and a throwback to the era of human folly and self-destruction which Wells sought to leap past — much like Toffler dismissing nation-states and representative democracy as “Second Wave.”

In fact, Wells was very clear what sort of corporativist world he wanted when identified the earliest of the multinational corporations as the fledgling model of his ideal economic organization. In his 1920’s novel, The World of William Chissolm, and the companion essay, Imperialism and The Open Conspiracy, Wells cites early multi-nationals as the only kind of globe-spanning (and, therefore, anti-nation-state) economic structures which could embody his revolutionary principles. He chides both government and business leaders who think that any remnant of the still British-nation-centered Empire could survive and calls on the heads of multinationals to join in forming the vanguard of his revolutionary “Open Conspiracy.”

He also published extensively about the inevitable scrapping of democracy and any form of popular rule in his World State. His “New Samurai” were volunteers who pledged their lives to the pure experience of ruling as a new caste of priest/scholars. No elections, no parliament, no hereditary titles and no buying your way in, Wells was clear that his new ruling class would be a religious elite with global reach. He even predicted that a new field of inquiry, which he termed Social Psychology, would arise and become the “soul of the race” by developing social control techniques which would systematically re-train the masses which he openly despised. And, following WW II, the core of British and American psychological warfare leadership created just such field to pursue worldwide social engineering. H.G. Wells was a very strange “socialist”, indeed.

Oh, he did call for the abolition of all socially significant private property. But, then so has Wired with their repeated claims that in the Information Age intellectual property will disappear in cyberspace — a posture that has not gone unnoticed in the more orthodox neo-liberal circles as demonstrated by Peter Huber’s scathing critique of Wired in his piece for Slate, Tangled Wires. Such a call for abolishing property was also featured by the native U.S. fascist movement, Technocracy — which was launched out of the Columbia University Engineering Department with 1932 nationwide radio broadcast. In fact, while Wells rejected the offered allegiance to his “Open Conspiracy” by native British fascist, Oswald Moseley, he did it by pointing out that “what we need is some more liberal fascists.” Being educated as he was, Wells surely understood (and I believe embraced) the philosophical heritage of radical “liberalism.”

As a matter of fact, independent economic sovereignty (the essence of politically effective private property) is what Wells (and all his empire building successors have) objected to. It is the independence of large scale economic forces — particularly those associated with strong nation-states — that both Wells and the radical Liberals both objected to so forcefully. It is only such forces, operating with determination and resolve, that function as a bulwark against empires like Wells’ World State. Despite their surface appearance of conflict, Wired-style free-marketeering and Wells’ “Open Conspiracy” both lead to the same political-economic outcome — oligarchist/corporativist control of a global economy. This is why the intellectual progenitor of modern libertarianism, Hayek, spent his career at the nominally Fabian socialist London School of Economics alongside Keynes, they were simply two birds of the same feather. Another ying-yang twinned pairing pointing to a common endgame.

While it admittedly flies in the face of conventional categorization, right-wing and left-wing utopian/oligarchists are still fundamentally and most significantly utopian/oligarchists — even if their protective plumage might temporarily succeed in confusing some birdwatchers. They differ merely on the tactics, while presenting a home for confused fellow-travellers of all persuasions, while they thump for the same 1000 year empire and imagine themselves sitting behind the steering wheel. This should be no more confusing than watching Alvin Toffler, and his wife Heidi, move from active Communist Party membership and factory floor colonization to becoming chief advisors to Newt Gingrich. Tactics may change; the strategy remains unaltered.

What sort of future do the futurists see for us? Despite the sugar-coated promises of wealth and power being held out to those who make the cut and get inducted into the supreme religious cult which gets to play imperial Wizard of Oz, the reality of a Wells/Wired future won’t be nearly so cinematic for most earthlings. As every honest futurist has admitted, the future will be painful and pointless for most who survive. The Information Age will be a Dark Age. It will bring pre-mature death to half or more of the earth’s population and it will represent the deliberate scrapping and then forgetting of humanity’s greatest achievements.

Perhaps, the harsh truth of the Information Age was best described in Michael Vlahos’ January 1995 speech, “ByteCity -or- Life After the Big Change.” Vlahos is a Senior Fellow at Newt Gingrich’s thinktank, the Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF), and a past geo-political analyst who has led PFF’s exploration of implementing the Toffler/Wells plans. Vlahos presents a terrifying future scenario roughly 20 years in the future in which society has stratified into elites and gangs. In fact, life is so threatening in ByteCity that we spent most of our time in our rooms staring at wall sized vidscreens — if we’re lucky enough to have a room, that is.

Vlahos’ world is run by stateless modern robber-barons, which he terms the “Brain Lords” and which he characterizes as “rampaging not through the landscape but making billions in the ether.” These new aristocrats will come from the merger of telecommunications and entertainment multinational giants and much like in Wells’ formulation, the “Brain Lords” do not inherit their class status and they will burn out from looting at an early age. After 40 they will retire to run the world. They will comprise 5% of the population, he says. They are Wells’ “New Samurai.”

Below them he stratifies in the “Upper Servers” and the “Agents” who comprise another 20% who will spend their lives destroying the value of professional education and association in a vicious “information” driven chase for individual recognition. Below that, roughly 50% of the population lives as service workers slaving 12-15 hours a day in front their living-room vidscreens “servicing” their global clients in a world that respects no time zones.

And the bottom 25%, who, if they are not pacified will provide ample motivation for people to stay indoors to avoid being attacked by roving gangs, are what Vlahos calls “The Lost.” Roughly twice as large a population share as those who were discarded by the Industrial Revolution in Britain according to Vlahos, “The Lost” are those that will never become a functioning part of “ByteCity.” Sustained by modern “Victorians” who know the threat posed by the poor, “The Lost” are merely the most wretched of the wretches. Life all the way up the line from “lost” to “lord” will entail such radical disruption of personal safety and well-being that, in effect, Vlahos has turned dystopian cyberpunk literature into a policy statement. Naturally, expecting to rise to the top, Vlahos appears to feverishly await the “Big Change.”

No less chilling is the scenarios planning exercise that Wired’s wizards-behind-the-curtain perform on their multi-national clients. From General Motors to AT&T, the Global Business Network (GBN) charges hefty sums to show the yellow-brick-road towards “ByteCity” to strategic planners and top corporate brass. In one recent and rare public discussion of the results, GM’s top planning team defined the three “alternative futures” which emerged after years of GBN counciling. The first is just like our world and, so by definition, is not very interesting. The second is an eco-fascist regime in which car designs are completely “Green” and the companies can only follow orders. The third is the fun one, however. This is the world in which armed gangs roam the streets and surface travel is a series of car chases. This scenario has already been anticipated with a Cadillac that includes armored protection and a “panic” button installed in the middle of the dashboard. The car has a satellite tracking system built in and it can call the local authorities (presumably your multi-national’s private swat-team) and get help when you get trapped by the natives.

Vlahos/PFF/Gingrich and Wired/GBN/Brand and Wells/Toffler/”Open Conspiracy”. What ideology is being expressed by all these 20th century New Dark Age “revolutionaries”? Is this ideology “Californian”? Or, does it have another historical context and another tribal association? I merely suggest that accuracy, intellectual faithfulness and international solidarity require us to pin the tail on the real (Benthamite) donkey. This is the English ideology and, as usual, it’s hell-bent on ruling the world — over our dead bodies.

[Copyright New Media Associates, 1996]
7  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:21:26 pm
And... EST was based on Scientology:


This article is from the Scientology and Dianetics FAQ, by (Scientology Information Server) with numerous contributions by others.

3.4 Did "est" squirrel from Scientology?

Yes, Werner Erhard, just prior to creating est, had taken Scientology
courses and received auditing. A number of concepts and procedures in
est are very similar to Scientology; at one time, much of the terminology
was the same. In Scientology, there is an auditing procedure designed
to address difficulties a person may have had by participation in est.

Scientology and Werner Erhard

Werner Erhard studied many disciplines and practices in the 1960s, among them Scientology. Initially he had a positive response to his education in Scientology beliefs and practices.[1] He purchased books from the Church of Scientology[2] and reached the Scientological level of "Grade II".[3]
Later, the Church of Scientology listed Erhard as a "Suppressive Person".[4][5][6][7] After he left the United States, he said that Scientology agents and private investigators hired by the Church of Scientology had investigated and harassed him.[5][8][9] Scientology rejected these allegations.[10]
On 20 December 1993, Erhard's brother Harry Rosenberg, CEO of Landmark Education, called in to Larry King Live at a time when that program featured Heber Jentzsch (president of the Church of Scientology International), and said that the Church of Scientology had threatened his brother.[11] In a subsequent appearance on Larry King Live by telephone from Moscow, he claimed that he had fled the country because he believed Scientologists had hired "hit men" to kill him.[citation needed]
In more recent years, academics and the press have compared and contrasted Scientology techniques with those used in The Forum[12][13][14][15][16], the initial materials that Erhard developed[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. Currently, Scientology employs a practice called the "Est Repair Rundown" to rid individuals of impurities supposedly related to the Est Training or The Forum. Landmark Education in comments to the media attributes the bad press surrounding Erhard to the Church of Scientology.[5]
8  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:21:05 pm
Memorable quotes for THX 1138
SRT: How shall the new environment be programmed? It all happened so slowly that most men failed to realize that anything had happened at all.
The USC program guide that accompanied the premiere said the film was a "nightmare impression of a world in which a man is trying to escape a computerized world which constantly tracks his movements

Music by The Yardbirds, "Still I'm Sad" (opening credits)
Cinematography F. E. Zip Zimmerman

The Nexus I was looking for:

Stewart Brand - Sequouia Seminars and Esalen :
Stewart Brand - On the Waterfront
Published: April 15, 2009

Job description: I design stuff; I start stuff; I found stuff. On the passport I put “writer.”

Bad trip: That was my first trip. I had 400 micrograms of LSD under quite clinical circumstances at a psychological research institute in Menlo Park, Calif. It was in a white room with therapists sitting around.

Good trip: In 1963 or ’64 I showed up at the door of Ken Kesey, the novelist and LSD evangelist. I was involved in Kesey’s Acid Tests, which were happenings where LSD made its way around and everyone was there to entertain each other.

What was Bucky Fuller’s reaction to your button campaign that asked, “Why haven’t we seen an image of the whole earth yet?”

It was all because of LSD, see. I took some lysergic acid diethylamide on an otherwise boring afternoon and came to the notion that seeing an image of the Earth from space would change a lot of things.

So, on next to no budget, I printed up buttons and posters and sold them on street corners at the University of California, Berkeley. I went to Stanford and back east to Columbia, Harvard, and MIT.

I also mailed the materials to various people: Marshall McLuhan, Buckminster Fuller, senators, members of the U.S. and Soviet space programs. Out of everyone, I only heard back from Bucky Fuller, who wrote, “Dear boy, it’s a charming notion but you must realize you can never see more than half the earth from any particular point in space.”

I was amused, and then met him a few months later at a seminar at Esalen Institute in Big Sur, California. I sat across from his lunch table and pushed the button over to him, asking him what he thought about it. He said, “Oh yes, I wrote to that guy.” I said, “I’m the guy. So what do you think?

What kind of difference do you think it will make when we actually get photographs of the earth from space?”

There was this slow, lovely silence. Then he said, “Dear boy, how can I help you?”

Stewart Brand is founder of the Whole Earth Catalog and cofounder of The Long Now
Foundation, The WELL, and Global Business Network.

I know the Global Business Network does some work with the Pentagon.
What about the possibility of a long peace?

I love working with the Pentagon because they’re the only entity I know that is
completely eager to think in half-century terms. And there are several reasons for that.

They’re not a commercial entity so they’re not worried about the next quarter. They’re not a democratic entity so they’re not worried about the next election. There really is a socialist economy in the military, and the people that you encounter at the senior levels are extremely bright. They’ve come up in a very tough meritocratic pyramid, and are trained throughout their lives to think globally.

What sort of scenario planning do you do with them?

One of the scenarios that developed in the course of our work with the Pentagon was what we refer to as a rogue superpower. We were looking at the various threats from rogue states and one of us said, “Let’s see. What if you combined a lone superpower?

What about rogue states? What if they’re one and the same?” The answer is a rogue superpower! So we looked at this at great length and, lo and behold, in 2001 we received a call from a friend in the Pentagon. He said, “I think we’ve gotten to the rogue superpower scenario.”

What were your thoughts on 9/11?

We were thinking that it was sort of right on schedule. It was horrifying for a lot of people who had been working both in the Clinton Administration and in Congress on the  terrorism environment because we were saying for some time, “Look, the U.S. is not invulnerable in this.” So a lot of us just groaned because we had already thought about


Excerpted from Joan d’Arc’s book, Space Travelers and the Genesis of the Human Form as well as her upcoming book, Phenomenal World, to be released in Fall, 2000.

While we were being told “plastics” was the wave of the future, the physics of nonlocal consciousness was being commandeered by the secret government. In the 1960s, the CIA began backing young geniuses, buying a round of physics educations, and pairing them up with UFO lounge-lizards at the Esalen Institute, a conference center/resort in Big Sur, California. Physicist Jack Sarfatti claims he was visited by two men from Sandia Corporation as a child in the 1950s. He later received a full scholarship to Cornell at age 17, and studied under the major figures in the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos. He spent time at the Esalen Institute in the early 1970s.
The Esalen Institute

The “quantum conspiracy” runs back to the Esalen Institute. Since the early 1960s, the Esalen Institute has held seminars on various esoteric topics, including parapsychology, human potential, psychedelic experimentation, quantum physics, gestalt therapy and various mystical/esoteric topics.

According to a 1983 book by Walter Anderson entitled The Upstart Spring: Esalen and the American Awakening, the Esalen Institute was founded in 1964 by Mike Murphy and Dick Price. Anderson notes that every program leader in the first “human potential” seminar held at Esalen was involved in early LSD research, including Willis Harmon, who was later head of the Future’s Department at SRI, Gregory Bateson, Gerald Heard, Paul Kurtz, and Myron Stolaroff. Interestingly, according to Mind Race, by Russell Targ and Keith Harary, a 1982 workshop on psychic phenomena was taught at Esalen by Targ and LSD researcher Stanislav Grof. In this program, however, the goal was to show that psychic experiences did not need to be precipitated by a chemically altered state. Apparently, for twenty years, the CIA assumed that LSD was the short cut.

Other leaders of the drug culture and hippie movement gave seminars at Esalen, like Timothy Leary, John Lilly, Richard Alpert, and later, Terence McKenna, some of whom may have been, in Jack Sarfatti’s words, “young inexperienced naïve useful idiots,” and others who probably knew what was up and went along with it anyway. Although, Anderson writes, drug use was not “officially endorsed,” it was common knowledge that psychedelic drugs were widely used by both staff and students. Anderson also notes that even though this was common knowledge, the Institute was never raided by the authorities. Anderson even noted that Charles Manson and Family played an “impromptu concert” at Esalen just three days before the slaughter at the Tate household.

The weirdness at Esalen is a never-ending tale. Another report is that a parapsychology exchange program began between certain Russian officials, which lasted into the 1980s. This exchange program came to be called “hot tub diplomacy,” and it has been reported that Dr. John Mack attended these sessions. Esalen’s seminars in the latest quantum physics theories gave birth to Jack Sarfatti’s Physics/Consciousness Research Group. This group, financed by Werner Erhardt and George Koopman, nurtured the writing of a new wave of quantum-synchronistic-mystical tomes by such people as Fred Alan Wolf, Nick Herbert, Fritjof Capra, Robert Anton Wilson, Uri Geller and others. Sarfatti stated in his article, “In the Thick of It,” that Koopman provided publishing funds for the Physics/Consciousness Research Group through Air Force and Army contracts funneled through Koopman’s company, Insgroup.
As Carl Sagan once proposed, communication with extraterrestrial intelligence will require computer actuated machines with abilities approaching human intelligence. Sagan and others admitted in the 1970s that a deficiency in present-day computer technology is what prevents us from exploring the galaxy. Secret developments in mind-machine psychic interface, which includes research in the areas of computers, psychotronics, cybernetics and genetic engineering, would certainly solve this problem, and in all probability, have already solved it.

As Zdenek Rejdak stated in 1973 at the same world gathering of psychotronic gurus, one of the future goals of computer technology was to create a generation of computers capable of creating technological artifacts. This is directly connected to the idea of the vN probe and to the engineering of the “human modified for space.”

In his paper entitled “Psychotronics Reveals New Possibilities for Cybernetics,” Rejdak revealed the following:

Theoretical cyberneticians are proposing at present the construction of computers that would ‘create’ and would possess at least a degree of intuition. ... Psychotronics has a great opportunity to provide much essential knowledge about these processes, and thereby to help cybernetics in solving one of the most complicated tasks, that of teaching computers to create. ... The point is not merely to build more perfect computers, but primarily computers with qualitatively new functions.

It is very likely that this scenario has covertly jumped right out of the pages of science fiction (and CIA classified documents) to become reality. It is clear that the marriage of technology and human psychic potential was a focus of various early brain studies conducted by CIA fronts and cutouts, including LSD experimentation, Monarch trauma-based conditioning, sleep/dream studies and psychic research, in an effort to investigate the inner workings of the human mind, and as a side effect of that research, to investigate the possibilities for manipulation, harness and control of human psychic potential.

A current Washington Post article brings this all into focus. As co-founder of Sun Microsystems, Bill Joy, proclaimed in this 4/16/00 Washington Post article:

“We are dealing now with technologies that are so transformatively powerful that they threaten our species.”

“Where do we stop,” Joy asked, “by becoming robots or going extinct?”

In this article entitled “Are Humans Doomed?,” Mr. Joy, a widely respected “Silicon Valley” computer expert, presented his joyless warning against the out-of-control technocratic culture which he himself has helped to spawn, saying that,

“there are certain technologies so terrible that you must say no. We have to stop some research. It’s one strike and you’re out

9  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:20:37 pm

Microchip Implants, Mind Control and Cybernetics
18th December 2007

By Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde, MD
Former Chief Medical Officer of Finland
December 6, 2000

In 1948 Norbert Weiner published a book, Cybernetics, defined as a neurological communication and control theory already in use in small circles at that time.  Yoneji Masuda, “Father of the Information Society,” stated his concern in 1980 that our liberty is threatened Orwellian-style by cybernetic technology totally unknown to most people.  This technology links the brains of people via implanted microchips to satellites controlled by ground-based supercomputers.

The first brain implants were surgically inserted in 1974 in the state of Ohio, USA and also in Stockholm, Sweden.  Brain electrodes were inserted into the skulls of babies in 1946 without the knowledge of their parents. In the 1950s and 60s, electrical implants were inserted into the brains of animals and humans, especially in the U.S., during research into behavior modification, and brain and body functioning. Mind control (MC) methods were used in attempts to change human behavior and attitudes. Influencing brain functions became an important goal of military and intelligence services.

Thirty years ago brain implants showed up in X-rays the size of one centimeter. Subsequent implants shrunk to the size of a grain of rice. They were made of silicon, later still of gallium arsenide. Today they are small enough to be inserted into the neck or back, and also intravenously in different parts of the body during surgical operations, with or without the consent of the subject.  It is now almost impossible to detect or remove them.

It is technically possible for every newborn to be injected with a microchip, which could then function to identify the person for the rest of his or her life. Such plans are secretly being discussed in the U.S. without any public airing of the privacy issues involved.  In Sweden, Prime Minister Olof Palme gave permission in 1973 to implant prisoners, and Data Inspection’s ex-Director General Jan Freese revealed that nursing-home patients were implanted in the mid-1980s. The technology is revealed in the 1972:47 Swedish state report, Statens Officiella Utradninger (SOU).

Implanted human beings can be followed anywhere. Their brain functions can be remotely monitored by supercomputers and even altered through the changing of frequencies. Guinea pigs in secret experiments have included prisoners, soldiers, mental patients, handicapped children, deaf and blind people, homosexuals, single women, the elderly, school children, and any group of people considered “marginal” by the elite experimenters.  The published experiences of prisoners in Utah State Prison, for example, are shocking to the conscience.

Today’s microchips operate by means of low-frequency radio waves that target them.  With the help of satellites, the implanted person can be tracked anywhere on the globe.  Such a technique was among a number tested in the Iraq war, according to Dr. Carl Sanders, who invented the intelligence-manned interface (IMI) biotic, which is injected into people.  (Earlier during the Vietnam War, soldiers were injected with the Rambo chip, designed to increase adrenaline flow into the bloodstream.)  The 20-billion-bit/second supercomputers at the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) could now “see and hear” what soldiers experience in the battlefield with a remote monitoring system (RMS).

When a 5-micromillimeter microchip (the diameter of a strand of hair is 50 micromillimeters) is placed into optical nerve of the eye, it draws neuroimpulses from the brain that embody the experiences, smells, sights, and voice of the implanted person.  Once transferred and stored in a computer, these neuroimpulses can be projected back to the person’s brain via the microchip to be reexperienced.  Using a RMS, a land-based computer operator can send electromagnetic messages (encoded as signals) to the nervous system, affecting the target’s performance.  With RMS, healthy persons can be induced to see hallucinations and to hear voices in their heads.

Every thought, reaction, hearing, and visual observation causes a certain neurological potential, spikes, and patterns in the brain and its electromagnetic fields, which can now be decoded into thoughts, pictures, and voices.  Electromagnetic stimulation can therefore change a person’s brainwaves and affect muscular activity, causing painful muscular cramps experienced as torture.

The NSA’s electronic surveillance system can simultaneously follow and handle millions of people.  Each of us has a unique bioelectrical resonance frequency in the brain, just as we have unique fingerprints.  With electromagnetic frequency (EMF) brain stimulation fully coded, pulsating electromagnetic signals can be sent to the brain, causing the desired voice and visual effects to be experienced by the target.  This is a form of electronic warfare.  U.S. astronauts were implanted before they were sent into space so their thoughts could be followed and all their emotions could be registered 24 hours a day.

The Washington Post reported in May 1995 that Prince William of Great Britain was implanted at the age of 12.  Thus, if he were ever kidnapped, a radio wave with a specific frequency could be targeted to his microchip.  The chip’s signal would be routed through a satellite to the computer screen of police headquarters, where the Prince’s movements could be followed.  He could actually be located anywhere on the globe.

The mass media has not reported that an implanted person’s privacy vanishes for the rest of his or her life.  S/he can be manipulated in many ways.  Using different frequencies, the secret controller of this equipment can even change a person’s emotional life.  S/he can be made aggressive or lethargic.  Sexuality can be artificially influenced.  Thought signals and subconscious thinking can be read, dreams affected and even induced, all without the knowledge or consent of the implanted person.

A perfect cyber-soldier can thus be created.  This secret technology has been used by military forces in certain NATO countries since the 1980s without civilian and academic populations having heard anything about it.  Thus, little information about such invasive mind-control systems is available in professional and academic journals.

The NSA’s Signals Intelligence group can remotely monitor information from human brains by decoding the evoked potentials (3.50HZ, 5 milliwatt) emitted by the brain.  Prisoner experimentees in both Gothenburg, Sweden and Vienna, Austria have been found to have evident brain lesions.  Diminished blood circulation and lack of oxygen in the right temporal frontal lobes result where brain implants are usually operative.  A Finnish experimentee experienced brain atrophy and intermittent attacks of unconsciousness due to lack of oxygen.

Mind control techniques can be used for political purposes.  The goal of mind controllers today is to induce the targeted persons or groups to act against his or her own convictions and best interests.  Zombified individuals can even be programmed to murder and remember nothing of their crime afterward.  Alarming examples of this phenomenon can be found in the U.S.

This “silent war” is being conducted against unknowing civilians and soldiers by military and intelligence agencies.  Since 1980, electronic stimulation of the brain (ESB) has been secretly used to control people targeted without their knowledge or consent.  All international human rights agreements forbid nonconsensual manipulation of human beings — even in prisons, not to speak of civilian populations.

Under an initiative of U.S. Senator John Glenn, discussions commenced in January 1997 about the dangers of radiating civilian populations.  Targeting people’s brain functions with electromagnetic fields and beams (from helicopters and airplanes, satellites, from parked vans, neighboring houses, telephone poles, electrical appliances, mobile phones, TV, radio, etc.) is part of the radiation problem that should be addressed in democratically elected government bodies.

In addition to electronic MC, chemical methods have also been developed.  Mind-altering drugs and different smelling gasses affecting brain function negatively can be injected into air ducts or water pipes.  Bacteria and viruses have also been tested this way in several countries.

Today’s supertechnology, connecting our brain functions via microchips (or even without them, according to the latest technology) to computers via satellites in the U.S. or Israel, poses the gravest threat to humanity.  The latest supercomputers are powerful enough to monitor the whole world’s population.  What will happen when people are tempted by false premises to allow microchips into their bodies?  One lure will be a microchip identity card.  Compulsory legislation has even been secretly proposed in the U.S. to criminalize removal of an ID implant.

Are we ready for the robotization of mankind and the total elimination of privacy, including freedom of thought?  How many of us would want to cede our entire life, including our most secret thoughts, to Big Brother?  Yet the technology exists to create a totalitarian New World Order.  Covert neurological communication systems are in place to counteract independent thinking and to control social and political activity on behalf of self-serving private and military interests.

When our brain functions are already connected to supercomputers by means of radio implants and microchips, it will be too late for protest.  This threat can be defeated only by educating the public, using available literature on biotelemetry and information exchanged at international congresses.

One reason this technology has remained a state secret is the widespread prestige of the psychiatric Diagnostic Statistical Manual IV produced by the U.S. American Psychiatric Association (APA) and printed in 18 languages.  Psychiatrists working for U.S. intelligence agencies no doubt participated in writing and revising this manual.  This psychiatric “bible” covers up the secret development of MC technologies by labeling some of their effects as symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.

Victims of mind control experimentation are thus routinely diagnosed, knee-jerk fashion, as mentally ill by doctors who learned the DSM “symptom” list in medical school.  Physicians have not been schooled that patients may be telling the truth when they report being targeted against their will or being used as guinea pigs for electronic, chemical and bacteriological forms of psychological warfare.

Time is running out for changing the direction of military medicine, and ensuring the future of human freedom.

This article was originally published in the 36th-year edition of the Finnish-language journal SPEKULA (3rd Quarter, 1999).  SPEKULA (circulation 6500) is a publication of Northern Finland medical students and doctors of Oulu University OLK (Oulun Laaketieteellinen Kilta).  It is mailed to all medical students of Finland and all Northern Finland medical doctors.
10  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:20:08 pm
Holistic Darwinism: synergy, cybernetics, and the bioeconomics of evolution (2005)

Synergy, Cybernetics, and the Evolution of Politics

Constitution is whatever we say it is
Dehumanizing politics through cybernetics - turn it into a self-regulated, controlled feedback loop

Politics brought in line with all other cybernetic models - including those cybernetic regulatory processes 'governing' the bacterial colony to the anthill society

(My note: See - this is what 'IT Governance' is about - this is why the Viable Systems Model influenced and helped shape Enterprise Architecture - Viable Systems Model being developed by British cyberneticist Stafford Beer - he was going to use it for Project Cybersyn, a computer network command and control system that would have run the entire economy in a top-down planned fashion.

Listen to Alan Watt's most recent audiotalk where he talks about 'stakeholders' and the legal definition behind it - we in IT engineering/software development currently have to use UML diagrams/processes where every involved party is a STAKEHOLDER. They are also giving 'IT governance' and 'global governance' lectures at these IT schools now - they are becoming the government - government as we know it today - if it isn't already a total circus - will become even more so - it will be no more relevant than America's Idols or America's Next Top Model - really.

Biopolitics-cum-cybernetics paradigm - the European Union is an EXAMPLE of a cybernetic form of government

Politics is 'dominance competition'

Fundamental paradigm shift in politics - 'political evolution'
Book channels The Report From Iron Mountain and 1984 - society is held together by war

Watch this trailer that ties directly into cybernetics/the musings on war quoted above - it is a more important cultural artefact than George Orwell's 1984 - because it ties everything together that I've been talking about - and I mean EVERYTHING

11  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:19:37 pm
SimCity2000 released 1993 offered a new form of urban renewal...

An arcology is a large building containing an entire settlement. A person can live his entire life from birth to death inside an arcology. Some can be self-sufficient....

If you played the game 24/7, the goal was to herd all the citizens into these fricking things! There are other obvious conditioning elements to the SimCity and SIMS series', but those pics reminded me of the conditioning nearly 20 years ago at viewing these dehumanizing monstrocities as some kind of utopia when they more resemble the people farm in the matrix...

Arcology, a portmanteau of the words "architecture" and "ecology",[1] is a set of architectural design principles aimed toward the design of enormous habitats (hyperstructures) of extremely high human population density. These largely hypothetical structures would contain a variety of residential, commercial, and agricultural facilities and minimize individual human environmental impact. They are often portrayed as self-contained or economically self-sufficient.

The concept has been primarily popularized, and the term itself coined, by architect Paolo Soleri, and appears commonly in science fiction.

As vast as our planet is, we continue to fill it up with people and overtake its lands with sprawling development. [Wiki using CFR/Bilderberg talking points to condition as well] One day, it's conceivable that we might possibly run out of space here on Earth in which to live as we have become accustomed. Many ideas have been proposed to solve this future problem, including: ocean colonization; space colonization; rigidly enforced societal birth control like that practiced in China; rigidly enforced societal death control as seen in the movie "Logan's Run" or on the television series Star Trek. All these ideas have merit, though some seem infringing on basic human freedoms, and all have been seriously explored to some extent.

An elegant, but little practiced option, is simply to use what land we have more wisely. Many architects and scientists have given serious thought to solutions.

Frank Lloyd Wright pondered it in "An Organic Architecture" with his Usonian city idea, called Broadacre city. His image involved dividing all of America's land equally for each American family, and he goes on to describe transportation, agriculture, and commerce systems that would support this idea. While this is an appealing concept, there are problems with Wright's solution. It doesn't take into account real and rapid population growth that essentially shrinks the amount of dividable land we have to use in this way. He pre-assumes a more rigid type of democracy than that in which we live. Also, he assumes a more levelled societal playing field where all of us, regardless of wealth or lack thereof, have roughly the same amount of home space or business space as everyone else.

A further solution for this problem, though with some difficulties of its own, is that of Paolo Soleri, who coined the term 'arcology'. In "Arcology: The City in the Image of Man", Soleri describes ways of compacting our city structures in three dimensions to combat two-dimensional urban sprawl. While this led to many science fiction interpretations of domed cities, Soleri's ideas aren't just the "human beehive" model popular in sci-fi. They also encompass vast differences in societal thinking regarding some of the same things that Wright touched upon in transportation, agriculture, and commerce. Soleri deepened Wright's ideas of what might specifically need to be done by exploring resource consumption and duplication, land reclamation, elimination of most private transportation in favor of public transport, and greater use of social resources like public libraries.

The concept of arcology can also be attributed as a SCUB (Self Contained Urban Developments) such as Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle's Oath of Fealty or as elements in video games, such as SimCity 2000, Escape Velocity Nova, Deus Ex: Invisible War, Call to Power II, Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Beyond the Sword, Shadowrun, and Mass Effect.

The first mention of an arcological structure can be found in H. G. Wells's When the Sleeper Wakes, published in 1899. A more in-depth description of arcology's design principles can be found in "The Last Redoubt" from The Night Land by William Hope Hodgson, first published in 1912. In it Hodgson envisions structures complete with a full artificial ecology, agriculture, and public transport by mobile roadways.

Also, another version of what an arcology could be is depicted in the 1968 futuristic novel "The World Inside", by [R. Silverberg] Robert Silverberg, where in the year 2381 the human race lives in 1000 stories high towers, providing all necessary to the society( nutrition, energy, entertainment, jobs, etc). these buildings seem like a mutation between a building and a living organism nourishing and sheltering this futuristic dystopian society.

J.G. Ballard wrote a dystopian take on a self contained building which is much like an arcology in his 1975 novel High Rise.

Yet another mention of the term can be found in William Gibson's 1986 novel Count Zero. Moreover, the structure Fiddler's Green from George A. Romero's 2005 film Land of the Dead is a possible arcology.

Similar real-world projects

Arcosanti is an experimental town under construction in central Arizona. Designed by Paolo Soleri, its primary purpose is to demonstrate principles of arcology.

Many cities in the world have proposed projects adhering to the design principles of the arcology concept, like Tokyo, and Dongtan near Shanghai.[2] The Dongtan project however seems to have collapsed, and its original goal of opening its first stage for the Shanghai World Expo in 2010 was not met.[3]

Certain cities and urban projects exhibit some characteristics that reflect the design principles of arcology. Pedestrian connection systems, like the +15 system in downtown Calgary, or the Minneapolis Skyway System are examples. They are self-contained apparatuses, with interconnected supermarkets, malls and entertainment complexes. The +15 is the world's most extensive pedestrian skywalk system with a total length of 16 km (10 miles), and Minneapolis possesses the longest continuous system, with eight miles (13 km) of length. Seward's Success, Alaska was planned but never built, it would have been a small city just outside of Anchorage. Co-op City in the Bronx, New York City is another example, with many services provided on-site.

The Las Vegas Strip exhibits characteristics of arcology inspired design. Most of the major casino resorts are connected by tunnels, footbridges, and monorails. It is possible to travel from Mandalay Bay at the south end of the Strip to the Las Vegas Convention Center, three miles (5 km) to the north, without using streets. In many cases, it is possible to travel between several different casinos without ever going outdoors.

The McMurdo Station of the United States Antarctic Program and other scientific research stations on the continent of Antarctica may most closely approximate the popular conception of an arcology as a technologically-advanced, self-sufficient human community. Although by no means entirely self-sufficient (the U.S. Military "Operation Deep Freeze" resupply effort delivers 8 million gallons of fuel and 11 million pounds of supplies and equipment yearly[4]) the base has a very insular character as a necessary shelter and protection from an extremely harsh environment, is geographically isolated from conventional support networks, and must avoid damage to the surrounding Antarctic ecosystem due to an international treaty. The base generates electricity with its own power plant, and grows fruits and vegetables in a hydroponic green house mainly for limited winter use when resupply is nonexistent. The base also provides a full range of living and entertainment amenities for the 3,000 or so science and support staff that visit each year.

Crystal Island is a proposed arcology project in Moscow, Russia, though as of 2009, construction has been postponed indefinitely due to the global economic crisis.

In 2008, the design firm Timelinks proposed a 2.3 square kilometers, 1 million inhabatant carbon-neutral super-structure to be built in Dubai, UAE with many arcology concepts (see Inhabitat » ZIGGURAT: Dubai Carbon Neutral Pyramid will House 1 Million by Evelyn Lee).

In popular culture

Novels and comics
*H.G. Wells's 1899 tale "When the Sleeper Wakes" describes a rudimentary version of pre-Soleri arcology, having developed from the evolution of transportation. They are hotel-like and dominate the surrounding landscape, having replaced all towns and cities though preserving their names.[5]
*William Hope Hodgson's 1912 novel The Night Land features the first example of what we now would call an arcology, though the future Earthlings depicted — millions of years into the future, in fact — have different reasons for building their metallic pyramid.[6]
*In Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle's collaboration Oath of Fealty (1982), much of the action is set in and around Todos Santos, an arcology built in a burnt-out section of Los Angeles that has evolved a separate culture from the city around it. Niven also occasionally refers to arcologies in his Known Space series, particularly in the stories involving Gil Hamilton.
*In the novel The World Inside by Robert Silverberg, everyone lives in 'Urban Monads': self-contained three kilometer high hyperstructures.
*In Isaac Asimov's Robot Series, Earth's population lives in large hyperstructures simply called Cities. In Asimov's Empire and the The Foundation series, the capital planet Trantor of the galactic empire is a completely built-up planet, covered in its entirety with tall buildings and subterranean structures.
*All the remaining cities of the Earth are hyperstructures in Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn trilogy.
*In the Judge Dredd comic stories, originally published in 2000 AD comic, the megalopolis of Mega-City One consists of many hundreds, if not thousands, of City Blocks, in which a citizen can be born, grow, live, and die without ever leaving.
*William Gibson's Sprawl trilogy features various Arcologies, namely the "projects." It is a megastructure that has been constructed with electricity, heat, oxygen, and food that it produced. They are also featured in the Bridge Trilogy.
*David Wingrove's Chung Kuo series depicts a dystopian future Earth in which almost the entire population lives within several hyperstructures that are thousands of feet tall and span entire continents.
*J.G. Ballard's 1975 novel High Rise featured a luxury arcology in which disparity between social classes among the residents eventually led to widespread anarchy and a reversion to primitive archetypes.
*In Samuel Youd's 1967-68 trilogy of novels The Tripods, an alien race known as "The Masters" live in three huge domed arcologies built on Earth to use as a base from which to colonise the planet. The structures are made from a golden material, and are capped with a crystal that replicates the atmospheric conditions of The Masters' home planet.
*In Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan Saga novels, the inhabitants of the planet Komarr live in arcologies, as the surface of the planet is inhospitable.
*The James Blish and Normal L. Knight collaboration A Torrent of Faces, set in the future where a trillion people inhabit the earth, features several semi-enclosed 'cities' - massive buildings big enough to house, entertain and feed hundreds of millions of people, and therefore may be considered arcologies. The city/building of London apparently extends as far as the Cornish coast.
*In the manga and anime world of BLAME! the plot takes place only in a gigantic megastructure/arcology simply called the City, which is still being expanded by its automatic systems.
*Frank Herbert's novel The Dosadi Experiment focuses on the creation of a super race through the control of another race, that forces them to live in an Arcological situation.

Films and television
*Arcologies are common elements in futuristic anime and manga titles. An example would be the post-apocalyptic/cyberpunk series Appleseed by Masamune Shirow, in which hyperstructures dominate the skyline of the city Olympus.
*In the 1982 film Blade Runner by Ridley Scott, the main offices of the fictional Tyrell Corporation (a Megacorp) resemble a hyperstructure.
*The Genom Tower arcologies (among other things) in the anime Bubblegum Crisis were partially inspired by the Tyrell hyperstructure; the series also features an underground "Geo City."
*In the film Equilibrium, an arcology named Libria is the last human civilization, a society in which peace is kept by the forced administration of an injected liquid drug designed to completely suppress emotions.
*In the science-fiction movie series The Matrix, the last human city, known as Zion, is a hyperstructure. Due to nuclear scarring of the Earth's surface and atmosphere, the hyperstructure is buried deeply under ground. While ecologically sparse, the habitat's climate is controlled by complex machinery in the lower levels. The population is in the realm of 200,000. Due to the nature of the aggression from the machines, Zion is an example of a heavily fortified hyperstructure.
*In the season four finale of the science fiction show Andromeda a large battle takes place in space around an antiquated space hyperstructure known simply as 'Arcology'.
*In the episode "11:59" of Star Trek: Voyager's fifth season (original air date: May 5, 1999), Earth's first self-contained ecosystem known as "The Millennium Gate" was referenced. Said to be one kilometer tall and began construction in 2001.
*In a number of movies, most notably the Star Wars prequels, the cities in the more populated worlds have buildings many miles tall, effectively approaching the completely built-over world of Trantor in the classic Isaac Asimov Foundation trilogy.
*The trailer for the 2009 film Star Trek features arcologies in a futuristic Iowa; in several scenes, James Kirk is seen driving among them in his car and motorcycle.
*In the film "Æon Flux", Earth's surviving humans live in Bregna, an enclosed and self-sufficient city-state.
*In the film and book City of Ember the principle city is either the last or one of several Underground cities used to escape a devastating war. However, the scale of the city is far below a typical Arcology having less than a thousand residents.
*In the anime "Wolf's Rain" ancient decaying domed cities from the times of the scientific breakthroughs shelter the remainder of humanity.

Video games
*The "Launch Arco", from SimCity 2000
*Will Wright's computer game SimCity 2000 allows the construction of four different types of arcologies. More primitive models hold quite a few people in exchange for producing considerable pollution, but later models are denser and cleaner. When 349 of the most advanced model, the "Launch Arco" (pictured), are built, an "exodus sequence" starts in which all Launch Arcos blast into space. This parallels parts of Soleri's book, in which hyperstructures were shown as being appropriate for environments in space, under the sea, in polar lands, etc.
*Another Wright game, Spore, features bubbled cities that serve the same function. In Wright's 1990 SimEarth, "Nanotech Age" cities eventually advance to a mass exodus of the entire sentient species of the planet.
*Two levels of the computer game Deus Ex: Invisible War posits a futuristic arcology, simply called the Arcology, on the edge of an ancient medina in Cairo.
*The Domes seen in 1999 and in the 24th century in Chrono Trigger could be considered arcologies.
*In the computer game Afterlife, the player controlling Heaven and Hell can eventually purchase Love Domes or Omnibulges. Functioning similarly to arcologies, these structures are the remnants of transcended/destroyed Heaven/Hells that are able to hold billions of souls.
*In the computer game Civilization: Call to Power, the "Arcology Advance," found in a near future part of the technology list, grants access to the Arcology building, which reduces overcrowding effects in its host city. This is also available in Call to Power II.
*In the computer game Escape Velocity: Nova, many planets that are part of the Auroran Empire have multiple arcologies on them. Many of their populations number in the hundreds of billions.
*The tutorial in the computer game Dystopia takes place in Yggdrasil's first arcology.
*The wholly self-sustained utopian society 'Rapture' in the computer and Xbox 360 game BioShock is an underwater example of an arcology.
*The game Shadowrun (2007 video game) mentions, as one of its important world events, the construction of RNA's Santos Corporate Arcology.
*The game Shadowrun (SEGA MD video game) includes Renraku Arcology as an in-game location.
*In Mass Effect the Codex (an in-game encyclopedia) explains that Earth is composed mainly of Arcology buildings.
*In Final Fantasy VII the massive, plate-suspended city of Midgar is an example of arcology.
*In the "Next War" mod, included in Cililization IV Beyond the Sword, three levels of archologies are available as city improvements.
*The Outpost (video game) computer game and its sequel both focus on building arcologies (called 'colonies' in the game) on various planets to contain what remains of Humanity after Earth is obliterated by an asteroid.

Role-playing and table-top games
*In the table-top strategy game Warhammer 40,000, hyperstructures, called "hives," are extremely common and are the main method of housing large populations in the billions. Arcologies are so widespread that some planets, dubbed 'hive worlds', are constructed entirely of hyperstructures. Necromunda, an off-shoot game set in the Warhammer 40,000 universe, involves conflict between rival gangs on the hive world of Necromunda.
*In the RPG Shadowrun, a number of hyperstructures such as the "Renraku Arcology" exist by 2050, most of which are mega-corporate controlled. A major theme to these is the desire of a large corporation to control every aspect of its employees' lives. A major meta-plot element was the sealing off of the aforementioned Renraku Arcology in Seattle when the advanced computer control system awakened into a self-aware AI named Deus.
*In the RPG Trinity, a number of hyperstructures exist, with the largest being that of the New New York Arcology run by the Psi-Order Orgotek.
*In the RPG Rifts, the capital of the Coalition States is the city of Chi-Town. Chi-town (as well as several other Coalition cities) is considered a "Mega-City", in that the entire city is housed inside one giant structure, which consists of more than thirty levels, each several stories high, and several sub-levels.
*The tongue-in-cheek RPG Paranoia primarily takes place in the futuristic and mostly computer controlled arcology Alpha Complex.
*In R.Talsorian's follow up to Cyberpunk 2020, Cybergeneration, one of the player archetype Yo-Gangs was called the "Arcorunner". The character was a child who has grown up in the arcologies, knowing every aspect about them.
*In WildFire's CthulhuTech RPG, humanity has been forced to live in fortified arcologies due to attacks from the Old Ones and the Migou.
*In Mindstorm's Alpha Omega RPG, the world's populations have retreated into arcology city-states to protect themselves from the war-torn decimation of the Earth's surface

They are planning an arcology for Boston Harbor prominantly propagandizing the Globalist terror attacks of 9/11

IXXI = IX XI = 9 11

All construction will soon have to conform to these hive blueprints:
12  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:18:47 pm


WATER BUILDING RESORT, is a sustainable building of postmodern generation (HITECH), it was designed architecturally and inspired by the form of a DROP OF WATER when falling from the heights. It is a sustainable building, projected and thought to create conscience of the water.
WATER BUILDING RESORT not contributed alone the knowledge and culture to the coming generations, if not also financial profitability for their promoters and investors.

The use is a dedicated Resort with an Acuarium, Restaurants, Gyms, Hotel, Spa service, Congresses, Conferences and permanents or itinerant Exhibitions rooms. Whose main dedications (among other) they will be thematic related with the universe of the Water, the environment and the renewable energy, their use, solutions, supplies, use and investigation (I+D).The building also harbors a Center of technological investigation (Cidemco) which will control certifications of industrial product of quality.

The design of the building allows integrating the renewable energy as reception and optimization. The facade guided in the sun, cover by photovoltaic glasses of the last technology that allow transparency and they capture the solar energy to give electricity of the build.
The opposed facade in the sun, are lattices that allows the air entrance and it will be drive trough the equipment producing of drinkable water. The air when going by the central yard its aped increases and it leaves for a superior air generator , generating the electricity for another equipment.

WATER BUILDING RESORT, will be the first build in the world that transform the air into water, to obtain water starting from the air it seems a science fiction , however it is a reality thanks a new and modern technology TeexMicron incorporated in this building.
Their production based on the condensation of the humidity that is in the air, its location in the water of the sea, add a big value regarding a bigger condensation., allowing to take advantage a daily evaporation and the night condensation.

On the other hand WATER BUILDING RESORT will recycle the water taking the rain water and marine water too, purifying it with equipment incorporated in the base of the build. The generator of water TeexMicron allow to produce 5.000 liters of water for each volume of 21,17 m3 / 48 people, for the calculation we will use an average of 105 liters for persons. The equipment of 5.000 liters will work in temperatures condition from 20o to 40 o and a humidity between 30% at 95%.
Also see:
13  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:18:29 pm

About Cybernetics

Cybernetics is not so much a discipline as an approach to doing.

In the words of Luc Hoebeke, cybernetics is "the conceptualization of a way of relating to one's world" (see Cyberlearning thread). It deals with the relationship between subject and object - between the human observer and that which has been identified as being of interest for that observer). It denies - or perhaps better, places limits upon - the tendency of both western analytical science and christianity to insist upon the separation of these two domains in the pursuit of a particular notion of Objectivity, one which is dependent on such a separation.

The insights of cybernetics provide an experiential grounding - a way of orienting, both in terms of the world 'out there' and the world 'in here'. This lays down a grounding for systemicity. It unfolds a notion of human understanding as the active embrace of the physical, the psychological and the spiritual and their holistic braiding together in our living as human beings.

As such, it impacts on all disciplines as an approach that is immediately relevant to the global challenges that face mankind today.
Distinct from advocating any particular subject area or profession, cybernetics is best thought of as encouraging emancipation and inclusion in whatever discipline or field of enquiry.

In short, cybernetics offers an optimistic yet realistic way of addressing the classical existentialist conundrum - 'where is meaning in this world of chaos, angst and despair?' (eg J.P. Sartre). Its fundamental premise - and indeed its findings - confirm the intrinsic coherence of the natural world, and the potential for human beings through their own recurrent action and interactions, to establish a fit with that coherence through their living it. In this sense it might be described as one of the inspirations for sustainability, and indeed has close historical links in its foundings with the early thinkers in ecology and population dynamics, such as Kenneth Boulding, Erwin Laszlo and others. Stafford Beer's 'Viable System Model' presents perhaps the first comprehensive model for tackling issues to do with sustainable development, a model in which the social, the personal and the biological are in a dynamic partnership rather than seen as competing in a single space for resources and survival.

The interpretation of contemporaneous findings in science that sometimes impacted negatively on influential strands of western philosophy (such as the influence of relativity, quantum mechanics and uncertainty on the emergence of existentialism), had a very different impact on the early cyberneticians. This is an example of how interpretation of the data (ie 'meaning') determines two very different insights into human reality. Indeed cybernetics, presents a vital an upbeat understanding about the significance of scientific findings of the last century, and the potentiality for humanity to live the future in a more integrative and viable manner which embodies both the spiritual and the phenomenal in one and the same holistic fabric of meaning. In the cybernetic tradition, scientific and spiritual, the rational and the emotional, form complementary aspects of the human phenomenon.

The essence of cybernetic thinking

Cybernetics is inspired by insights gained from findings in the neurosciences and systems sciences: that the human brain and nervous system constitute perhaps the foremost example of a system that enables effective action, signified by the emergence of human language and thinking, society and culture, and, last but not least, the spirititual. After all the whole range of human experience (society, science, technology, language, art) is mediated by the human nervous system.

What Warren McCulloch and others did was to demonstrate how a particular physiological organisation might account for the the emergence of the phenomenon we call 'mind'. In a seminal paper, McCulloch and Pitts demonstrated how a network of unintelligent, purposeless logical processors might generate phenomena that come to be equivalent to 'universals'. McCulloch recognised that any phenomenon worthy of the label 'memory' (and thence 'foresight') can emerge from network relations provided there is a tie lapse between triggers (individual synapse firings) and that cycles of triggered events occur with re-entrant paths for the continued cycle provided by the time lapse. He and Pitts demonstrated that, minimally, this potential was provided by an organisationally closed nervous system having entry points via receptors and exit points via effectors (of course these are not really 'entry' and 'exit' as nothing comes in and nothing goes out - just that stimuli trigger disturbances, and these disturbances, in some cases, result in receptor activity.

[I'm taking this offline to work on it in a tighter manner]

The similarity of man and machine

Another feature of cybernetics, the one that gives it it's science-fiction connotations, is that it tries to find rules that are constant for both human beings, animals and machines. This highly universal approach to thinking was brought on by the requirement to simulate human skills in machinery, as well as by people trying to apply their thinking in engineering to themselves.

This can lead to fears of claiming that people are "just machines", but cybernetics very quickly developed an approach of avoiding oversimplification, and it's principles encourage practitioners to add to knowledge rather than simplify, leading to renewed respect for all sorts of elements of the world, elevating our opinion of our surroundings rather than lowering our opinion of humanity.

The cybernetics or bionics that make the name more famous are cybernetic in that they create control systems that bridge organic nerves and inorganic electronics, taking advantage of the similarities the theory observes to produce prosthetics or other enhancements. These design are not always based on the modern cybernetic understanding of the world, but simply use many of it's principles.

Eco-Cybernetic City

The City eco-cibernetic in the design process takes input from the nature, its forms and strategies of integration with the environment.

Its structure resembles a forest of trees that look for the light and their roots give the base to support the movement and forces of the nature, like the seisms and wind.

Its self-sufficiency is not only limited in the energy aspect, by the integration of aerogenerators that take advantage of the airflows between the two towers, and to the obtaining water of the air, but also in the economic, social and environmental aspects by its flexibility and integration of uses in the 150 floors, that turn it into a “alive machine”.

This building integrate the communication networks, incorporating in its facade a system of photovoltaic lattices , that give energy to screens of leds, creating a facade multimedia that interacts with the changes of the atmosphere.

Also the skin of the building is made by bio-climatic panels who apply nanotecnología for their cleaning, these panels allows to the growth of vegetation in their surface creating a green mantle that purifies the air that crosses this skin.

_____________________________ ______


Eco cybernetic Architecture and urbanism are our vision of the future habitat that will transform Barcelona into a social and power self-sufficient city.

The economic, social, environmental changes, the new networks and the man, at the moment are so fast that is necessary a Eco-cybernetic system design that allows to adapt us to the continuous external and internal changes that interact, feeding back the design process to obtain a sustainable self-sufficiency of the hábitat.

The Eco Ensanche sets out like an urban reorganization, taking advantage of synergies that the zone of San Adria of Besos and Badalona gives, projecting an urban ecosystem that Integra the urban network and mobility between the zones 22 @ and Sagrera. Generating a connection between the marine sport ports of the Forum and Badalona.

This self-sufficient city scheme incorporates a set of initiatives of planning and environmental design, and an ecological landscape that contributes to the conservation of the environment through the intelligent use and advantage of the resources. Emphasizing the symbiotic interaction between the urban landscape and the nature, by means of a green mesh system that in addition serves as surrounding to the urban structure conformed by self-sufficient buildings that integrate several uses that are complemented to each other like integral strategy.

The architecture and eco-cybernetic urbanism in its process of design realize a feedback of (input), elements and control systems, and have the two objectives (output), the habitat and the construction.

Input: The man, networks, economy, environment and the society.

Output habitat: Needs basic, biological, emotional, sensorial, ethical values and security, happiness and comfort.
Constructive Output: Is the rind that it protects to us of the surroundings with a binary combination of drained and volume, that generates spaces of dwelling, work, culture, commerce and leisure = self-sufficient city.

The feedback of input, allows to a positive evolution of the habitat and the construction of as they are the communication, the technology, the habitability, the culture and the viability, economic, average environmental and the future social. Out-put is an architecture and eco-cybernetic, flexible urbanism that adapts to the changes and the surroundings as it has done it to the nature you dare of the time.

The blocks of the Eco-ensanche have rectangular form and conserve the typical chamfer (Chaflan) of blocks of the ensanche of Cerdà, and a great central garden courtyard, that divides the blocks in two parts. The part large ofthe block is oriented to the south, to takeadvantage of the light the sun, which makes more favorable the bio-climatic conditions of the buildings and more efficient the advantage of the solarenergy. The distance among the volumes this defined by the projection of the shades between them and towards the interior of the courtyard gardens.

The blocks are crossed by the Green Pathways that create a pedestrian continuity that interlaces the natural ecosystem with the artificial structure of the city, formed by a mixed system of bio-climatic pergolas and wind towers with natural refrigeration. Based on a system of pulverization of the water of the phreatic level, which is pumped taking advantage of the wind energy. The towers of wind and refrigeration take the air hot that passes through a system humidifier that makes to go down its temperature. The bio-climatic pathways allow that the flora and fauna of the river Besos not interrupted by the buildings and comprises of the Eco- ensanche.

The eco-Bridges unite both sides of the river Besos, giving continuity to the ecological pathways of the eco-ensanche.The bridges are covered by a structure that allows that the vegetation grows, creating a habitat for the flora and fauna of the mouth's river Besos.

Other systems are integrated like a system of illumination by means of photovoltaic glass and Leds. Also it has a system of irrigation for the vegetation by means of the pulverization of the water that takes from the flow of the river. Turning it into Eco-Domes for the ecosystem of the river Besos.

This group of self-sufficient buildings follows the shore of the river Besos and they are integrated to the surroundings by a system of green roofs, that allow the continuity of the vegetation. To conform a great natural park throughout the river, and that is connected with the Eco-ensanche by green pathways. In these buildings several activities are developed like support and leisure, that integrates the mouth of the river to the entire city. Creating a balance between the natural ecosystem and the artificial surroundings.

14  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:17:56 pm

Journal of Research Practice
Volume 1, Issue 1, Article R2, 2005
Can Nature Teach us Good Research Practice? A Critical Look at Frederic Vester’s Bio-cybernetic Systems Approach


Werner Ulrich
University of Fribourg, SWITZERLAND, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
Address for correspondence: Sichelweg 41, CH-3098 Schliern, SWITZERLAND

Die Kunst vernetzt zu denken: Ideen und Werkzeuge für einen neuen Umgang mit Komplexität [The Art of Network Thinking: Ideas and Tools for a New Way of Dealing with Complexity.] Book by Frederic Vester (Language: German). Published by Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Stuttgart, Germany, 1999, (6th Edition, 2000), 315 pp., ISBN 3-421-05308-1, EUR 22.80. (Pocketbook Edition by Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag (dtv), Munich, Germany, 2002, 348 pp, ISBN 3-423-33077-5, EUR 12.50)

Suggested Citation: Ulrich, W. (2005). Can nature teach us good research practice? A critical look at Frederic Vester's bio-cybernetic systems approach. Journal of Research Practice, 1(1), Article R2. Retrieved [Date of Access], from

This is a book review of a somewhat unusual sort. It aims to introduce to the readers of JRP a book that ought to have been published but never has--the English version of Frederic Vester’s The Art of Network Thinking. I should mention that Vester himself proposed as title “The Art of Networked Thinking”; however, I prefer to speak of “network thinking.” This sounds less awkward and it conveys the central idea well--thinking in terms of networks. Unfortunately, there seems to be no completely satisfactory English translation of the phrase vernetztes Denken [pronounce: fer-nets-tes den-ken]. Its meaning is rather rich and includes notions of holistic (in the sense of integrated and global) thinking, of thinking in terms of multiple causation and dynamic interdependencies, in cycles rather than linear cause-effect chains, and so on.

The first hardcover edition of the German original appeared in 1999 and was sold out within months. By December 2000 it had been reprinted five times. In 2002, the Club of Rome,1 an international group of experts concerned with global development issues that became widely known in the early 1970s through its report on The Limits to Growth (Meadows et al., 1972), accepted an extended version of the book as a “Report to the Club of Rome.” The report was then published as a revised paperback edition. Equally in 2002, this edition was chosen as “non-fiction book of the month” in Germany. Until his death in November 2003, Vester tried to arrange an English translation but found no interested publisher. No English translation is available to date. All the more it may be useful to present the book to the English speaking community, at least in the form of a brief review.

1. The Author
It is no exaggeration to say that in the German speaking countries, Frederic Vester (b. 1925, d. 2003) today is the personification of systems thinking. No other author has done more to popularize the idea of systems thinking or, as Vester liked to call it, vernetztes Denken, in these countries. Since the 1970s, Vester was a very successful author of widely-read books (e.g. 1975, 1976, 1983); video films;2 radio- and TV-productions; cardboard and computer games,3 among them the popular cardboard game Ökolopoly (Vester, 1984) and its computerized versions, Ökolopoly PC-Version (Vester, 1989) and Ecopolicy (Vester, 1997);4 exhibitions5 and other educational materials (among them his “windows books”);6 and finally, a commercial software package for professional use (Vester, 2004).7 Most of his 17 books became bestsellers. They were translated into 11 different languages, but not, amazingly, into English. Die Kunst vernetzt zu Denken, his last book, summarizes his work of several decades in one easy-to-read volume.

Vester was a biochemist and recognized expert for environmental issues, energy and traffic planning issues, health issues, sustainable management, learning, and other areas that require adequate ways of dealing with complexity. If there is one author who can be singled out in the German speaking world for having brought to a broad public’s attention the need for going beyond traditional disciplinary thinking patterns, it must be Frederic Vester. His characterization of the new quality of thinking required for dealing with the increasing complexity of our world, the postulate of vernetztes Denken, has become a household world that everyone understands immediately and intuitively, despite the difficult implications it often has in practice. It is hardly possible nowadays to find a political speech, a managerial declaration on strategy, a job offer or a proposal for an educational program that will not in some way refer to the importance of vernetztes Denken.

Vester was a member of the Club of Rome. He directed the Study Group for Biology and Environment (now, Frederic Vester GmbH) in Munich, an independent research institute that he founded in 1970. From 1981 to 1989 he was professor of Interdependence of Technological and Social Change at the University of the German Army in Munich; from 1989 to 1991 he was a visiting professor of business administration at the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland (then Graduate School of Economics and Business Administration), which in 1989 distinguished him with an honorary doctoral degree. He also served as a consultant to major corporations such as IBM, Siemens, Daimler-Benz, Hoechst and others, as well as to governmental agencies and university institutes. His main consulting tool was his bio-cybernetic Sensitivity Model (Vester & Hesler, 1980), a computer supported approach to complexity management.

Despite his success, Frederic Vester has remained relatively unknown in the English-speaking world--a fact that is not easy to explain. I see two major possible explanations: (a) Vester did not write in English. Only a few of his academic publications have appeared in English; among them a report on an application of the Sensitivity Model and an essay that I invited him to prepare for the journal Systems Practice in 1988, which may still be of interest to those looking for a short introduction to his approach in English (Vester, 1988). (b) Vester’s writings do not take up, or at least refer to, the methodological developments of systems thinking that have taken place since the late 1970s in the Anglo-Saxon literature.

2. The Book’s Message
The core message of Vester’s book can be summarized in one sentence: The art of network thinking can be learned. The book demonstrates that it is indeed possible to devise simple but effective conceptual tools to this end, as well as sophisticated computer-supported tools. The other good news is that adequate ways of dealing with complexity--in the book’s language, with complex networks of interdependencies--do not necessarily require us to handle ever-larger amounts of data. It is an error to think that by continuously increasing the already prevalent information overload, that is, by adding more data and more precision to the way we analyze complex issues, we will do much better in handling complexity. Rather, Vester argues, good results depend on our capabilities of reducing the information overload.

In a preface to the book, Ricardo Díez Hochleitner, former President of the Club of Rome, describes this core concern of the book well:

Do we have the right approach to complexity; do we really understand what it is? Man’s attempt to learn how to deal with complexity more efficiently by means of storing and evaluating ever more information with the help of electronic data processing is proving increasingly to be the wrong approach. We are certainly able to accumulate an immense amount of knowledge, yet this does not help us to understand better the world we are living in; quite the contrary, this flood of information merely exacerbates our lack of understanding and serves to make us feel insecure... Man should not become the slave of complexity but its master (Díez Hochleitner, 2000, p. 7).

For Vester, the key to achieving such mastery lies in recognizing the essential patterns that shape the interaction of crucial aspects (critical variables) of networks, so that one can then focus on a reduced set of data that capture these patterns. Network thinking as Vester understands it is as much a quest for reducing the need for data, and thus for practicability, as it is a quest for more holistic modes of thinking; or, perhaps more to the point, it is the art of combining the two concerns within one and the same framework.

The aim of the book is to help both professionals and lay people in achieving exactly that: becoming more holistic thinkers while at the same time learning to reduce data overload or the apparent need for ever more data. Ambitious as this aim may appear, the author does not struggle to develop his ideas--the book summarizes the ideas and insights of thirty years of work on the subject, and that shows. The book is therefore of interest to a large audience of political decision-makers, corporate executives, policy analysts, organizational researchers, environmental experts, engineers, and many other groups of professionals. It should have equal appeal to the so-called general intelligent reader. Although Vester is a serious researcher rather than just a popular writer or even a guru, the book clearly benefits from his experience as author of many successful non-fiction books and educational products.

3. The Book’s Content Summarized
The book’s 18 (in the Pocketbook edition, 21) short chapters are well organized into four parts.

Part 1, “What We Should Avoid,” explains the problem for which network thinking is the proposed remedy. Despite paying customary lip service to holistic and interdisciplinary thinking, decision-makers and researchers, both in the public and in the private sector, still tend to structure complex problems along administrative (bureaucratic) and professional (disciplinary) boundaries. They consequently devote much time and effort to collecting data and finding solutions for inadequately defined problems. Apart from the resulting data overload, the result is a hopeless attempt to understand problems in terms of “disrupted networks” and to react with “repair service behavior.”

Vester’s analysis is similar to, and partly draws on, the widely acclaimed empirical investigations by Dörner (1989) on The Logic of Failure. Dörner demonstrated that in dealing with complex situations, even well informed and educated decision-makers and researchers tend to repeat a number of typical “cardinal errors.”

For example, they ignore or underestimate the side-effects that an intervention may produce; they are oriented towards short-term solutions rather than long-term sustainability; they focus on eliminating isolated deficiencies, rather than on improving the viability of the whole network; they spend too much time and energy on collecting and analyzing relatively irrelevant data; they rely too much on linear extrapolations of recent short-term developments; they intervene in ways that may be irreversible, rather than taking care that unforeseen side-effects can be corrected; they underestimate the time lags that may occur between an intervention and expected effects and therefore tend to misinterpret the initial lack of response as a need for stronger intervention, resulting in an over-steering to which they then again overreact; and so on. All this is no news, but Vester provides a well-written summary of the traps of insufficiently systemic thinking in the face of complexity.

Part 2, “What Our Situation is Calling for,” introduces the conceptual basis of Vester’s proposed remedy, a “bio-cybernetic” approach to network thinking. Eight basic bio-cybernetic principles help to understand the way successful systems thrive. They are bio-cybernetic, that is, inspired by the cybernetic capacities we observe in living nature, because for Vester, it is living nature that provides the most successful example of complexity management of which we know. For instance, negative feedback should dominate positive feedback loops, and the viability of the system should be independent of quantitative growth. Again, these cybernetic ideas are certainly not new, but Vester manages to explain them in a simple, lively manner and convincingly demonstrates their general validity and application.

Part 3, “The Sensitivity Model,” offers practical tools for network thinking. They include surprisingly simple, yet powerful conceptual tools as well as software tools. Among the former are a basic sequence of conceptual steps for grasping a network’s essential variables and the ways they interact, and then for judging the resulting behavior pattern against the background of the mentioned bio-cybernetic principles; the use of fuzzy logic (Zadeh et al., 1996), and most originally, the Paper Computer, an influence matrix for identifying and evaluating a system’s critical variables. The matrix allows to calculate three approximate measures (called “influence indices”) for the extent to which any variable:

(a) influences other variables; (b) is itself influenced by them; and (c) is a critical leverage point for intervening into the system. I have used the Paper Computer concept during many years as a help for introducing the value of systems thinking to students of social planning, and have found it a useful, simple way to help them understand notions such as interdependence, sensitivity, and leverage points for systems interventions. To me, the Paper Computer represents a core idea of Vester’s entire work. It explains why the author, far from merely preaching cybernetic thinking, has been so successful in reaching his readers: the conceptual tools he proposes are easy and cheap to use, yet generic and powerful.

From the Paper Computer, Vester also derives the already mentioned Sensitivity Model ® , which is the major analytical tool available today for professional practice of network thinking. It is a framework for systems modeling and assessment that has been applied in countless applications and which is now available as a computer-aided simulation and decision-support tool for the Windows XP platform (Vester, 2004). It consists of three recursive levels of analysis:

bio-cybernetic systems description (data collection and aggregation),
bio-cybernetic systems interpretation (understanding the network, e.g., in terms of the mentioned influence matrix or Paper Computer), and
bio-cybernetic systems evaluation (understanding the need, consequences, and risks of interventions).

Applying a bio-cybernetic perspective to each level of analysis is to ensure that we use our limited research resources in a well-aimed way and, at the same time, avoid the eternal risk of information overload: what matters is not that we achieve complete knowledge, but rather, that we learn to understand and appreciate those essential patterns of interaction that shape the structure and dynamics of the network in question. I think it is not exaggeration to say that, for Vester, bio-cybernetic evaluation is the key to learning from nature about good research practice. In the earlier-mentioned rare paper in English, he aptly summarized the major point (and inadvertently, also a major limitation) of his learning from nature approach:

Cybernetic evaluation is not just interpretation but requires judgment appealing to a “higher court.” Where to find this authority? Since the problem is “survival,” I do not know a better one than the one and only system which has survived for billions of years and withstood the most unbelievable external attacks, i.e., nature (Vester, 1988, p. 407).

The book outlines the bio-cybernetic framework of Vester’s simulation and assessment tool but does not include the software package itself; the interested reader will need to buy or lease it separately. Consequently, a certain sense of vagueness permeates this part of the book, as the author keeps referring to a software tool that readers have to imagine but cannot see and try for themselves. This does a disservice to Vester’s cause. At least a demonstration CD-ROM should come with the book.

Part 4, “A New Path Towards Sustainable Strategies,” concludes the book with a number of didactic, methodological and organizational recommendations. Based on his experience with concrete applications as well as educational projects, the author offers a number of considerations that can help us in putting network thinking to work on practical problems. The chapters of this Part focus on special requirements for developing and using software tools for bio-cybernetic analysis; for developing adequate strategies of evaluating its results; and for using the Sensitivity Model as a generic planning tool for achieving sustainable strategies in all areas of policy-making and complexity management. In the extended Pocketbook edition of 2002, three additional chapters discuss the application of Vester’s bio-cybernetic approach to complexity management in the areas of genetic engineering, nuclear energy, and medicine.

4. Appreciation
Like a few other books on systems thinking, this one is (in the best sense of the word) a basic, paradigmatic book. It explains the nature and relevance of network thinking in a language that avoids jargon and which is accessible and relevant to the general intelligent reader as well as to specialists of many fields. Its tone remains sober and down-to-earth throughout, without ever becoming obsessed with modeling or becoming merely managerial in its outlook. The book is thus apt to appeal to readers who might not care for the technocratic flavor of Beer’s (1985) viable system diagnosis or for the managerial outlook of Senge’s (1990) fifth discipline. Its orientation is thoroughly inter- and transdisciplinary, yet always pragmatic and packed with everyday empirical observations and practical examples. In short, this book should be of interest to researchers, professionals, and decision-makers in many domains who are looking for an introductory text.

Of course, like any book, this one has its limitations, too. First, with a view to the aims of this journal, I wish Vester had discussed in more detail, and more systematically, what his approach means for the design of good research projects and research methodologies. For instance, what criteria could we derive for evaluating the quality of research proposals? A related question that I wish the book would address is how exactly researchers can use network thinking to enhance their personal quest for competence, perhaps in the way I have attempted this for critical systems thinking (Ulrich, 2001). Vester largely leaves his readers alone with such questions.

This is all the more regrettable as his work clearly has a potential for giving many people--whether researchers and professionals or lay people--a new sense of competence in dealing with complex problem situations. I suspect the most profound difference will be in how competent observers identify and bound research problems, but unfortunately, the book remains vague in this respect.

Second, I regret that network thinking as Vester conceives it remains tied to a mainly functionalist and naturalistic understanding of the systems approach. Methodological developments of the systems approach since the late 1970s have come to question the universal applicability of this strand of systems thinking and have made available to researchers and professionals a number of options.

Vester’s work does not seem to be aware of these developments. He hardly questions the limitations of his natural-science-based learning from nature paradigm, apparently unaware that it is not always beyond doubt when applied to societal issues. Is it, for instance, really true that a bio-cybernetic understanding of the way nature manages complexity tells us how we ought to intervene in complex social systems? Or, as a second example, is it not perhaps all too simple to assume that if only a sufficient number of us learn to master the art of network thinking, we will then also agree on the right solutions to the pressing issues of our time?

The book is rather silent on this sort of questions. Personally I do not agree with Vester in this regard. I would argue that systemic thinking, if it is to guide us toward sustainable improvement of the human condition, cannot do without a humanist foundation spelled out in philosophical terms, as a basis for reflecting on the epistemological, ethical, sociological, and other issues that both sound research and good policy-making invariably raise.

On the other hand, to be fair to Vester, it is always a bit questionable to measure a book by issues that it does not mean to address. Vester’s book aims to provide a summary statement of the ways in which bio-cybernetically based, functional systems thinking can improve our understanding and handling of complexity. Readers looking for a theoretical and philosophical discussion of the limitations of functional systems thinking, along with a consideration of alternative approaches to systems thinking, should not expect to find it in this book. What they can find is, rather, a down-to-earth, pragmatic, easy-to-grasp introduction to conventional systems thinking, enriched by Vester’s specific bio-cybernetic perspective.

My appreciation for Vester’s work, then, is based on the observation that it does well what it intends to do, rather than on considerations of what I might wish it would do additionally. The fact that vernetztes Denken has become a household word proves how successful Vester has been in arguing his case for network thinking. This, along with the fact that the book offers some proven conceptual tools for learning and practicing the approach, renders it relevant to researchers, professionals and policy-makers in a great variety of fields, along with interested lay people. It can only be wished that English speaking readers, too, will some day be able to get a first-hand access to The Art of Network Thinking.

As for my personal bias towards a more philosophically based, critical kind of systems thinking, I see no reason why network thinking, insufficient as it is as a stand-alone approach, could not be usefully combined with critical notions of systems thinking. In my professional and teaching practice, I have never found network thinking to be incompatible with my own critical systems heuristics (CSH). Rather, I tend to think that efforts (based on Vester’s network thinking) to understand the complexity out there, and efforts (based on CSH and other critical approaches) to do justice to the value-laden and conflictual character of societal decision-making, should go hand in hand.

No one approach can do it all. I certainly associate with the systems approach ideas and hopes that are quite different from Vester’s; but that does not invalidate his understanding of the systems approach. In any case, I share with him one essential ambition--namely, that we should try to develop and use systems ideas in ways that can give ordinary people (including ordinary researchers, professionals, and decision-makers) a new sense of competence in dealing with the issues of our time. Vester’s book contributes to this endeavor, and that is what makes it valuable.

Beer, S. (1985). Diagnosing the System for Organizations. Chichester, UK: Wiley. (Paperback Edition, 1995).

Díez Hochleitner, R. (2000). Geleitwort. Preface to Vester, F. (2000). Die Kunst, vernetzt zu denken: Ideen und Werkzeuge für einen neuen Umgang mit Komplexität (pp. 7-8). Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.

Dörner, K.(1989). Die Logik des Misslingens: Strategisches Denken in komplexen Situationen. Hamburg, Germany: Rowohlt. English version, 1996: The Logic of Failure: Recognizing and Avoiding Error in Complex Situations. New York: Metropolitan Books (Hardcover) and Perseus Books (Pocketbook Edition).

Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens III, W. W. (1972). The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome’s Project on the Predicament of Mankind. New York: Universe Books.

Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday. Also London: Century Business/Random House, 1992. New Pocketbook Edition, 1994 (with a new introduction and tips for first-time readers). New York: Currency/Doubleday.

Ulrich, W. (2001). The quest for competence in systemic research and practice. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 18(1), 3-28.

Vester, F. (1975). Denken, Lernen, Vergessen [Thinking, Learning, Forgetting]. Stuttgart, Germany: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt. Pocketbook Edition, 1978 (27th Edition, 2001). Munich: dtv.

Vester, F. (1976). Ballungsgebiete in der Krise [Urban Areas in Crisis]. Stuttgart, Germany: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt. Pocketbook Edition, 1983 (5th Edition, 1994). Munich: dtv.

Vester, F. (1978). Unsere Welt-- ein vernetztes System [Our World--a Networked System]. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Pocketbook Edition, 1983 (10th Edition, 1999). Munich: dtv.

Vester, F. (1984). Ökolopoly, ein kybernetisches Umweltspiel von Frederic Vester [An Environmental Cardboard Game]. Ravensburg, Germany: Otto Maier Verlag.

Vester, F. (1988). The bio-cybernetic approach as a basis for planning our environment. Systems Practice (Special Issue: C. West Churchman--75 Years, Editor: W. Ulrich), 1(4), 399-413.

Vester, F. (1989). Ökolopoly PC-Version, Das kybernetische Umweltspiel von Frederic Vester [An Environmental Computer Game]. Munich, Germany: Studiengruppe für Biologie und Umwelt GmbH.

Vester, F. (1997). Ecopolicy, das kybernetische Strategiespiel [Simulation game ecopolicy]. CD-ROM, in German language, for Windows 95/98/NT/2000. Freiburg, Germany: Rombach. New ed. for Windows 95/98/NT/2000/ME/XP, Braunschweig, Germany: Westermann Multimedia, 1999; Version 2.0, 2000. Also available from Frederic Vester GmbH, Munich. (An English version is in preparation.)

Vester, F. (2004). Sensitivity Model / Sensitivitätsmodell Prof. Vester. ® Commercial software package, in English, German, or Spanish language. Orig. Version 1991, current version SMW 5.0e for Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP. Munich, Germany: Frederic Vester GmbH.

Vester, F., & Hesler, A. (1980). Sensitivitätsmodell / Sensitivity Model (in German and English languages). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Regionale Planungsgemeinschaft Untermain. (Available from Planungsverband Ballungsraum Frankfurt/Rhein-Main, Am Hauptbahnhof 18, D-60329 Frankfurt am Main, Germany, email:

Zadeh, L. A., Klir, G. J., & Yuan B. (1996). Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Systems: Selected Papers by Lotfi A. Zadeh (Edited by G.J. Klir & B. Yuan). Singapore: World Scientific.

1. See

2. See

3. See

4. See

5. See

6. See

7. See
15  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:17:22 pm

The Revenge of Gaia:
Why the Earth is Fighting Back - and How we Can Still Save Humanity (2006)

'Totalitarian greens, sometimes called ecofascists'

Unsustainable growth of population

Population control - according to Gaia's capacity to nourish them - Gaia will also do the culling

My note: Keep in mind that 'Gaia' - the 'Earth System Science' he is talking about - is a cybernetic world simulation model - which serves as the basis for the entire global warming/climate change dialectic. Gaia will indeed do the pruning - for Gaia, through the planetary skin, will be elevated to its proper status - the cybernetic command and control system that will decide over who gets to live, and who gets to die.

Death control

Does this sound like a religion to anyone out there?

My note: Keep in mind once again - 'Gaia' is the cybernetic doctrine - the 'character' - the 'social' imprint they have given to the Earth.
16  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:16:37 pm
Think of what "cybersecurity" really means that the transhumanists/cyberneticist fascists are pushing when you read this:

Cybernetics: The Cyborg
Thursday 29 August 2002 11:27

Earlier this year Kevin Warwick became the first human to plug his nervous system in to the Internet. Nathalie Towner caught up with the cybernetics professor to find out if the experiment was a success and discover what the future holds.

Superhumans who can connect directly to the Internet no longer belong to the realms of science fiction - the pilot version has already been let loose on the streets of Reading.

Kevin Warwick, professor of cybernetics at the University of Reading, has now reverted to his fully human state but for three months earlier this year he became the world's first cyborg - part-man, part-machine.

This was not Warwick's first foray into the futuristic world of chip implants and human machines. Xtra! interviewed him two years ago, when he spoke of the chip he had implanted in his arm for nine days that was linked to the IT in his faculty building. Doors opened for him, lights came on and the computer wished him good morning as he entered the building. But this was only the beginning.

"This whole experience opened my eyes to what was possible," says Warwick. "Before this I was considering progressing to a link-up with the muscles but then I thought muscles would be a waste of time, it would be far more exciting to go straight for the nervous system."

If successful, the implications for future cyborgs would be enormous. By linking a human brain with technology, potentially the person would not have to learn mathematics because calculations could be done at high speed by a computer and downloaded via the electronic implant. The brain would also be able to access data held in computer storage facilities. According to Warwick, if a cyborg wanted to recall something it would just download the required piece of information, to the point where it could relive memories of events it had never experienced.

It took four years of hard work at Reading University's cybernetics department before the technology was ready for the experiment.

"Most of the time was spent on the actual design of the implant, we had to work out what technology we were going to use," explains Warwick. "Initially we set out thinking that we could use a complete implant but then we realised this would create problems with the power supply. As time went on we realised it would be a crazy thing to do. Because we would not know in advance what components to use, we would have to reopen my arm."

In the end it was decided that the best solution was for some of the implant to be external.

Warwick was well aware of the potential dangers of such an operation. Implanting the electrode into his nervous system via the median nerve in his arm could cause permanent damage, and there was no way to predict how his brain would react to the electrical current.

As well as worries for his own safety he also had to consider his wife Irena, who was due to have a chip implant herself to see if two nervous systems could communicate with each other. Her operation was scheduled for a few weeks after her husband's implant to allow enough time to see if everything was running smoothly.

Warwick eventually went under the knife at the beginning of March. By the end of the operation he had array pins directly linking his nerves to fine wires coming out of his skin and onto an external connecting pad.

"The surgeons would have preferred to have the chip fully implanted. If there were no wires coming out of my body it would have seriously reduced the chances of infection," he says. "But we had to have the connector pad on the outside of the arm, and as time went on I didn't notice it, although I could not have a bath and I had to be careful not to rip my nerves out by catching the wires on something."

Warwick had to wait six weeks before he could commence any experiments. As soon as he was given the go ahead his colleague plugged an interface unit in to the connecting pad to first measure the signal from his nervous system and then try to stimulate his nervous system from the unit.

"When we first started simulating my nervous system the results were so, so. We did not know how much current to put through my system," says Warwick. "Eighty micro amps eventually seemed to do the trick, and I could feel about three quarters of the pulses. However, after three months of having the implant I could feel everything because my brain had become totally tuned in."

Once Warwick was up and running, the experiments could begin. After various trials in Reading, Warwick headed to New York where he set up a direct, electronic connection across the Internet between his nervous system in New York and the laboratory in Reading.

"Two webcams were set up at either end and a Kyberd articulated hand in Reading was connected via the Internet," he says. "I moved my hand in New York and I could see the robot hand in Reading doing the same - all of this was done over the Internet."

This event was hailed as a major breakthrough, but the most anticipated experiment was still to come.

Irena underwent surgery to have an electrode inserted and was immediately whisked off to the laboratory at Reading University. Once it was ascertained that signals were travelling from Irena's brain via her nervous system and the electrode to the PC, Warwick connected himself to another PC. The two PCs were then connected via the Internet for the two nervous systems to communicate.

The experiment was a success and electronic signals were passed from brain to brain. Each time Irena moved her hand Warwick felt a charge run down the inside of his left index finger. "It was amazing, it was our secret communication," he says.

The success of this experiment got Warwick thinking about how, in the future, it would be possible to transmit signals from brain to brain and bring about some form of thought communication.

"For me the future is about either focusing on emotional signals or, most probably, looking at thought communication through brain implants. I need to find out where it is best to connect up to, where the best signals are. I see us downloading information from the brain within a 10-15-year timeframe," he says.

Although the professor estimates that he will be about 60 years old by the time it is possible to insert a brain implant, he says he would have no reservations about being the first to try it.

Warwick has been surprised by how
emotionally attached he became to his implant.

"I had not expected the way it would affect me mentally, I felt it was a part of me," he explains. "For three months I was a walking laboratory, I missed it desperately when it was gone, although I did jump in the bath as soon as it was taken out. I must have had the smelliest arm in the whole of the UK."

17  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:16:14 pm

144. Thus human nature has in the past put certain limits on the development of societies. People could be pushed only so far and no farther. But today this may be changing, because modern technology is developing way of modifying human beings.

145. Imagine a society that subjects people to conditions that make them terribly unhappy, then gives them the drugs to take away their unhappiness. Science fiction? It is already happening to some extent in our own society. It is well known that the rate of clinical depression had been greatly increasing in recent decades. We believe that this is due to disruption fo the power process, as explained in paragraphs 59-76. But even if we are wrong, the increasing rate of depression is certainly the result of SOME conditions that exist in today's society. Instead of removing the conditions that make people depressed, modern society gives them antidepressant drugs. In effect, antidepressants area a means of modifying an individual's internal state in such a way as to enable him to tolelrate social conditions that he would otherwise find intolerable. (Yes, we know that depression is often of purely genetic origin. We are referring here to those cases in which environment plays the predominant role.)

146. Drugs that affect the mind are only one example of the methods of controlling human behavior that modern society is developing. Let us look at some of the other methods.

147. To start with, there are the techniques of surveillance. Hidden video cameras are now used in most stores and in many other places, computers are used to collect and process vast amounts of information about individuals. Information so obtained greatly increases the effectiveness of physical coercion (i.e., law enforcement).[26]

Then there are the methods of propaganda, for which the mass communication media provide effective vehicles. Efficient techniques have been developed for winning elections, selling products, influencing public opinion. The entertainment industry serves as an important psychological tool of the system, possibly even when it is dishing out large amounts of sex and violence. Entertainment provides modern man with an essential means of escape. While absorbed in television, videos, etc., he can forget stress, anxiety, frustration, dissatisfaction. Many primitive peoples, when they don't have work to do, are quite content to sit for hours at a time doing nothing at all, because they are at peace with themselves and their world. But most modern people must be constantly occupied or entertained, otherwise the get "bored," i.e., they get fidgety, uneasy, irritable.

148. Other techniques strike deeper that the foregoing. Education is no longer a simple affair of paddling a kid's behind when he doesn't know his lessons and patting him on the head when he does know them. It is becoming a scientific technique for controlling the child's development. Sylvan Learning Centers, for example, have had great success in motivating children to study, and psychological techniques are also used with more or less success in many conventional schools. "Parenting" techniques that are taught to parents are designed to make children accept fundamental values of the system and behave in ways that the system finds desirable....

149. Presumably, research will continue to increase the effectiveness of psychological techniques for controlling human behavior. But we think it is unlikely that psychological techniques alone will be sufficient to adjust human beings to the kind of society that technology is creating. Biological methods probably will have to be used. We have already mentioned the use of drugs in this connection. Neurology may provide other avenues of modifying the human mind. Genetic engineering of human beings is already beginning to occur in the form of "gene therapy," and there is no reason to assume the such methods will not eventually be used to modify those aspects of the body that affect mental functioning.

150. As we mentioned in paragraph 134, industrial society seems likely to be entering a period of severe stress, due in part to problems of human behavior and in part to economic and environmental problems. And a considerable proportion of the system's economic and environmental problems result from the way human beings behave. Alienation, low self-esteem, depression, hostility, rebellion; children who won't study, youth gangs, illegal drug use, ****, child abuse , other crimes, unsafe sex, teen pregnancy, population growth, political corruption, race hatred, ethnic rivalry, bitter ideological conflict (i.e., pro-choice vs. pro-life), political extremism, terrorism, sabotage, anti-government groups, hate groups. All these threaten the very survival of the system. The system will be FORCED to use every practical means of controlling human behavior.

151. The social disruption that we see today is certainly not the result of mere chance. It can only be a result of the conditions of life that the system imposes on people. (We have argued that the most important of these conditions is disruption of the power process.) If the systems succeeds in imposing sufficient control over human behavior to assure itw own survival, a new watershed in human history will have passed. Whereas formerly the limits of human endurance have imposed limits on the development of societies (as we explained in paragraphs 143, 144), industrial-technological society will be able to pass those limits by modifying human beings, whether by psychological methods or biological methods or both. In the future, social systems will not be adjusted to suit the needs of human beings. Instead, human being will be adjusted to suit the needs of the system.

[27] 152. Generally speaking, technological control over human behavior will probably not be introduced with a totalitarian intention or even through a conscious desire to restrict human freedom. [28] Each new step in the assertion of control over the human mind will be taken as a rational response to a problem that faces society, such as curing alcoholism, reducing the crime rate or inducing young people to study science and engineering.


153. Thus control over human behavior will be introduced not by a calculated decision of the authorities but through a process of social evolution (RAPID evolution, however).

The process will be impossible to resist, because each advance, considered by itself, will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will seem to be less than that which would result from not making it

(see paragraph 127). Propaganda for example is used for many good purposes, such as discouraging child abuse or race hatred. [14] Sex education is obviously useful, yet the effect of sex education (to the extent that it is successful) is to take the shaping of sexual attitudes away from the family and put it into the hands of the state as represented by the public school system.


157. Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful that the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents.


159. Will public resistance prevent the introduction of technological control of human behavior? It certainly would if an attempt were made to introduce such control all at once.

But since technological control will be introduced through a long sequence of small advances, there will be no rational and effective public resistance.


The above is taken from the Manifesto written by Ted Kaczynski, (the unabomber), published in 1995.

18  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:15:51 pm
Unbelievable document, just unbelievable.

Made in IBM Labs:

IBM Unveils Software to Expand Use of Wireless Sensor Networks and Further Smarter Systems Globally
New Software Enables Developers to More Easily Create and Use Sensor Networks

Rosemont, IL, June 9, 2010—IBM (NYSE: IBM) today announced a new software development kit to expand the ability of companies and governments to harness sensors and digital devices to design and build intelligent products and systems. The software, available as a free download, aims to increase the global adoption of wireless sensor networks by making them easier to program and use. The announcement was made at the 2010 Sensors Expo & Conference.

To make wireless sensor networks easier to program and exploit, IBM has created a new software development kit — called Mote Runner — which provides an open and programmer-friendly platform to connect sensor and actuator motes within a wireless sensor network (WSN). Motes — also known as wireless sensor nodes — gather sensory information, such as temperature, movement, or light, and communicate that data across a network of wireless sensors.

Separately, IBM also announced today that MEMSIC Inc, a leading microelectromechanical systems and sensor solution provider, will offer Mote Runner on IRIS, one of its most popular sensors.  With the cost of transistors ($0.00001 each) plummeting as density increases, companies and governments are working to take advantage of transistor-rich wireless sensor networks and analytics to:

Increase understanding of the internal and external systems that support and impact their business.

Improve the behavior and performance of business and societal systems.

Make better, more informed decisions in real-time by applying analytics to data captured from sensors.

Learn about situations occurring in business and societal systems as quickly as they happen.

However, many wireless sensor networks used to monitor and react to physical or environmental conditions are proprietary and difficult to program, therefore limiting the ability of companies, governments and universities to take advantage of them. Mote Runner addresses these challenges.

For example, Mote Runner could help a building management company deploy sensors throughout a high rise building. The technology would:

Enable the company to develop applications for the sensors that provide the ability to monitor equipment, room temperature, water systems and more,

Allow the company to simulate where the sensors would be positioned throughout the building and test how they would communicate,

Provide the company with the ability to reprogram the sensors remotely once they have been placed throughout the building.

“Sensors play an important role in interconnected systems and are critical to helping business leaders understand both what is happening in a system, and what will happen next,” said Charles Lickel, vice president for IBM Software Research.“IBM is focused on empowering our clients to use sensors to instantly monitor constantly changing dynamics and apply analytics to understand and act upon these dynamics. Enabling clients to easily program and use sensor networks is core to creating smarter systems, and the new developer tools we are unveiling today will advance our clients’ ability to drive new intelligence into their businesses.”

Software systems are the centerpiece of smart grids, for example, integrating multiple independent products and complex systems to perform their critical functions. Smart meters, smart appliances, and smart homes, all containing embedded software, will be interconnected with numerous back-end software applications to create significant new value for consumers, businesses, and the public.

About Mote Runner

Created by IBM Research scientists, Mote Runner is a high-performance, lowfootprint run-time platform that is portable to a broad range of mote hardware and programmable in standard object-oriented programming languages, together with development and integration tooling to easily create and manage applications for wireless sensor networks.

“Sensor networks are instrumental in creating a smarter planet, therefore it is critical to make them easy to program,” comments Thorsten Kramp, IBM Research staff member and co-developer of Mote Runner. “We invented Mote Runner to enable developers to take advantage of the skills they have and apply them to programming wireless sensor networks. This should proliferate the use of sensor networks around the world.”

Mote Runner was invented to address several distinct challenges:

The use of a programming language such as Java, in combination with a highly efficient virtual machine developed from the ground up for use in sensor networks, provides application portability while shielding developers from the complexities of the underlying hardware, without sacrificing performance.

A simulation environment, a web-based management dashboard, and an integrated development environment based on Eclipse, provide a userfriendly platform for testing, debugging, and maintaining applications sensors. This enables advanced simulation prior to deploying motes in the field, eliminating most programming errors before deployment.

Since most sensor motes are deployed remotely, battery consumption is a key hurdle. Mote Runner was designed to run on very limited resources: an 8-bit processor, 8 kilobytes of RAM and 64 kilobytes of flash memory — roughly comparable to the operating requirements of a computer in the 1970s). In addition, Mote Runner can be used with energy harvesting techniques, to utilize solar power, for example, as a source of energy.

Physical access to remotely deployed sensor motes to update them with new functionality is not an option for many mote deployment usage scenarios, such as installations across large agricultural areas, in a multistory building, or in locations with unique climates such as a rain forests or glaciers. Mote Runner caters to this need by including the ability to push or pull changes wirelessly with minimal interruption to the established network.

IBM and MEMSIC Bring Ease of Use to Wireless Sensors
MEMSIC Adopts IBM Software to Enable Organizations to More Easily Harness Sensors and Find Patterns in Ubiquitous Data

Rosemont, IL, June 9, 2010—IBM (NYSE: IBM) today announced a contract with MEMSIC Inc. (NASDAQ GM: MEMS), a leading micro-electromechanical systems and sensor solution provider, to offer one of its most popular sensors with new IBM software that enables enterprises to build smarter products and systems. The announcement was made at the 2010 Sensors Expo & Conference.

As billions of interconnected chips exist in the world today, companies and governments are working to take advantage of wireless sensors and analytics to reduce cost and waste; improve efficiency and productivity; improve the ability to anticipate changes; and raise the quality of services, such as, healthcare, building maintenance and transportation.

However, today, programming and connecting wireless sensors can be challenging, therefore limiting the ability of companies, governments and universities to take advantage of wireless sensor technology.

To change this, MEMSIC will bundle its IRIS wireless sensor motes with a new software platform, invented by IBM scientists in Zurich, called Mote Runner. This advanced hardware and software combination offers organizations a proven, low-cost sensor with open, portable, and developer-friendly software.

Motes — also known as wireless sensor nodes — gather sensory information, such as temperature, movement, or light and communicate that data across a network of wireless sensors.  In a separate announcement today, IBM also announced the availability of the Mote Runner development kit as a free download on its emerging technologies website.

"As a leading sensor manufacturer and wireless sensor networking infrastructure solution provider we are delighted to see ease of use brought to wireless sensor networks without compromising efficiency," said Steve Tsui, Vice President of Worldwide Sales, System Business at MEMSIC, Inc. "We share the same vision as IBM, of a world that is instrumented and connected with sensors, which is why we are pre-installing Mote Runner on our IRIS mote. This powerful combination will provide an efficient, scalable, easy to implement and cost effective solution."

About IRIS and Mote Runner

The MEMSIC IRIS is a 2.4 GHz wireless sensor mote used for enabling lowpower wireless sensor networks, such as monitoring the temperature and electricity in a high rise office building or traffic patterns on a busy intersection.
Now pre-installed with Mote Runner, IRIS users can benefit from:

The use of a programming language such as Java, in combination with a highly efficient virtual machine developed from the ground up for use in sensor networks, providing application portability and shielding developers from the complexities of the underlying hardware without sacrificing performance.

A simulation environment, a web-based management dashboard, and an integrated development environment based on Eclipse, provide a userfriendly platform for testing, debugging, and maintaining applications for MEMSIC IRIS motes running Mote Runner. This enables advanced simulation prior to deploying motes in the field, thus eliminating most programming errors before deployment.

The Mote Runner execution engine has been designed to be very efficient in terms of power* consumption while delivering a high runtime performance; thus the combined Mote Runner/IRIS mote can be ideally used with energy harvesting techniques, to utilize for example, solar power as a source of energy.

Physical access to remotely deployed sensor motes to update them with new functionality is not an option for many mote deployment usage scenarios, such as installations across large agricultural areas, in a multi-story building, or in locations with unique climates such as a rain forests or glaciers. Mote Runner caters to this by including the ability to push or pull changes wirelessly with minimal interruption to the established network.

"Mote Runner on MEMSIC IRIS motes is a wireless sensor network in a box," comments Thorsten Kramp, computer scientist and developer of Mote Runner at IBM Research - Zurich. "The combination of MEMSIC's popular IRIS mote with Mote Runner makes developing for and operating a wireless sensor network easy and straightforward."

The contract was signed in June 2010. Sets comprising Mote Runner on MEMSIC motes can be ordered via all MEMSIC distribution and sales channels starting July 2010.

Available on IBM alphaWorks

To encourage exploration, the Mote Runner software development kit is available free of charge for non-commercial use to universities and students and available as a 90-day evaluation trial for corporate users on the IBM alphaWorks website. IBM also is also providing free support on the IBM alphaWorks website.

About IBM

For more information see
_____________________________ _________

What is intelligent infrastructure, and how do geospatial tools contribute?

Written by Matt Ball
Friday, 26 February 2010 00:00

Intelligent infrastructure combines sensors, network connectivity and software to monitor and analyze complex systems to uncover inefficiency and inform optimal operations. The sensor component collects operational detail over time as well as providing real-time inputs on current conditions. The network connectivity ensures the flow of information between systems, other sensors, and practitioners. The software component provides oversight and analysis, integrating insight from various systems and personnel. The approach incorporates the management of multiple processes for more collaborative and multidisciplinary workflows. Intelligence is constantly improving from such a system through incremental improvements that are informed through constant monitoring and analysis.

The idea of intelligent infrastructure has been around for a long time in one form or another. Early forays into real-time monitoring of systems include industrial control systems such as SCADA. What largely sets the newer concept of intelligent infrastructure apart is an advancement in sensors, systems and networks that enable us to go beyond simply monitoring. Instead of the more passive alarms when inputs exceed accepted norms, intelligent infrastructure is a more holistic approach that aims to model and manage with a greater understanding of the interconnectivity of systems and the implications of events.

Big Blue Leads the Way

IBM is well out in front of publicizing and practicing the concept of intelligent infrastructure with their Smarter Planet campaign and their SmarterCity initiative. The company trades on their large-scale integration work and their understanding of complex systems to promote this idea of instrumented, interconnected, and then intelligent systems.

At the core of this concept is the idea of a system of systems approach. In the complex urban core, it’s a combination of transportation, healthcare, economic development, public safety, energy and utilities, and education systems. Each of these individual systems is in themselves a system of multiple inputs from multiple sensors and systems. IBM asserts that it’s largely an issue of constant data collection and open data exchanges that yield smarts for these systems. The resulting repository yields the ability to see how things are performing and a clear picture on how to redeploy resources quickly in advance of any problems or failures.

IBM takes a partnership approach toward achieving their Smarter Planet goals, working with a number of geospatial players to map assets and analyze details geographically. IBM’s Maximo Spatial Asset Management system integrates with ESRI’s ArcGIS Server to incorporate the GIS view, display map content, provide geospatial querying capability, and read data direct from multiple geodatabases. The geospatial component is clearly needed, particularly in the complex environments of an urban setting, and location often acts as the glue to integrate disparate data and systems together.

Flexible and Responsive

Given the changes of rapid urbanization and the pressures to adapt to climate change, it’s imperative that we fine tune our systems to be more flexible and responsive. The concept of intelligent infrastructure is also strategically timed for great demographic shifts that will leave many high-level jobs vacant due to retirements. These systems can bridge the knowledge gap by recording and modeling best business practice and process in advance of losing legacy operational knowledge.

Examples of industry approaches that might qualify as “intelligent infrastructure” in my mind are:

the skeletonization of water networks for better understanding of full-network issues

intelligent traffic systems and sensors on bridges to measure and monitor performance

the detailed use of spatial analysis for renewable energy siting and ongoing monitoring of in situ conditions for optimal energy generation

more efficient building heating, cooling and lighting systems for energy conservation

detailed underground models for more informed oil and gas extraction

In all the above examples, there is a considerable increase in infrastructure and mapping efforts, but the payoffs can also be huge. An energy savings of 40 percent translates into a lower energy bill, less of a dependence on foreign energy sources, and reduced emissions. Intelligent traffic can dramatically reduce drive times and congestion, while cutting down on carbon emissions. While the solutions themselves are smart, the investment is also smart because the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Unleashing Creativity

Given the cross-cutting nature of intelligent infrastructure, where operational data from multiple separate operations are combined, there’s a great deal of opportunity for creative approaches to problem solving. Instead of being constrained by traditional business silos, these new systems will unlock cross-organization information to reveal the inefficiencies that exist between different systems.

As the systems mature and much more is known about operations, solutions to problems can be tested almost as in a laboratory setting. With the sensor-based feedback, and the growing knowledge base, pilot projects can be tested and the great deal of data that is generated can be analyzed to determine any performance improvements.

Through the application of intelligent infrastructure, we can gain a much better handle on the materials and resources that our systems consume. This conservation-first approach will go a long way toward improving our efficiency for a more sustainable approach, and will greatly improve the way we manage and construct our built world.

Get Involved: The Geospatial Information & Technology Association will be exploring the geospatial dimension of intelligent infrastructure at their upcoming annual meeting in Phoenix in April. I’ll be acting as facilitator for discussions with the Industry Trends Analysis Group (ITAG) on Monday morning of the event. If this topic is of interest to you, be sure to become involved.

Additional Resources

IBM – A Smarter Planet Initiative

Intelligent Infrastructure Definition – University of Toronto, Dept. of Civil Engineering

Intelligent Infrastructure – Water Matters Blog at the Earth Institute at Columbia University
19  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:15:22 pm
OK folks - they're throwing down the gauntlet now.

This is from the 'FIG Congress Sydney 2010: Facing the Challenges – Building the Capacity'. This reinforces what I've alluded to above in a big way - making it impossible for them to deny this is their real aim.

This probably ties in with the 'persistent ISR' spy blimp that Anti_Illuminati posted in one of my other threads.

Geo-Cybernetics – a 21st Century Cybernetic Approach to Sustainable Development and Environmental Protection

Ioan STANGU, Romania

Key words: geo-cybernetics, matter, substance, energy, transformation, information, entropy, geospatial measurements, cadastre, GIS.


At the beginning of the 21st century, mankind seems to be confronted with special natural phenomena which are determined, on the one hand, by the natural development of the Earth and by the uncontrollable and sometimes irresponsible activities of humanity, on the other. Therefore it is absolutely necessary to ensure the equilibrium of Man-Nature relationship by means of a decisive intervention of decision-making factors and of science, too, on a planetary scale has become compulsory these days.

Geo-Cybernetics – a 21st Century Cybernetic Approach to Sustainable Development and Environmental Protection
Ioan STANGU, Romania


The activity unfolded by Man in the middle of his environment, which is determined by the multitude of life-preservation elements, which ensure nourishment and dwelling conditions in parallel with all the other artificial elements created and achieved to further develop human society, may produce multiple “transformations”to our natural habitat.

Unfortunately, these transformations which are being produced by Man in his environment overcome the limits imposed by Nature, a fact that leads to disturbances with serious effects called “pollution”, which is in fact more than that, it represents irreversible natural destruction phenomena.

All climatic changes, determined by complex natural phenomena produce, in their turn, “specific changes” which manifest themselves nowadays through global warming, storms, hurricanes and heavy rains in some areas of the Earth having as immediate effects catastrophic floods, landslides, droughts, etc, accompanied by important human and material losses.

The natural evolution of the Earth, as a live organism, in its multiple manifestations, produces a “certain type of change”, independent from man’s will, such as the earthquakes and the volcanic eruptions with their disastrous effects.

The multitude of these “pieces of information”characteristic to these “changes”, necessary in the process of control, analysis and decision-making in management activities asks for the use of some scientific domains that could “measure”and “keep the evidence”of these changes in time and space, as well as of geo-spatial measurements, of cadastre and GIS and other land sciences together with a new way of cybernetic thinking and action.


Cybernetics, as a science, is defined by its creator, the American scientist Norbert Wiener, in his work, Cybernetics, as a “domain of control theory and communication in machines and in live organisms, as well”.

This definition, which today is surpassed by the very development of cybernetics, was extended by Wiener himself particularly over the field of social and economic sciences.

The further development of this new science offers us some definitions which are not unitary, being more or less complete, which shows the position of the authors in relation to cybernetics, as well as to their own field of activity.

Therefore, some emphasize the control (Wiener, Conffignal, Berg), others – regulation and self-regulation (Klaus, Lange, Gremiewski) or the reverse connection (Apostol), or communication and information (Ruyer, Gluskov), while others stress up the completeness, the final action (Moles) or others who think of this science in terms of automatic machines or life-imitating robots (Boulanger).

Closer to the complex domain we have tackled so far, the environmental transformations operated by humanity and the analysis of these changes cybernetically, which we call “geo-cybernetics”, seem to be the definition given to cybernetics by other authors who define it as :”the theory of self-regulating dynamic systems”or “ the general science of management and regulation of interconnected action systems that deal with all the general principles and law research that govern all these systems, irrespective of their concrete character, or “ the general theory of complex dynamic system management”or even, that cybernetics studies the general laws of the processes that occur within some complex dynamic systems when these change from a state to another, irrespective of their physical or social nature”, or “ the science of the general laws of information change within complex control systems”.

From the definitions above we may select the quasi-unanimous opinion that cybernetics is the “science of system management”.

All the scientists that study such problems admit that the subject of cybernetics deals with the control of complex dynamic systems, which may include the animals (and the man) as well as the machines (electronic devices as complex dynamic systems) and the social systems (society, industrial units, production, etc.)

The study of cybernetics is characterized by the fact that management processes are being studied without taking into account the system substrate, i.e., its substantial and energetic characteristics. It deals with informational processes as they are the ones that determine the system behavior, no matter if it is of a substantial, energetic or social nature. By analyzing the analogies existing between the functional principles that belong to various systems (biological, technical, economical, social, etc), cybernetics preserves from the components of these systems only those elements that are characteristic to them all. So, as we see, cybernetics doesn’t study “the content”of the systems, but only their “structure”.

Cybernetics doesn’t analyze objects, but behavioral ways. It doesn’t ask a question like that:”what is this object ?”, but “ what does this object do?”.

Scientifically, the behavior of some complex dynamic systems cannot be foreseen if we do not know the informational processes of reception, processing and transmitting that lie behind. And similarly, we can’t analyze the information we get if we don’t possess a precise scientific characterization of that system behavior. All the social, economic, technical, etc. phenomena may evolve differently in accordance with the information we get, process and transmit.

The behavior of the complex dynamic systems is connected directly with the processes of reception, processing and transmitting of information. As a result, the control is an informational process.

The informational processes that determine the behavior of these complex dynamic systems evolve according to their own laws, totally different from the laws of mechanics, physics and chemistry. So, if the physical and chemical processes occur according to their specific laws, whose behavior is given by modifications in substance and energy, the behavior of the phenomena in the social, economic and biological domains is determined by the laws according to which they receive, process and transmit the information.

There are two categories of phenomena if we take the behavioral characteristics into account: the substantial and the energetic phenomena, on the one hand, and informational and organizational processes, on the other. The informational and organizational processes and phenomena are those whose behavior depends upon the signal received and by the action of processing and transmitting, the informational and organizational actions rather than by the quantity and quality of the substantial and energetic action.

As an informational process, the command occurs in a certain general order, therefore in a certain organization for all the complex dynamic systems.

Cybernetics is also characterized by the fact that it doesn’t explain the complex systems through others, less complex in structure. On the contrary, it looks at the complex systems the way they are, as complex systems, emphasizing their essential characteristics by means of specific laws and categories.

The cybernetic way of thinking, as opposed to the classic way of thinking which considers the organism and the society as being mere mechanisms, conceives the machines as artificial organisms with a certain finality and behavior.

If, traditionally, we had to pass from well-known, simpler elements to others, more complex, to systems composed of these known elements, the cybernetic thinking goes in reverse: from complex totalities with their functioning to the gradual discovery of their constituents and of the connections between them which ultimately ensure their functioning.

Only gradually do we reach the part starting from the whole, and from the system to the element.

If the classical systems present a “development”in time, cybernetic systems have a “behavior”in time. For the cybernetic systems, the concept of behavior implies the concept of milieu (environment), too, where the system makes use of its particular type of behavior.

With the help of cybernetic abstracting, which allows the comparison between the scientific results that come from completely different domains of reality, we may speak about systems that may preserve a certain “state”or follow a certain development, irrespective of the changing influences of the environment. The concept of behavior is isomorphic with the concept of “operation”as any system behavior means the performance of a set of operations. If such a set of operations, i.e., a certain behavior, turns into a theoretical norm, then it becomes an integral part of the methodology and changes itself into an algorithm

2.1 The Cybernetic Components of Matter: Substance, Energy, Information

Anyway, cybernetics opens up ways of getting new viewpoints about the essential aspects of matter. The present level of human knowledge, the cyberneticist’s already expressed opinions allow the highlighting of the three essential aspects of matter: the”substance”, the “energy”and the “information”. (apud Wiener)

The evolution of society first emphasized the “substance”which deals with the substantial side of matter. This aspect is emphasized on the production plan as substance, material transformation and processing represents the main problem of all the material goods.

But soon, the evolution of modern sciences as well as the development of production throw a different light upon the energetic aspect of matter. This aspect, very actual nowadays, determined by the first aspect for the production, transformation and transmitting of energy required by substance transformation and processing appears as the second important aspect of matter.

As long as the processes of transformation of substance, of its processing, but also the production, transformation and transmission of energy were relatively simple, the problems connected with the information, always interwoven with the other two aspects, could have been solved almost simultaneously, in a spontaneous and tacit way. But once with the diversification of all the goods, this activity was no longer possible.

Cybernetics is responsible for having emphasized the third aspect of matter, which had been previously foreseen by anticipations: the “information”and “organization”aspects of matter. Without getting into details about the concept of information, we may introduce the definition given by Wiener to information which is unanimously accepted nowadays: “information is merely information, it is neither matter (substance) nor energy”.

It is therefore importa

t to point out that information is vital and so often all-present that we may say that man’s existence relies on the permanent presence of both information and its connections as well.

2.2 Management = an informational process

Cybernetics introduces for the first time, consciously and systematically, the structural aspect of matter. Each “substantial”system has a given structure, i.e., a given “order”, hence, a given “organization”.

In its turn, any process of management based on the selection, processing and transmitting of information is possible only on a structure, on a certain organization which serves in the maintenance or the improvement of the structure. In the process of goods creation, this new aspect presents itself as a command and regulation technique, on one hand, and as an informational technique, on the other, which, together make up the basis of automated modern production.

We may say that, the automated, modern production represents the unity between the substantial, energetic and structural-informational aspect which became possible only when this new aspect has been noticed systematically, scientifically, taking on the appearance of a new theory.

As a result, information is not an exterior aspect, a phenomenon, an object, but it is an objective property of things, processes and phenomena. It is actually one of the general properties of matter.

The informational aspect, and the organizational aspect as well, as compared to the substantial aspect occupies the first position in modern production. In this context, we must admit that there is no information that should not be connected to substantial structures or need the energy necessary for its further maintenance, formation and development. The three components may be presented as logical implications: the substantial aspect, the energetic aspect and the informational aspect.

The information appears as an arrangement in its development from inferior to superior and we must therefore admit that information arranges and organizes the substantial and energetic processes. By extending it to the human activity in the territory, we may appreciate that information appears as an ordering of various forms of manifestation of human activity in the territory.

If the sciences, in general, look at information through the processes they analyze, cybernetics generates a characteristic treatment and explaining of the information. It studies information only from its management functional role point of view. In its essence, management is an informational process. As a result, all the processes and actions are meant to ensure the preservation of system equilibrium (homeostasis), so their rational behavior represent an information.
At the same time, the three aspects of matter are to be found in a close cybernetic interdependence due to the fact that the energetic-substantial aspect of matter presents a certain ordering(organization) within a given space and developing within a certain time as an event, phenomenon or process, object or state.

The establishment of information relationships within the system makes up a logical chain, similar to a closed circuit logical chain is represented by a series of events which move in a given order, the so-called normal order of the information unfolding. The normal order of the information unfolding within the system closes up the informational circuit.

2.3 Information = Energetic Transformation of the Substance

As seen above, I consider that information is not simply information, as Wiener pointed out when defining matter and information, but it is actually the component of a logical chain of actions from inside the matter -substance, energy, information-that all these are in a close interdependence and as a consequence, the information is the result of actions that take place between the substantial and the energetic aspects of matter.

So, information is, in my opinion, the result of energetic transformation of substance known by the man.

We may motivate this point of view by the fact that information is an exterior process, a phenomenon, a thing, doesn’t exist outside matter under a different shape, but it is a result determined by conscious human activity, of substance controlled energetic transformation with a purpose and secondly, that information doesn’t exist outside substance energetic transformations.

Any other energetic transformation of the substance leads to entropy and as a result to disorganization, or rather, to natural hazards.

If we resort to a simplifying hypothesis, the definition we found for information, as a component of matter, can be graphically represented in Figure 1.

The significance and matter components, according to Figure 1, are the following:

E -represents the energy, matter essential component which serves to the controlled transformation of substance by the man;
S -represents the substance, the concrete, natural component of matter which the man transforms with the help of energy
T -constitutes the controlled energetic transformation of substance by the man;
I -represents “information”, i.e. the result of substance energetic transformation, or mathematically:

I = f (T:E,S)

2.4 The Concept of Geo-Cybernetics

Geo-cybernetics, in the light of the ideas above, may be defined as the science of the management of man-created artificial transformations and modifications in his environment as well as of the risk reduction to natural hazards, and of entropy reduction by means of the informational system of geospatial measurements, the cadastre, of GIS and other sciences connected with the territory, in concept and cybernetic thinking.

This concept is, in my opinion, a requirement of today’s human activity and particularly of the future, which needs the action of several sciences in the process of human activity management due to the problems created by both man and nature, and having as major aim the process of sustainable development of human society and the actual protection of the environment.

My personal interest concerning the use of cybernetics in human activities management in the territory dates back to the time when I was working on my doctoral paper when I had the opportunity to study Wiener’s theory about cybernetics as well as other studies that framed up my “cybernetic thinking”. It also left me thinking about Wiener’s definition of information: “ information is simply information, it is neither substance nor energy”.

All the studies I dedicated to this dilemma combined with the research activities meant to modify and transform the environment led me to the logical conclusion as to how to define “information”as being: the result of man’s conscious activities to “energetically transform the substance”.

On this basis, determined by the support of”the environmental informational system”(s/chapt.3.1) which can be achieved by the complex system of geospatial measurements, by the complex system of cadastre records, for all real estate (land or/and buildings), GIS and by other sciences related to the natural and artificial resources of the environment, we therefore reached the concept of geo-cybernetics.

This name, very useful in the future, comes from geo = geoid = earth, meaning environment, to which we add the name Wiener gave to cybernetics, for which we preserved the letter Y.

In this way I also bring my contribution to the general effort for protecting nature and to actively participate in the environmental protection of the world I live in.


Man -humanity at large – lives and earns his living by using our planet’s natural resources, by using the environment conveniently within the society that it has created in time.

The evolution of human society on the Earth, very different in space and time, the requirements forced upon us by the need to ensure our everyday nourishment and lodgings, etc. have determined the appearance of a complex land planning and buildings of all types which make up together the so-called artificial resources.

We may represent graphically, through a simplifying hypothesis, the environment we live in which includes three factors, Figure 2, whose significance and characteristics are the following:

O -the man (the population) is the dynamic factor, ever-growing, with an essential role in changing the environment.
N -the natural habitat (the territory) that includes the sum of all the natural resources, it is a factor limited in time and space.
C -the changed framework that includes the sum of all artificial resources, i.e. the elements of the natural framework modified by the man together with the totality of buildings, a dynamic factor dependent on the natural background and therefore limited in time and space.
P -the products achieved by man, under various forms through: industry, agriculture, buildings, etc. through: industry, agriculture, buildings, etc.

The three factors together (O, N, C) that constitute the humanity’s milieu are in a mutual interdependence within the space determined by their “intersection”. At the same time, these factors are in mutual relations, two by two, in spaces determined by such intersections.

By means of this scheme we may emphasize the cybernetically-based circuit determined by the human action upon the land which ultimately leads to the process of a controlled and directed “transformation”made by the man and completed by means of “information”, as a result of substance energetic transformation (see s/chapt. 2.3)

This information can be obtained only through a complex, multi-discipline system of sciences specific to all the human activities of changing, modeling, planning and endowment in time and space of the environment based on technical and scientific facilities and on specialists in this field.

So, a harmonious economical and social development in the territory depends on the best ways, means and methods the society finds appropriate, for an efficient combination of the three factors in order to make human activity more concrete in all its forms.

As an objective necessity of the society, this activity implies the coordination of the multiple interests that interfere on the same territory within an organized frame in order to make a rational use of the resources.

The society exerts this function by the concrete way of using the environment which at the country, county and city levels is shown by the way in which all the artificial resources are being placed, created and used properly and also how the whole territory is organized and coordinated.

Contemporary civilization, under conditions of population increase, makes possible and necessary an intense territorial mobility, creates new models and media of social life, develops great urban agglomerations within relatively small areas. The need to ensure the daily population supply in these areas has deep effects upon the position, the profile and the specialization of agro-food production in the area and it influences the optimum way of using and planning the territory.

Of course, the implications are much more numerous. I have emphasized only a few in order to demonstrate the role human society may play in the regulatory function it has over the whole territorial system in order to preserve the equilibrium of the whole environment.

The regulatory function is achieved through the continuous modification of the territorial structures by means of “models”and by ensuring the system functioning without “disturbances”.

To know the various types of connections between the phenomena and the processes that happen in the territory, the direction and their action tendencies, the complexity and interdependence of various sectors of economic-social life, the dynamics of the mutations that happen in the territory -all these require the presence of “information”in the management process.

3.1 The Informational System of the Environment

The “information”, as a result of the human activity of transformation and modeling the environment, required by the management activities, determines the introduction of a complex system of gathering, stocking and processing of all the information characteristic to the process of transformation of the natural resources and of the creation of artificial resources necessary to human life and well-being.

This complex system, Figure 3, that measures up, emphasizes and processes all the information about the environment may be made up of the following:

MG -the system of geospatial measurements.
CAD -the system of cadastre recording.
GIS -the geospatial informational system. SIMI -the environmental informational system

Fig.3: The Informational System of the Environmental

The informational flux among the three systems suggests bi-univocal relations and they also show that the intersection of the three components represents the environmental informational system.

The use of cybernetics as a modern method of research and management is more visible these days in all the fields of human activity where there are analogies with this science.

So, geo-cybernetics, as a science and as a part of the technical, economic, social, etc, activities presents, as we have shown before, the main cybernetic categories : the system, the model, the information, the command, the regulation, the self-regulation, etc.


The concepts of regulation and self-regulation are fundamental issues of cybernetics. From Wiener’s own definition, we conclude that cybernetics was born from an analogy between the human beings and the technical devices created by the man. Any analogy support itself on at least one common trace.

The main common characteristic used by Wiener was self-regulation. He pointed out that both humans and the machines are capable to preserve for some periods of time a certain equilibrium in their relations with the environment. So, in humans, the temperature, the pressure, the chemical composition of the cell etc are preserved in a state of equilibrium. There is a regulation mechanism that keeps up the temperature of the human body at 37 ° Celsius independent from the environmental temperature and this phenomenon is called homeostasis.

The same happens with some machinery, in the technical field.

This phenomenon resides in the capacity of both beings and artificialstructures created by the man to answer in a way or another to the interaction between them and the environment – the self-regulation principle. As Wiener pointed out, the major way to achieve self-regulation is “command”which implies the presence of “communication”.

As a result, as Wiener used to say, all the economic and social phenomena regulation is similar to the live and artificial organisms self-regulation principle.

In the society the regulation is not done automatically, but by means of functional relations on which the function of coordination and organization is based. The point of contact between the system and the environment is the “program”.

Conventionally we may consider that the system is regulated when the program and the resources for its achievement are established by a higher hierarchy, being self-regulated when the program is established by the territorial cybernetic system itself, taking into account the conditions of the resource self-regeneration. So, the self-regulation of the organizational and controlling systems is analogous to the process of adaptation and selection of the biological systems.
Once the program is adopted through regulation by a superior territorial factor or through self-regulation there appears the second analogy with the beings, namely the internal self-regulation.

This category – the regulation-may be defined in general terms as a process where a regulated value or an output value of a system is maintained in a dependence by the input value.

The regulation is achieved by means of measurements of the output values, by comparing it with the input value and by acting upon the system processes so that the difference between the two values should be as small as possible and preserve within optimum limits imposed by the necessity of conservation and the normal functioning of the system under analysis.

Self-regulation is produced when not only the output value is kept dependent to the input value, but also in reverse, in order to eliminate the “disturbances”that appear along the way as well as of the preservation of the system under its optimum functional parameters, the input being controlled by the output.

The aim of regulation in a cybernetic system is to keep up all its functional parameters within some constant limits, i.e., to have a “stabilizing “ function for the command. This happens because both inside the system and outside it a series of disturbances may occur which may divert the result of the action of processes or phenomena that take place in the system from the command value.

Regulation and self-regulation can be performed, in cybernetic systems, either by “correcting”the deviations of the real values from the norm(or command value), or by a compensation or removal of the disturbances that made them, by comparing the command value –the input-with the result value – the output.

This operation presupposes “an inverted”action, the so-called reverse connection or feed-back or retroaction which closes up the chain of connections between all the elements of the system..

The reverse connection represents the fundamental notion of regulation and self-regulation, being the elements that coordinate cybernetic system functioning.

The reverse connection represents the fundamental notion of regulation and self-regulation, being the elements that coordinate cybernetic system functioning.

The system components linked by means of direct and reverse connections, the regulated system and the regulating one which, together, make up the geo-cybernetic system of management and organization in the territory.

Fig.4: The Geo-Cybernetic Block Scheme of Environmental Management

(My note: Well well, doesn't this look like they have projected onto this 'Gaia' cybernetic feedback control loop the God from the Old Testament - the one who could really mess up your day and that of entire peoples if you pissed him off or he happened to have a bad hair day? Just putting the thought out there - doesn't look like this is a God (or Guardian if you will) of the 'good shepherd' kind... OODA Loop just got elevated to a God in Gaia.)

Corresponding to the cybernetic concepts, the specific notions of organization and control as well as of the personal points of view shown in the previous chapters, the geo-cybernetic block scheme of Figure 4 represents the synthesis of all the ideas that make up the concept of “geo-cybernetics”.


The whole problem presented in this paper needs some extra information to be better understood:

-Our life on the Earth requires a different way of approach in as far as Man-Nature relationship is concerned.
-Science, in general, that is present in almost all the activities of transformation characteristic to human activity in relation to Nature must adapt itself and work out according to the new requirements of a sustainable development as well as to the environmental protection as such.
-The definition we gave to “information”different from the one given by Wiener may contribute to a more consistent approach to the concept of management and to the act of decision-making as well.
-On this basis, geo-cybernetics may become a discipline or a study program, a specialization, perhaps, with a curriculum adapted to the new requirements.
-The ideas presented here contain, cybernetically speaking, two categories of information: the knowledge I gathered in time from all types of sources I have studied and whose essence has been used here in this paper as well as the personal contribution underlined and written in blue.
-For the sake of simplifying the text from a graphical point of view I gave up giving numbers with extra signs.
-For the sake of simplification, I also made a selection of the bibliographical titles.

[1] Wiener, N, Cybernetics, Scientific Publishing House, Bucharest, 1966.
[2] Klaus, G., Cybernetics and Society, Political Publishing House, Bucharest, 1966.
[3] Lange, O., Introduction to Economical Cybernetics, Scientific Publishing House, Bucharest 1967
[4] Ross Ashby, W., Introduction to Cybernetics, Technical Publishing House, Bucharest, 1972.
[5] Stangu, I., Doctoral Thesis, The University of Agricultural Sciences, Bucharest, 1978.
[6] Stangu, I., The Cadastre – The Interface between Human Society and the Environment, FIG, XXII International Congress, Washington, DC, 2002


Eng. Ioan STANGU, Phd., Associate Professor in Topography and Land Management, “Lower Danube”University. Cadastre, Management and Protection of Environment Department, Galatz, ROMANIA. FIG Academic Member.


„Lower Danube”University of Galatz
47, Domneasca Street, 800008 Galatz, ROMANIA
Fax: (+40) 236 461353

Private Adress: Melodiei Street, nr.16, Bloc C12, ap. 6,
Code 800062 Galatz, ROMANIA

Phone: +40336435779
Fax: +40336435778

Galatz, ROMANIA -Mai, 2009

20  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Re: Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:14:34 pm
From the book:

Gaia In Turmoil: Climate Change, Biodepletion, and Earth Ethics In An Age Of Crisis

You simply can't make up the interconnected web that constitutes this cyberneticist world-schemer class.

Stewart Brand - the guy who gave you 'personal' computers, Wired Magazine, Whole Earth Catalog, et al - was Gaian before Gaia was cool
Cybernetics, Stewart Brand, Gaia Theory and Lovelock
Second-order cybernetics - cybernetics of cybernetics - as in System Of Systems (SOS) - as in slaves of slaves - as in slave masters of slave masters

How the 'cybernetics' of Gaia will put people inside a controlled dialectical eco-nomy

How videogames - a byproduct of cybernetics/game theory - have pushed the Gaia meme - the 'self-regulating' Earth - the cybernetic control system

Illusion of Gaia (1994)

Believe it or not, the Japanese are in love with everything having to do with Gaia. No big surprise, given the whole Shinto religion they had and still have going over there - the pantheistic nature worship religion where everything from a fox to a toad can constitute a God/Kami/spirit lord/whatever.

Other videogames from Japan with the 'Gaia meme':

Final Fantasy VII (1997)

Has lead characters in it - girls who sell flowers on the streets - who can hear the 'cries' emanating from the planet - the planet has wounds in it caused by environmental degradation and rapid industrialization/an evil monolithic corporation depriving the world of natural resources - the lead characters commit acts of 'eco-terrorism' on said corporation.

Oh, and then there's the movie (Final Fantasy - The Spirits Within (2001)), where they openly call the planet 'Gaia'.

Final Fantasy - The Spirits Within (2001)
'The Spirits Within' of the title is supposedly the 'carbon blob' living inside each and every member just crying to 'get out' and become 'sustainable'.

Sim Earth (1990)

Believe it or not, Will Wright worked directly with James Lovelock to push this one out there - for kids and adults alike to receive their 'cybernetic slave adaptation' programming course.

21  Science & Technology / ClimateGate / Global Warming/Climate Change Agenda Is Geo-Cybernetics In Disguise on: July 23, 2010, 08:11:56 pm
as posted by 'squarepusher'

Let's first look at a familiar fellow - James Lovelock, the originator of the Gaia hypothesis and a classic card-carrying 'global warming/climate change' believer.

BTW, this guy envisions most of us dying off - and from his interviews I gather it doesn't bother him that much - it speaks volumes that this theme of 'depopulation' and 'totalitarianism' continues to pop up whenever the negative aspects of cybernetics are being discussed. The Unabomber alluded to these nefarious schemes, Jacques Ellul did in his book 'The Technological Society', and so on.

So - James Lovelock is a 'Cyberneticist'. So was BF Skinner - a so-called 'Behaviorist'. So you have all kinds of guys camouflaging themselves as being a representative of a particular trade when they are really part of a much wider scientific discipline - in this case 'Cybernetics'.

This is the website of 'The Cybernetics Society'.

James Lovelock - Cybernetics Society

But the connections don't just end there. From his book 'The Ages Of Gaia', where he talks about his computer simulation model, the 'Daisyworld'.

The Ages Of Gaia

James Lovelock defined Gaia as:

This is also what Arthur Jensen in the movie Network (Howard Beale, remember?) was talking about when he mentioned the 'system of systems' in his 'New World Order' speech.


See? Global warming had a 'model' and a 'hypothetical world simulation' long before they started pushing the meme in public and around colleges/universities.

They then trickled this down to the public through a 1991 videogame called Sim Earth:

All the control systems that will be regulating carbon output, conserving energy, the smart meters that will record your energy usage, the entire 'smart grid' in fact - all of that are examples of a cybernetic system of control. The whole global warming/climate change move to sustainability does not have anything to do with being 'sustainable' (dumb term that one), or tending to the environment.

Ask yourself: how sustainable is it to put sensors all over the planet? How sustainable is it to put smart meters inside every home? How sustainable are all these RF radio waves that are going to be produced as a result of all this 'climate change control'? How sustainable is it to be running these computers as part of geo-cybernetic Command and Control systems?

It's not very 'sustainable' or 'eco-friendly' at that - but this is the whole con-game behind it. Under the guise of 'environmentalism', they're bringing in cybernetic control.

Remember - this is cybernetics' promise:

The importance and contribution of cybernetics for contemporary information society

See all the 'eco' terms popping up there? Yet this essay does not have one thing to do with 'environmentalism', 'global warming', 'climate change', or anything like that. Like I said, global warming/climate change = ushering in of cybernetic control systems.

How do you control people? By controlling the environment they're in. When you control the environment, you control the people.

Command and control of eco-nomies

Back in the '70s (at the same time that the US was building the ARPANET, aka the Internet), there was a project called Project Cybersyn in Chile. It was overseen by a British cyberneticist by the name of Stafford Beer, and its implications were huge - controlling the entire economy of Chile in top-down fashion.

Stafford Beer based this system on a conceptual model called Viable Systems Model - which as far as my research shows me was a precursor to Enterprise Architecture or at the very least has been combined with that. It talks about the promise of having a 'brain of the enterprise', of having a 'brain in the factory' - a synthetic brain of sorts that regulates the entire thing. Once again, this seems to recount HG Wells and his World Brain idea, pursued by me in another thread. It's also about how to integrate people into this organizational information flow so that the workers themselves become part of the 'hive mind' that constitutes the organization that is being 'governed'/'run' by the cybernetic C2 system.

Needless to say, I'm going to be doing more research on this, and others should too. It really looks like the head honchos behind global warming/climate change are camouflaging cybernetic systems of societal control under the banner of 'greenie environnmentalism' claptrap.
22  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 08:03:22 pm
Chapter 12


THERE WILL BE NO day of days then when a new world order comes into being. Step by step and here and there it will arrive, and even as it comes into being it will develop fresh perspectives, discover unsuspected problems and go on to new adventures. No man, no group of men, will ever be singled out as its father or founder. For its maker will be not this man nor that man nor any man but Man, that being who is in some measure in every one of us. World order will be, like science, like most inventions, a social product, an innumerable number of personalities will have lived fine lives, pouring their best into the collective achievement.

We can find a small-scale parallel to the probable development of a new world order in the history of flying. Less than a third of a century ago, ninety-nine people out of a hundred would have told you that flying was impossible; kites and balloons and possibly even a navigable balloon, they could imagine; they had known of such things for a hundred years; but a heavier then air machine, flying in defiance of wind and gravity! That they knew was nonsense. The would-be aviator was the typical comic inventor. Any fool could laugh at him. Now consider how completely the air is conquered.

And who did it? Nobody and everybody. Twenty thousand brains or so, each contributing a notion, a device, an amplification. They stimulated one another; they took off from one another. They were like excited ganglia in a larger brain sending their impulses to and fro. They were people of the most diverse race and colour. You can write down perhaps a hundred people or so who have figured conspicuously in the air, and when you examine the rôle they have played, you will find for the most part that they are mere notorieties of the Lindbergh type who have put themselves modestly but firmly in the limelight and can lay no valid claim to any effective contribution whatever. You will find many disputes about records and priority in making this or that particular step, but the lines of suggestion, the growth and elaboration of the idea, have been an altogether untraceable process. It has been going on for not more than a third of a century, under our very eyes, and no one can say precisely how it came about. One man said "Why not this?" and tried it, and another said "Why not that?" A vast miscellany of people had one idea in common, an idea as old as Dædalus, the idea that "Man can fly". Suddenly, swiftly, it got about - that is the only phrase you can use - that flying was attainable. And man, man as a social being, turned his mind to it seriously, and flew.

So it will certainly be with the new world order, if ever it is attained. A growing miscellany of people are saying - it is getting about - that "World Pax is possible", a World Pax in which men will be both united and free and creative. It is of no importance at all that nearly every man of fifty and over receives the idea with a pitying smile. Its chief dangers are the dogmatist and the would-be "leader" who will try to suppress every collateral line of work which does not minister to his supremacy. This movement must be, and it must remain, many-headed. Suppose the world had decided that Santos Dumont or Hiram Maxim was the heaven-sent Master of the Air, had given him the right to appoint a successor and subjected all experiments to his inspired control. We should probably have the Air Master now, with an applauding retinue of yes-men, following the hops of some clumsy, useless and extremely dangerous apparatus across country with the utmost dignity and self-satisfaction . . . .

Yet that is precisely how we still set about our political and social problems.

Bearing this essential fact in mind that the Peace of Man can only be attained, if it is attained at all, by an advance upon a long and various front, at varying speed and with diverse equipment, keeping direction only by a common faith in the triple need for collectivism, law and research, we realise the impossibility of drawing any picture of the new order as though it was as settled and stable as the old order imagined itself to be. The new order will be incessant; things will never stop happening, and so it defies any Utopian description. But we may nevertheless assemble a number of possibilities that will be increasingly realisable as the tide of disintegration ebbs and the new order is revealed.

To begin with we have to realise certain peculiarities of human behaviour that are all too disregarded in general political speculation. We have considered the very important rôle that may be played in our contemporary difficulties by a clear statement of the Rights of Man, and we have sketched such a Declaration. There is not an item in that Declaration, I believe, which a man will not consider to be a reasonable demand - so far as he himself is concerned. He will subscribe to it in that spirit very readily. But when he is asked not only to concede by the same gesture to everybody else in the world, but as something for which he has to make all the sacrifices necessary for its practical realisation, he will discover a reluctance to "go so far as that". He will find a serious resistance welling up from his sub-conscious and trying to justify itself in his thoughts.

The things he will tell you will be very variable; but the word "premature" will play a large part in it. He will display a tremendous tenderness and consideration with which you have never credited him before, for servants, for workers, for aliens and particularly for aliens of a different colour from himself. They will hurt themselves with all this dangerous liberty. Are they fit, he will ask you, for all this freedom? "Candidly, are they fit for it?" He will be slightly offended if you will say, "As fit as you are". He will say in a slightly amused tone, "But how can you say that?" and then going off rather at a tangent, "I am afraid you idealise your fellow-creatures."

As you press him, you will find this kindliness evaporating from his resistance altogether. He is now concerned about the general beauty and loveliness of the world. He will protest that this new Magna Carta will reduce all the world to "a dead level of uniformity". You will ask him why must a world of free-men be uniform and at a dead level? You will get no adequate reply. It is an assumption of vital importance to him and he must cling to it. He has been accustomed to associate "free" and "equal", and has never been bright-minded enough to take these two words apart and have a good look at them separately. He is likely to fall back at this stage upon that Bible of the impotent genteel, Huxley’s Brave New World, and implore you to read it. You brush that disagreeable fantasy aside and continue to press him. He says that nature has made men unequal, and you reply that that is no reason for exaggerating the fact. The more unequal and various their gifts, the greater is the necessity for a Magna Carta to protect them from one another. Then he will talk of robbing life of the picturesque and the romantic and you will have some difficulty in getting these words defined. Sooner or later it will grow clear that he finds the prospect of a world in which "Jack’s as good as his Master" unpleasant to the last degree.

If you still probe him with questions and leading suggestions, you will begin to realise how large a part the need for glory over his fellows plays in his composition (and incidentally you will note, please, you own secret satisfaction in carrying the argument against him). It will become clear to you, if you collate the specimen under examination with the behaviour of children, yourself and the people about you, under what urgent necessity they are for the sense of triumph, of being better and doing better than their fellows, and having it felt and recognised by someone. It is a deeper, steadier impulse than sexual lust; it is a hunger. It is the clue to the unlovingness of so much sexual life, to sadistic impulses, to avarice, hoarding and endless ungainful cheating and treachery which gives men the sense of getting the better of someone even if they do not get the upper hand.

In the last resort this is why we must have law, and why Magna Carta and all its kindred documents set out to defeat human nature in defence of the general happiness. Law is essentially an adjustment of that craving to glory over other living things, to the needs of social life, and it is more necessary in a collectivist society than in any other. It is a bargain, it is a social contract, to do as we would be done by and to repress our extravagant egotisms in return for reciprocal concessions. And in the face of these considerations we have advanced about the true nature of the beast we have to deal with, it is plain that the politics of the sane man as we have reasoned them out, must anticipate a strenuous opposition to this primary vital implement for bringing about the new world order.

I have suggested that the current discussion of "War Aims" may very effectively be transformed into the propaganda of this new Declaration of the Rights of Man. The opposition to it and the attempts that will be made to postpone, mitigate, stifle and evade it, need to be watched, denounced and combatted persistently throughout the world. I do not know how far this Declaration I have sketched can be accepted by a good Catholic, but the Totalitarian pseudo-philosophy insists upon inequality of treatment for "non-Aryans" as a glorious duty. How Communists would respond to its clauses would, I suppose, depend upon their orders from Moscow. But what are called the "democracies" are supposed to be different, and it would be possible now to make that Declaration a searching test of the honesty and spirit of the leaders and rulers in whom they trust. These rulers can be brought to the point by it, with a precision unattainable in any other fashion.

But the types and characters and authorities and officials and arrogant and aggressive individuals who will boggle at this Declaration and dispute and defy it, do not exhaust the resistances of our unregenerate natures to this implement for the establishment of elementary justice in the world. For a far larger proportion of people among the "democracies" will be found, who will pay it lip service and then set about discovering how, in their innate craving for that sense of superiority and advantage which lies so near the core of our individuals wills, they may unobtrusively sabotage it and cheat it. Even if they only cheat it just a little. I am inclined to think this disingenuousness is a universal weakness. I have a real passion for serving the world, but I have a pretty keen disposition to get more pay for my service, more recognition and so on than I deserve. I do not trust myself. I want to be under just laws. We want law because we are all potential law-breakers.

This is a considerable digression into psychology, and I will do no more than glance at how large a part this craving for superiority and mastery has played in the sexual practices of mankind. There we have the ready means for a considerable relief of this egotistical tension in mutual boasting and reassurance. But the motive for his digression here is to emphasise the fact that the generalisation of our "War Aims" into a Declaration of Rights, though it will enormously simplify the issue of the war, will eliminate neither open and heartfelt opposition nor endless possibilities of betrayal and sabotage.

Nor does it alter the fact that even when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people, from maharajas to millionaires and from pukkha sahibs to pretty ladies, will hate the new world order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to estimate its promise we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people.

Ant it will be no light matter to minimise the loss of efficiency in the process of changing the spirit and pride of administration work from that of an investing, high-salaried man with a handsome display of expenditure and a socially ambitious wife, into a relatively less highly-salaried man with a higher standard of self-criticism, aware that he will be esteemed rather by what he puts into his work than by what he gets out of it. There will be a lot of social spill, tragi-comedy and loss of efficiency during the period of the change over, and it is better to be prepared for that.

Yet after making allowances for these transitional stresses we may still look forward with some confidence to certain phases in the onset of World Order. War or war fear will have led everywhere to the concentration of vast numbers of workers upon munition work and the construction of offensive and defensive structures of all sorts, upon shipping, internal communications, replacement structures, fortification. There will be both a great accumulation and control of material and constructive machinery and also of hands already growing accustomed to handling it. As the possibility of conclusive victory fades and this war muddle passes out of its distinctively military phase towards revolution, and as some sort of Peace Congress assembles, it will be not only desirable but necessary for governments to turn over these resources and activities to social reconstruction. It will be too obviously dangerous and wasteful to put them out of employment. They must surely have learnt now what unemployment means in terms of social disorganisation. Governments will have to lay out the world, plan and build for peace whether they like it or not.

But it will be asked, "Where will you find the credit to do that?" and to answer this question we must reiterate that fact that money is an expedient and not an end. The world will have the material and the hands needed for a reconditioning of its life everywhere. They are all about you now crying out to be used. It is, or at any rate it has been, the function of the contemporary money-credit system to bring worker and material together and stimulate their union. That system always justified its activities on that ground, that is its claim to exist, and if it does not exist for that purpose then for what purpose does it exist and what further need is there for it? If now the financial mechanism will not work, if it confronts us with a non possumus, then clearly it resigns its function.

Then it has to get out of the way. It will declare the world has stopped when the truth will be that the City has stopped. It is the counting-house that has gone bankrupt. For a long time now an increasing number of people have been asking questions about the world counting-house, getting down at last to such fundamental questions as "What is money?" and "Why are Banks?" It is disconcerting but stimulating to find that no lucid answer is forthcoming.

One might have imagined that long before this one of the many great bankers and financial experts in our world would have come forward with a clear and simple justification for the monetary practices of to-day. He would have shown how completely reasonable and trustworthy this money-credit system was. He would have shown what was temporarily wrong with it and how to set it working again, as the electrician does when the lights go out. He would have released us from our deepening distress about our money in the Bank, our little squirrel hoard of securities, the deflating lifebelt of property that was to assure our independence to the end. No one of that quality comes forward. There is not so much as a latter-day Bagehot. It dawns upon more and more of us that it is not a system at all and never has been a system, that it is an accumulation of conventions, usages, collateral developments and compensatory expedients, which creaks now and sways more and more and gives every sign of a complete and horrifying social collapse.

Most of us have believed up to the last moment that somewhere distributed among the banks and city offices in a sort of world counting-house, there were books of accounts, multitudinous perhaps and intricate, but ultimately proper accounts. Only now is it dawning upon comfortable decent people that the counting-house is in a desperate mess, that codes seem to have been lost, entries made wrong, additions gone astray down the column, records kept in vanishing ink. . . .

For years there has been a great and growing literature about money. It is very various but it has one general characteristic. First there is a swift exposure of the existing system as wrong. Then there is a glib demonstration of a new system which is right. Let this be done or that be done, "let the nation own its own money", says one radio prophet earnestly, repeatedly, simply, and all will be well. These various systems of doctrine run periodicals, organise movements (with coloured shirt complete), meet, demonstrate. They disregard each other flatly. And without exception all these monetary reformers betray signs of extreme mental strain.

The secret trouble in their minds is gnawing doubt that their own proper "plan", the panacea, is in some subtle and treacherous way likely to fail them if it is put to the test. The internal fight against this intolerable shadow betrays itself in their outer behaviour. Their letters and pamphlets, with scarcely an exception, have this much in common with the letters one gets from lunatics, that there is a continual resort to capital letters and abusive terms. They shout out at the slightest provocation or none. They are not so much shouting at the exasperating reader who remains so obstinate when they have been so clear, so clear, as at the sceptical whisper within.

Because there is no perfect money system by itself and there never can be. It is a dream like the elixir vitæ or perpetual motion. It is in the same order of thought.

Attention has already been drawn, in our examination of Mr Streit’s proposals for Union Now, to the fact that money varies in its nature and operations with the theory of property and distribution on which society is based, that in a complete collectivism for example it becomes little more than the check handed to the worker to enable him to purchase whatever he likes from the resources of the community. Every detachment of production or enterprise from collective control (national or cosmopolitan) increases the possible functions of money and so makes a different thing of it. Thus there can be endless species of money - as many types of money as there are types and varieties of social order. Money in Soviet Russia is a different organ from money French or American money. The difference can be as wide as that between lungs and swimming bladders and gills. It is not simply a quantitative difference, as so many people seem to imagine, which can be adjusted by varying the rate of exchange or any such contrivance, it goes deeper, it is a difference in quality and kind. The bare thought of that makes our business and financial people feel uncomfortable and confused and menaced, and they go on moving their bars of gold about from this vault to that, hoping almost beyond hope that no one will say anything more about it. It worked very well for a time, to go on as though money was the same thing all the world over. They will not admit how that assumption is failing to work now.

Clever people reaped a certain advantage from a more or less definite apprehension of the variable nature of money, but since one could not be a financier or business director without an underlying faith in one’s right to profit by one’s superior cleverness, there did not seem to be any reason for them to make a public fuss about it. They got their profits and the flats got left.

Directly we grasp this not very obscure truth that there can be, and are, different sorts of money dependent on the economic usages or system in operation, which are not really interchangeable, then it becomes plain that a collectivist world order, whose fundamental law is such a Declaration of Rights as we have sketched, will have to carry on its main, its primary operations at least with a new world money, a specially contrived money, differing in its nature from any sort of money conventions that have hitherto served human needs. It will be issued against the total purchasable output of the community in return for the workers’ services to the community. There will be no more reason for going to the City for a loan than for going to the oracle at Delphi for advice about it.

In the phase of social stress and emergency socialisation into which we are certainly passing, such a new money may begin to appear quite soon. Governments finding it impossible to resort to the tangled expedients of the financial counting-house, may take a short cut to recuperation, requisition the national resources within their reach and set their unemployment hands to work by means of these new checks. They may carry out international barter arrangements upon an increasing scale. The fact that the counting-house is in a hopeless mess because of its desperate attempts to ignore the protean nature of money, will become more manifest as it becomes less important.

The Stock Exchange and Bank credit and all arts of loaning and usury and forestalling will certainly dwindle away together as the World Order establishes itself. If and when World Order establishes itself. They will be superseded, like egg-shells and fœtal membranes. There is no reason for denouncing those who devised and worked those methods and institutions as scoundrels and villains. They did honestly according to their lights. They were a necessary part of the process of getting Homo sapiens out of his cave and down from his tree. And gold, that lovely heavy stuff, will be released from its vaults and hiding-places for the use of the artist and technician - probably at a price considerably below the present quotations.

Our attempt to forecast the coming World Order is framed then in an immense and increasing spectacle of constructive activity. We can anticipate a rapid transfiguration of the face of the earth as its population is distributed and re-distributed in accordance with the shifting requirements of economic production.

It is not only that there is what is called a housing shortage in nearly every region of the earth, but most of the existing accommodation, by modern standards, is unfit for human occupation. There is scarcely a city in the world, the new world as well as the old, which does not need to have half its dwelling-places destroyed. Perhaps Stockholm, reconditioned under a Socialist regime, may claim to be an exception; Vienna was doing hopefully until its spirit was broken by Dollfuss and the Catholic reaction. For the rest, behind a few hundred main avenues and prospects, sea and river fronts, capitols, castles and the like, filthy slums and rookeries cripple childhood and degrade and devitalise its dulled elders. You can hardly say people are born into such surroundings; they are only half born.

With the co-operation of the press and the cinema it would be easy to engender a world-wide public interest and enthusiasm for the new types of home and fitment that are now attainable by everyone. Here would be an outlet for urban and regional patriotism, for local shame and pride and effort. Here would be stuff to argue about. Wherever men and women have been rich enough, powerful enough and free enough, their thoughts have turned to architecture and gardening. Here would be a new incentive to travel, to see what other towns and country-sides were doing. The common man on his holidays would do what the English milord of the seventeenth century did; he would make his Grand Tour and come back from his journeys with architectural drawings and notions for home application. And this building and rebuilding would be a continuing process, a sustained employment, going on from good to better, as the economic forces shifted and changed with new discoveries and men’s ideas expanded.

It is doubtful in a world of rising needs and standards if many people would want to live in manifestly old houses, any more than they would want to live in old clothes. Except in a few country places where ancient buildings have wedded themselves happily to some local loveliness and become quasi-natural things, or where some great city has shown a brave facade to the world, I doubt if there will be much to preserve. In such large open countries as the United States there has been a considerable development of the mobile home in recent years. People haul a trailer-home behind their cars and become seasonal nomads. . . . But there is no need to expatiate further on a limitless wealth of possibilities. Thousands of those who have been assisting in the monstrous clumsy evacuations and shiftings of population that have been going on recently, must have had their imaginations stirred by dim realisation of how much better all this might be done, if it were done in a new spirit and with a different intention. There must be a multitude of young and youngish people quite ripe for infection by this idea of cleaning up and resettling the world. Young men who are now poring over war maps and planning annexations and strategic boundaries, fresh Maginot lines, new Gibraltars and Dardanelles, may presently be scheming the happy and healthy distribution of routes and residential districts in relation to this or that important region of world supply for oil or wheat or water-power. It is essentially the same type of cerebration, better employed.

Considerations of this sort are sufficient to supply a background of hopeful activities to our prospective world order. But we are not all architects and gardeners there are many types of minds and many of those who are training or being trained for the skilled co-operations of warfare and the development of a combatant morale, may be more disposed to go on with definitely educational work. In that way they can most easily gratify the craving for power and honourable service. They will face a world in extreme need of more teachers and fresh-minded and inspiring teachers at that. At every level of educational work from the kindergarten to the research laboratory, and in every part of the world from Capricornia to Alaska and from the Gold Coast to Japan, there will be need of active workers to bring minds into harmony with new order and to work out, with all the labour saving and multiplying apparatus available, cinema, radio, cheap books and pictures and all the rest of it, the endless new problems of human liaison that will arise. There we have a second line of work along which millions of young people may escape the stagnation and frustration which closed in upon their predecessors as the old order drew to its end.

A sturdy and assertive variety of the new young will be needed for the police work of the world. They will be more disposed for authority and less teaching or creative activities than their fellows. The old proverb will still hold for the new order that it takes all sorts to make a world, and the alternative to driving this type of temperament into conspiracy and fighting it and, if you can, suppressing it, is to employ it, win it over, trust it, and give it law behind it to respect and enforce. They want a loyalty and this loyalty will find its best use and satisfaction in the service of world order. I have remarked in the course of such air travel as I have done, that the airmen of all nations have a common resemblance to each other and that the patriotic virus in their blood is largely corrected by a wider professionalism. At present the outlook before a young airmen is to perish in a spectacular dog-fight before he is five and twenty. I wonder how many of them really rejoice in that prospect.

It is not unreasonable to anticipate the development of an ad hoc disarmament police which will have its greatest strength in the air. How easily the spirit of an air police can be de-nationalised is shown by the instance of the air patrols on the United States-Canadian border, to which President Roosevelt drew my attention. There is a lot of smuggling along that border and the planes now play an important part in its suppression. At first the United States and Canada had each their own planes. Then in a wave of common sense, the two services were pooled. Each plane now carries a United States and Canadian customs officer. When contraband is spotted the plane comes down on it and which officer acts is determined by the destination of the smuggled goods. There we have a pattern for a world struggling through federation to collective unity. An ad hoc disarmament police with its main strength in the air would necessarily fall into close co-operation with the various other world police activities. In a world where criminals can fly anywhere, the police must be able to fly anywhere too. Already we have a world-wide network of competent men fighting the white-slave traffic, the drug traffic and so forth. The thing begins already.

All this I write to provide imaginative material for those who see the coming order as a mere blank interrogation. People talk much nonsense about the disappearance of incentive under socialism. The exact opposite is the truth. It is the obstructive appropriation of natural resources by private ownership that robs the prosperous of incentive and the poor of hope. Our Declaration of Human rights assures a man the proper satisfaction of all his elementary needs in kind, and nothing more. If he wants more than that he will have to work for it, and the healthier he is and the better he is fed and housed, the more bored he will be by inactivity and the more he will want something to do. I am suggesting what he is likely to do in general terms, and that is as much as one can do now. We can talk about the broad principles upon which these matters will be handled in a consolidating world socialism, but we can scarcely venture to anticipate the detailed forms, the immense richness and variety of expression, an ever-increasing number of intelligent people will impose upon these primary ideas.

But there is one more structural suggestion that it may be necessary to bring into our picture. So far as I know it was first broached by that very bold and subtle thinker, Professor William James, in a small book entitled The Moral Equivalent of War. He pointed out the need there might be for a conception of duty, side by side with the idea of rights, that there should be something in the life of every citizen, man or woman alike, that should give him at once a sense of personal obligation to the World State. He brought that into relation with the fact that there will remain in any social order we can conceive, a multitude of necessary services which by no sort of device can be made attractive as normal life-long occupations. He was not thinking so much of the fast-vanishing problem of mechanical toil as the such irksome tasks as the prison warder’s, the asylum attendant’s; the care of the aged and infirm, nursing generally, health and sanitary services, a certain residuum of clerical routine, dangerous exploration and experiment. No doubt human goodness is sufficient to supply volunteers for many of these things, but are the rest of us entitled to profit by their devotion? His solution is universal conscription for a certain period of the adult life. The young will have to do so much service and take so much risk for the general welfare as the world commonwealth requires. They will be able to do these jobs with the freshness and vigour of those who know they will presently be released, and who find their honour through performance; they will not be subjected to that deadening temptation to self-protective slacking and mechanical insensitiveness, which assails all who are thrust by economic necessity into these callings for good and all.

It is quite possible that a certain percentage of these conscripts may be caught by the interest of what they are doing; the asylum attendant may decide to specialise in psycho-therapeutic work; the hospital nurse succumb to that curiosity which underlies the great physiologist; the Arctic worker may fall in love with his snowy wilderness. . . .

One other leading probability of a collectivist world order has to be noted here, and that is an enormous increase in the pace and amount of research and discovery. I write research, but by that I mean that double-barrelled attack upon ignorance, the biological attack and the physical attack, that is generally known as "Science". "Science" comes to us from those academic Dark Ages when men had to console themselves for their ignorance by pretending that there was a limited amount of knowledge in the world, and little chaps in caps and gowns strutted about, bachelors who knew all that there was to be known. Now it is manifest that none of us know very much, and the more we look into what we think we know, the more hitherto undetected things we shall find lurking in our assumptions.

Hitherto this business of research, which we call the "scientific world", has been in the hands of very few workers indeed. I throw out the suggestion that in our present-day world, of all the brains capable of great and masterful contributions to "scientific" thought and achievement, brains of the quality of Lord Rutherford’s, or Darwin’s or Mendel’s or Freud’s or Leonardo’s or Galileo’s, not one in a thousand, not one in a score of thousands, ever gets born into such conditions as to realise its opportunities. The rest never learn a civilised language, never get near a library, never have the faintest chance of self-realisation, never hear the call. They are under-nourished, they die young, they are misused. And of the millions who would make good, useful, eager secondary research workers and explorers, not one in a million is utilised.

But now consider how things will be if we had a stirring education ventilating the whole world, and if we had a systematic and continually more competent search for exceptional mental quality and a continually more extensive net of opportunity for it. Suppose a quickening public mind implies an atmosphere of increasing respect for intellectual achievement and livelier criticism of imposture. What we call scientific progress to-day would seem a poor, hesitating, uncertain advance in comparison with what would be happening under these happier conditions.

The progress of research and discovery has produced such brilliant and startling results in the past century and a half that few of us are aware of the small number of outstanding men who have been concerned in it, and how the minor figures behind these leaders trail off into a following of timid and ill-provided specialists who dare scarcely stand up to a public official on their own ground. This little army, this "scientific world" of to-day, numbering I suppose from head to tail, down to the last bottle-washer, not a couple of hundred thousand men, will certainly be represented in the new world order by a force of millions, better equipped, amply co-ordinated, free to question, able to demand opportunity. Its best will be no better than our best, who could not be better, but they will be far more numerous, and its rank and file, explorers, prospectors, experimental team workers and an encyclopædic host of classifiers and co-ordinators and interpreters, will have a vigour, a pride and confidence that will make the laboratories of to-day seem half-way back to the alchemist’s den.

Can one doubt that the "scientific world" will break out in this way when the revolution is achieved, and that the development of man’s power over nature and over his own nature and over this still unexplored planet, will undergo a continual acceleration as the years pass? No man can guess beforehand what doors will open then nor upon what wonderlands.

These are some fragmentary intimations of the quality of that wider life a new world order can open to mankind. I will not speculate further about them because I would not have it said that this book is Utopian or "Imaginative" or anything of that sort. I have set down nothing that is not strictly reasonable and practicable. It is the soberest of books and the least original of books. I think I have written enough to show that it is impossible for world affairs to remain at their present level. Either mankind collapses or our species struggles up by the hard yet fairly obvious routes I have collated in this book, to reach a new level of social organisation. There can be little question of the abundance, excitement and vigour of living that awaits our children upon that upland. If it is attained. There is no doubting their degradation and misery if it is not.

There is nothing really novel about this book. But there has been a certain temerity in bringing together facts that many people have avoided bringing together for fear they might form an explosive mixture. Maybe they will. They may blast through some obstinate mental barriers. In spite of that explosive possibility, that explosive necessity, it may be this remains essentially an assemblage, digest and encouragement of now prevalent but still hesitating ideas. It is a plain statement of the revolution to which reason points an increasing number of minds, but which they still lack resolution to undertake. In The Fate of Homo sapiens I have stressed the urgency of the case. Here I have assembled the things they can and need to do. They had better summon up their resolution.
23  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 08:02:15 pm
Chapter 11


AND NOW, HAVING COMPLETED our picture of what the saner elements in human society may reasonably work for and hope for, having cleared away the horrible nightmares of the class war and the totalitarian slave-state from our imaginations, we are able to attack the immediate riddles of international conflict and relationship with some hope of a general solution. If we realise to the depths of our being that a world settlement based in the three ideas of socialism, law and knowledge, is not only possible and desirable, but the only way of escape from deepening disaster, then manifestly our attitude towards the resentments of Germany, the prejudices of America or Russia, the poverty and undernourishment of India or the ambitions of Japan, must be frankly opportunist. None of these are primary issues. We sane men must never lose sight of our ultimate objective, but our methods of getting there will have to vary with the fluctuating variations of national feeling and national policy.

There is this idea of federalism upon which I have already submitted a criticism in chapter seven. As I have shown there, the Streit proposals will either take you further or land you nowhere. Let us assume that we can strengthen his proposals to the extent of making a socialistic economic consortium and adhesion to that Declaration of Rights, primary conditions for any federal union; then it becomes a matter of mood and occasion with what communities the federal association may be begun. We can even encourage feeble federal experiments which do not venture even so far as that along the path to sanity, in the certainty that either they will fade out again or else that they will become liberal realities of the type to which the whole world must ultimately conform. Behind any such half-hearted tentatives an educational propaganda can be active and effective.

But when it comes to the rate and amount of participation in the construction of a rational world order we can expect from any country or group of countries, we are in a field where there is little more than guessing and haphazard generalisations about "national character" to work upon. We are dealing with masses of people which may be swayed enormously by a brilliant newspaper or an outstandingly persuasive or compelling personality or by almost accidental changes in the drift of events. I, for example, cannot tell how far the generality of educated and capable people in the British Empire now may fall in with our idea of accepting and serving a collectivism, or how strong their conservative resistance may be. It is my own country and I ought to know it best, and I do not know it detachedly enough or deeply enough to decide that. I do not see how anyone can foretell these swirls and eddies of response.

The advocacy of such movements of the mind and will as I am speaking of here is in itself among the operating causes in political adjustment, and those who are deepest in the struggle are least able to estimate how it is going. Every factor in political and international affairs is a fluctuating factor. The wise man therefore will not set his heart upon any particular drift or combination. He will favour everything that trends towards the end at which he aims.

The present writer cherishes the idea that the realisation of a common purpose and a common cultural inheritance may spread throughout all the English-speaking communities, and there can be no harm in efforts to give this concrete expression. He believes the dissociation of the British Empire may inaugurate this great synthesis. At the same time there are factors making for some closer association of the United States of America with what are called the Oslo powers. There is no reason why one of these associations should stand in the way of the other. Some countries such as Canada rest already under what is practically a double guarantee; she has the security of the Monroe Doctrine and the protection of the British fleet.

A Germany of eighty million people which has been brought to acquiesce in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and which is already highly collectivised, may come much earlier to a completely liberal socialist regime than Great Britain or France. If she participates in a consortium for the development of what are called the politically backward regions of the world, she may no longer be disposed for further military adventures and further stress and misery. She may enter upon a phase of social and economic recovery so rapid as to stimulate and react upon every other country in the world. It is not for other countries to dictate her internal politics, and if the German people want to remain united as one people, in federated states or in one centralised state, there is neither righteousness nor wisdom preventing them.

The Germans like the rest of the world have to get on with collectivisation, they have to produce their pattern, and they cannot give themselves to that if they are artificially divided up and disorganised by some old-fashioned Quai d’Orsay scheme. They must do the right thing in their own way.

That the belligerent tradition may linger on in Germany for a generation or so, is a risk the Atlantic powers have to take. The world has a right to insist that not simply some German government but the people generally, recognise unequivocably and repeatedly, the rights of man asserted in the Declaration, and it is disarmed and that any aggressive plant, any war plane, warship, gun or arsenal that is discovered in the country shall be destroyed forthwith, brutally and completely. But that is a thing that should not be confined to Germany. Germany should not be singled out for that. Armament should be an illegality everywhere, and some sort of international force should patrol a treaty-bound world. Partial armament is one of those absurdities dear to moderate-minded "reasonable" men. Armament itself is making war. Making a gun, pointing a gun and firing it, are all acts of the same order. It should be illegal to construct anywhere upon earth, any mechanism for the specific purpose of killing men. When you see a gun it is reasonable to ask: "Whom is that intended to kill?"

Germany’s rearmament after 1918 was largely tolerated because she played off British Russophobia against the Russian fear of "Capitalist" attack, but that excuse can no longer serve any furtive war-mongers among her people after her pact with Moscow.

Released from the economic burdens and restrictions that crippled her recovery after 1918, Germany may find a full and satisfying outlet for the energy of her young men in her systematic collectivisation, raising the standard of her common life deliberately and steadily, giving Russia a lead in efficiency and obliging the maundering "politics" and discursive inattention of the Atlantic world to remain concentrated upon the realities of life. The idea of again splitting up Germany into discordant fragments so as to postpone her ultimate recovery indefinitely, is a pseudo-democratic slacker’s dream. It is diametrically opposed to world reconstruction. We have need of the peculiar qualities of her people, and the sooner she recovers the better for the whole world. It is preposterous to resume the policy of holding back Germany simply that the old order may enjoy a few more years of self-indulgence in England, France and America.

A lingering fear of German military aggression may not be altogether bad for the minor states of South-Eastern Europe and Asia Minor, by breaking down their excessive nationalism and inducing them to work together. The policy of the sane man should be to welcome every possible experiment in international understandings duplicate and overlap one another, so much the better. He has to watch the activities of his own Foreign Office with incessant jealousy, for signs of that Machiavellian spirit which foments division among foreign governments and peoples and schemes perpetually to frustrate the progressive movement in human affairs by converting it into a swaying indecisive balance of power.

This book is a discussion of guiding principles and not of the endless specific problems of adjustment that arise on the way to a world realisation of collective unity. I will merely glance at that old idea of Napoleon the Third’s, the Latin Union, at the possibility of a situation in Spanish and Portuguese South America parallel to that overlap of the Monroe Doctrine and the European motherlands which already exists in practice in the case of Canada, nor will I expatiate upon the manifold possibilities of sincere application of the Declaration of the Rights of Man to India and Africa - and particularly to those parts of the world in which more or less black peoples are awakening to the realities of racial discrimination and oppression.

I will utter a passing warning against any Machiavellian treatment of the problem of Northern and Eastern Asia, into which the British may be led by their constitutional Russophobia. The Soviet collectivism, especially if presently it becomes liberalised and more efficient through a recovery from its present obsession by Stalin, may spread very effectively across Central Asia and China. To anyone nourished mentally upon the ideas of an unending competition of Powers for ascendancy for ever and ever, an alliance with Japan, as truculent and militarised a Japan as possible, will seem the most natural response in the world. But to anyone who has grasped the reality of the present situation of mankind and the urgent desirableness of world collectivisation, this immense unification will be something to welcome, criticise and assist.

The old bugbear of Russia’s "designs upon India" may also play its part in distorting the Asiatic situation for many people. Yet a hundred years of mingled neglect, exploitation and occasional outbreaks of genuine helpfulness should have taught the British that the ultimate fate of India’s hundreds of millions rests now upon no conquering ruler but wholly and solely upon the ability of the Indian peoples to co-operate in world collectivisation. They may learn much by way of precept and example from Russia and from the English-speaking world, but the days for mere revolt or for relief by a change of masters have passed. India has to work out for itself, with its own manner of participation in the struggle for a world order, starting from the British raj as a datum line. No outside power can work that out for the Indian peoples, nor force them to do it if they have no will for it.

But I will not wander further among these ever-changing problems and possibilities. They are, so to speak, wayside eventualities and opportunities. Immense though some of them are they remain secondary. Every year or so now the shifting channels of politics need to be recharted. The activities and responses of the sane man in any particular country and at any particular time will be determined always by the overruling conception of a secular movement towards a single world order. That will be the underlying permanent objective of all his political life.

There is, however, another line of world consolidation to which attention must be drawn before we conclude this section, and is what we may call ad hoc internationalism is admirably set forth in Leonard Woolf’s International Government, a classic which was published in 1916 and still makes profitable reading.

The typical ad hoc organisation is the Postal Union, which David Lubin, that brilliant neglected thinker, would have had extended until it controlled shipping and equalised freights throughout the world. He based his ideas upon his practical experience of the mail order business from which he derived his very considerable fortune. From that problem of freight adjustment he passed to the idea of a controlled survey of world, so that a shortage here or a glut there could be foreseen and remedied in time. He realised the idea in the form of the International Institute of Agriculture at Rome, which in its heyday made treaties like an independent sovereign power for the supply of returns from nearly every government upon earth. The war of 1914 and Lubin’s death in 1919 checked the development of this admirable and most inspiring experiment in ad hoc internationalism. Its history is surely something that should be made part of the compulsory education of every statesmen and publicist. Yet never in my life have I met a professional politician who knew anything whatever or wanted to know anything about it. It didn’t get votes; it seemed difficult to tax it; what was the good of it?

Another ad hoc organisation which might be capable of a considerable extension of its functions is the Elder Brethren of Trinity House, who control the lighthouses and charting of the seas throughout the world. But it would need a very considerable revision and extension of Mr Woolf’s book and, in spite of the war stresses that have delayed and in some cases reversed their development, it would be quite beyond our present scope, to bring up to date the lengthening tale of ad hoc international networks, ranging from international business cartels, scientific and technical organisations, white-slave-trade suppression and international police co-operation, to health services and religious missions. Just as I have suggested that the United States and Great Britain may become complete socialisms unawares, so it is a not altogether impossible dream that the world may discover to its great surprise that it is already practically a cosmopolis, through the extension and interweaving of these ad hoc co-operations. At any rate we have this very powerful collateral process going on side by side with the more definite political schemes we have discussed.

Surveying the possibilities of these various attacks upon the complicated and intricate obstacles that stand between us and a new and more hopeful world order, one realises both the reasons for hope in that great possibility and the absurdity over over-confidence. We are all like soldiers upon a vast battlefield; we cannot be sure of the trend of things; we may be elated when disillusionment is rushing headlong upon us; we may be on the verge of despair, not knowing that our antagonists are already in collapse. My own reactions vary between an almost mystical faith in the ultimate triumph of human reason and good-will, and moods of stoical determination to carry on to the end in the face of what looks like inevitable disaster. There are quantitative factors in the outlook for which there are no data; there are elements of time and opportunity beyond any estimating. Every one of these activities we have been canvassing tends to delay the drift to destruction and provides a foothold for a further counter-offensive against the adversary.

In the companion predecessor to this book, The Fate of Homo sapiens, I tried to drive home the fact that our species has no more reason to believe it can escape defeat and extinction, than any other organism that plays or has played its part in the drama of life. I tried to make clear how precarious is our present situation, and how urgent it is that we should make a strenuous effort at adjustment now. Only a little while ago it seemed as though that was an appeal to a deaf and blind world, invincibly set in its habitual ways into the question whether this inclination towards pessimism reflected a mood or phase in myself, and I threw out a qualifying suggestion or so; but for my own part I could not find any serious reason to believe that the mental effort that was clearly necessary if man was to escape that fate that marched upon him would ever be made. His conservative resistances, his apathy, seemed incurable.

Now suddenly everywhere one meets with alarmed and open and enquiring minds. So far the tremendous dislocations of the present war have been immensely beneficial in stripping off what seemed to be quite invincible illusions of security only a year ago. I never expected to live to see the world with its eyes as widely open as they are to-day. The world has never been so awake. Little may come of it, much may come of it. We do not know. Life would amount to nothing at all if we did.
24  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 08:01:42 pm
Chapter 10


LET US TURN NOW to another system of problems in the collectivisation of the world, and that is the preservation of liberty in the socialist state and the restoration of that confidence without which good behaviour is generally impossible.

This destruction of confidence is one of the less clearly recognised evils of the present phase of world-disintegration. In the past there have been periods when whole communities or at least large classes within communities have gone about their business with a general honesty, directness and sense of personal honour. They have taken a keen pride in the quality of their output. They have lived through life on tolerable and tolerant terms with their neighbours. The laws they observed have varied in different countries and periods, but their general nature was to make an orderly law-abiding life possible and natural. They had been taught and they believed and they had every reason to believe: "This (that or the other thing) is right. Do right and nothing, except by some strange exceptional misfortune, can touch you. The Law guarantees you that. Do right and nothing will rob you or frustrate you."

Nowhere in the world now is there very much of that feeling left, and as it disappears, the behaviour of people degenerates towards a panic scramble, towards cheating, over-reaching, gang organisation, precautionary hoarding, concealment and all the meanness and anti-social feeling which is the natural outcome of insecurity.

Faced with what now amounts to something like a moral stampede, more and more sane men will realise the urgency for a restoration of confidence. The more socialisation proceeds and the more directive authority is concentrated, the more necessary is an efficient protection of individuals from the impatience of well-meaning or narrow-minded or ruthless officials and indeed from all the possible abuses of advantage that are inevitable under such circumstances to our still childishly wicked breed.

In the past the Atlantic world has been particularly successful in expedients for meeting this aspect of human nature. Our characteristic and traditional method may be called the method of the fundamental declaration. Our Western peoples, by a happy instinct, have produced statements of Right, from Magna Carta onwards, to provide a structural defence between the citizen and the necessary growth of central authority.

And plainly the successful organisation of the more universal and penetrating collectivism that is now being forced upon us all, will be frustrated in its most vital aspect unless its organisation is accompanied by the preservative of a new Declaration of the Rights of Man, that must, because of the increasing complexity of the social structure, be more generous, detailed and explicit than any of its predecessors. Such a Declaration must become the common fundamental law of all communities and collectivities assembled under the World Pax. It should be interwoven with the declared war aims of the combatant powers now; it should become the primary fact in any settlement; it should be put before the now combatant states for their approval, their embarrassed silence or their rejection.

In order to be as clear as possible about this, let me submit a draft for your consideration of this proposed Declaration of the Rights of Man - using "man" of course to cover every individual, male or female, of the species. I have endeavoured to bring in everything that is essential and to omit whatever secondary issues can be easily deduced from its general statements. It is a draft for your consideration. Points may have been overlooked and it may contain repetitions and superfluous statements.

"Since a man comes into this world through no fault of his own, since he is manifestly a joint inheritor of the accumulations of the past, and since those accumulations are more than sufficient to justify the claims that are here made for him, it follows:

"(1) That every man without distinction of race, of colour or of professed belief or opinions, is entitled to the nourishment, covering, medical care and attention needed to realise his full possibilities of physical and mental development and to keep him in a state of health from his birth to death.

"(2) That he is entitled to sufficient education to make him a useful and interested citizen, that special education should be so made available as to give him equality of opportunity for the development of his distinctive gifts in the service of mankind, that he should have easy access to information upon all matters of common knowledge throughout his life and enjoy the utmost freedom of discussion, association and worship.

"(3) That he may engage freely in any lawful occupation, earning such pay as the need for his work and the increment it makes to the common welfare may justify. That he is entitled to paid employment and to a free choice whenever there is any variety of employment open to him. He may suggest employment for himself and have his claim publicly considered, accepted or dismissed.

"(4) That he shall have the right to buy or sell without any discriminatory restrictions anything which may be lawfully bought or sold, in such quantities and with such reservations as are compatible with the common welfare."

(Here I will interpolate a comment. We have to bear in mind that in a collectivist state buying and selling to secure income and profit will be not simply needless but impossible. The Stock Exchange, after its career of four-hundred-odd-years, will necessarily vanish with the disappearance of any rational motive either for large accumulations or for hoarding against deprivation and destitution. Long before the age of complete collectivisation arrives, the savings of individuals for later consumption will probably be protected by some development of the Unit Trust System into a public service. They will probably be entitled to interest at such a rate as to compensate for that secular inflation which should go on in a steadily enriched world community. Inheritance and bequest in a community in which the means of production and of all possible monopolisation are collectivised, can concern little else than relatively small, beautiful and intimate objects, which will afford pleasure but no unfair social advantage to the receiver.)

"(5) That he and his personal property lawfully acquired are entitled to police and legal protection from private violence, deprivation, compulsion and intimidation.

"(6) That he may move freely about the world at his own expense. That his private house or apartment or reasonably limited garden enclosure is his castle, which may be entered only with consent, but that he shall have the right to come and go over any kind of country, moorland, mountain, farm, great garden or what not, or upon the seas, lakes and rivers of the world, where his presence will not be destructive of some special use, dangerous to himself nor seriously inconvenient to his fellow-citizens.

"(7) That a man unless he is declared by a competent authority to be a danger to himself and to others through mental abnormality, a declaration which must be annually confirmed, shall not be imprisoned for a longer period than six days without being charged with a definite offence against the law, nor for more than three months without public trial. At the end if the latter period, if he has not been tried and sentenced by due process of law, he shall be released. Nor shall he be conscripted for military, police or any other service to which he has a conscientious objection.

"(Cool That although a man is subject to the free criticism of his fellows, he shall have adequate protection from any lying or misrepresentation that may distress or injure him. All administrative registration and records about a man shall be open to his personal and private inspection. There shall be no secret dossiers in any administrative department. All dossiers shall be accessible to the man concerned and subject to verification and correction at his challenge. A dossier is merely a memorandum; it cannot be used as evidence without proper confirmation in open court.

"(9) That no man shall be subjected to any sort of mutilation or sterilisation except with his own deliberate consent, freely given, nor to bodily assault, except in restraint of his own violence, nor to torture, beating or any other bodily punishment; he shall not be subjected to imprisonment with such an excess of silence, noise, light or darkness as to cause mental suffering, or to imprisonment in infected, verminous or otherwise insanitary quarters, or be put into the company of verminous or infectious people. He shall not be forcibly fed nor prevented from starving himself if he so desire. He shall not be forced to take drugs nor shall they be administered to him without his knowledge and consent. That the extreme punishments to which he may be subjected are rigorous imprisonment for a term of not longer than fifteen years or death."

(Here I would point out that there is nothing in this to prevent any country from abolishing the death penalty any country from abolishing the death penalty. Nor do I assert a general right to commit suicide, because no one can punish a man for doing that. He has escaped. But threats and incompetent attempts to commit suicide belong to an entirely different category. They are indecent and distressing acts that can easily become a serious social nuisance, from which the normal citizen is entitled to protection.)

"(10) That the provisions and principles embodied in this Declaration shall be more fully defined in a code of fundamental human rights which shall be made easily accessible to everyone. This Declaration shall not be qualified nor departed from upon any pretext whatever. It incorporates all previous Declarations of Human Right. Henceforth for a new ear it is the fundamental law for mankind throughout the whole world.

"No treaty and no law affecting these primary rights shall be binding upon any man or province or administrative division of the community, that has not been made openly, by and with the active or tacit acquiescence of every adult citizen concerned, either given by a direct majority vote of his publicly elected representatives. In matters of collective behaviour it is by the majority decision men must abide. No administration, under a pretext of urgency, convenience or the like, shall be entrusted with powers to create or further define offences or set up by-laws, which will in any way infringe the rights and liberties here asserted. All legislation must be public and definite. No secret treaties shall be binding on individuals, organisations or communities. No orders in council or the like, which extend the application of a law, shall be permitted. There is no source of law but the people, and since life flows on constantly to new citizens, no generation of the people can in whole or in part surrender or delegate the legislative power inherent in mankind."

There, I think, is something that keener minds than mine may polish into a working Declaration which would in the most effective manner begin that restoration of confidence of which the world stands in need. Much of it might be better phrased, but I think it embodies the general good-will in mankind from pole to pole. It is certainly what we all want for ourselves. It could be a very potent instrument indeed in the present phase of human affairs. It is necessary and it is acceptable. Incorporate that in your peace treaties and articles of federation, I would say, and you will have a firm foundation, which will continually grow firmer, for the fearless cosmopolitan life of a new world order. You will never get that order without some such document. It is the missing key to endless contemporary difficulties.

And if we, the virtuous democracies, are not fighting for these common human rights, then what in the name of the nobility and gentry, the Crown and the Established Church, the City, The Times and the Army and Navy Club, are we common British peoples fighting for?

25  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 08:01:17 pm
Chapter 9


LET US RESTATE THE general conclusions to which our preceding argument has brought us.

The establishment of a progressive world socialism in which the freedoms, health and happiness of every individual are protected by a universal law based on a re-declaration of the rights of man, and wherein there is the utmost liberty of thought, criticism and suggestion, is the plain, rational objective before us now. Only the effective realisation of this objective can establish peace on earth and arrest the present march of human affairs to misery and destruction. We cannot reiterate this objective too clearly and too frequently. The triangle of collectivisation, law and knowledge should embody the common purpose of all mankind.

But between us and that goal intervenes the vast and deepening disorders of our time. The new order cannot be brought into existence without a gigantic and more or less co-ordinated effort of the saner and abler elements in the human population. The thing cannot be done rapidly and melodramatically. That effort must supply the frame for all sane social and political activities and a practical criterion for all religious and educational associations. But since our world is multitudinously varied and confused, it is impossible to narrow down this new revolutionary movement to any single class, organisation or Party. It is too great a thing for that. It will in its expansion produce and perhaps discard a number of organisations and Parties, converging upon its ultimate objective. Consequently, in order to review the social and political activities of sane, clear-headed people to-day, we have to deal with them piecemeal from a number of points of view. We have to consider an advance upon a long and various front.

Let us begin then with the problem of sanity in face of the political methods of our time. What are we to do as voting citizens? There I think the history of the so-called democracies in the past half-century is fairly conclusive. Our present electoral methods which give no choice but a bilateral choice to the citizen and so force a two-party system upon him, is a mere caricature of representative government. It has produced upon both sides of the Atlantic, big, stupid, and corrupt party machines. That was bound to happen and yet to this day there is a sort of shyness in the minds of young men interested in politics when it comes to discussing Proportional Representation. They think it is a "bit faddy". At best it is a side issue. Party politicians strive to maintain that bashfulness, because they know quite clearly that what is called Proportional Representation with the single transferable vote in large constituencies, returning a dozen members or more, is extinction for the mere party hack and destruction for party organisations.

The machine system in the United States is more elaborate, more deeply entrenched legally in the Constitution and illegally in the spoils system, and it may prove more difficult to modernise than the British, which is based on an outworn caste tradition. But both Parliament and Congress are essentially similar in their fundamental quality. They trade in titles, concessions and the public welfare, and they are only amenable in the rough and at long last to the movements of public opinion. It is an open question whether they are much more responsive to popular feeling than the Dictators we denounce so unreservedly as the antithesis of democracy. They betray a great disregard of mass responses. They explain less. They disregard more. The Dictators have to go on talking and talking, not always truthfully but they have to talk. A dumb Dictator is inconceivable.

In such times of extensive stress and crisis as the present, the baffling slowness, inefficiency and wastefulness of the party system become so manifest that some of its worst pretences are put aside. The party game is suspended. His Majesty’s Opposition abandons the pose of safeguarding the interests of the common citizens from those scoundrels upon the government benches; Republican and Democrats begin to cross the party line to discuss the new situation. Even the men who live professionally by the Parliamentary (Congressional) imposture, abandon it if they are sufficiently frightened by the posture of affairs. The appearance of an All-Party National Government in Great Britain before very long seems inevitable.

Great Britain has in effect gone socialist in a couple of months; she is also suspending party politics. Just as the United States did in the great slump. And in both cases this has happened because the rottenness and inefficiency of party politics stank to heaven in the face of danger. And since in both cases Party Government threw up its hands and bolted, is there any conceivable reason why we should let it come back at any appearance of victory or recovery, why we should not go ahead from where we are to a less impromptu socialist regime under a permanent non-party administration, to the reality if not to the form of a permanent socialist government?

Now here I have nothing to suggest about America. I have never, for example, tried to work out the consequences of the absence of executive ministers from the legislature. I am inclined to think that is one of the weak points in the Constitution and that the English usage which exposes the minister to question time in the House and makes him a prime mover in legislation affecting his department, is a less complicated and therefore more democratic arrangement than the American one. And the powers and functions of the President and the Senate are so different from the consolidated powers of Cabinet and Prime Minister, that even when an Englishman has industriously "mugged up" the constitutional points, he is still almost as much at a loss to get the living reality as he would be if he were shown the score of an opera before hearing it played or the blue prints of a machine he had never seen in action. Very few Europeans understand the history of Woodrow Wilson, the Senate and his League of Nations. They think that "America", which they imagine as a large single individual, planted the latter institution upon Europe and then deliberately shuffled out of her responsibility for it, and they will never think otherwise. And they think that "America" kept out of the war to the very limit of decency, overcharged us for munitions that contributed to the common victory, and made a grievance because the consequent debt was not discharged. They talk like that while Americans talk as if no English were killed between 1914 and 1918 (we had 800,000 dead) until the noble American conscripts came forward to die for them (to the tune of about 50,000). Savour for example even the title of Quincy Howe’s England expects every American to do his Duty. It’s the meanest of titles, but many Americans seem to like it.

On my desk as I write is a pamphlet by a Mr Robert Randall, nicely cyclostyled and got up. Which urges a common attack on the United States as a solution of the problem of Europe. No countries will ever feel united unless they have a common enemy, and the natural common enemy for Europe, it is declared, is the United States. So to bring about the United States of Europe we are to begin by denouncing the Monroe doctrine. I believe in the honesty and good intentions of Mr Robert Randall; he is, I am sure, no more in the pay of Germany, direct or indirect, than Mr Quincy Howe or Mr Harry Elmer Barnes; but could the most brilliant of Nazi war propagandists devise a more effective estranging suggestion? . . .

But I wander from my topic. I do not know how sane men in America are going to set about relaxing the stranglehold of the Constitution, get control of their own country out of the hands of those lumpish, solemnly cunning politicians with their great strong jowls developed by chewing-gum and orotund speaking, whose photographs add a real element of frightfulness to the pages of Time, how they are going to abolish the spoils system, discover, and educate to expand a competent civil service able to redeem the hampered promises of the New Deal and pull America into line with the reconstruction of the rest of the world. But I perceive that in politics and indeed in most things, the underlying humour and sanity of Americans are apt to find a way round and do the impossible, and I have as little doubt they will manage it somehow as I have when I see a street performer on his little chair and carpet, all tied up with chains, waiting until there are sufficient pennies in the hat to justify exertion.

These differences in method, pace and tradition are a great misfortune to the whole English-speaking world. We English people do not respect Americans enough; we are too disposed to think they are all Quincy Howes and Harry Elmer Barneses and Borahs and suchlike, conceited and suspicious anti-British monomaniacs, who must be humoured at any cost; which is why we are never so frank and rude with them as they deserve. But the more we must contain ourselves the less we love them. Real brothers can curse each other and keep friends. Someday Britannia will give Columbia a piece of her mind, and that may clear the air. Said an exasperated Englishman to me a day or so ago: "I pray to God they keep out of the end of this war anyhow. We shall never hear the last of it if they don’t. . . ."

Yet at a different pace our two people are travelling towards identical ends, and it is lamentable that a difference of accent and idiom should do more mischief than a difference of language.

So far as Great Britain goes things are nearer and closer to me, and it seems to me that there is an excellent opportunity now to catch the country in a state of socialisation and suspend party politics, and keep it at that. It is a logical but often disregarded corollary of the virtual creation of All-Party National Governments and suspension of electoral contests, that since there is no Opposition, party criticism should give place to individual criticism of ministers, and instead of throwing out governments we should set ourselves to throw out individual administrative failures. We need no longer confine our choice of public servants to political careerists. We can insist upon men who have done things and can do things, and whenever an election occurs we can organise a block of non-party voters who will vote it possible for an outsider of proved ability, and will at any rate insist on a clear statement from every Parliamentary candidate of the concrete service, if any, he has done the country, of his past and present financial entanglements and his family relationships and of any title he possesses. We can get these necessary particulars published and note what newspapers decline to do so. And if there are still only politicians to vote for, we can at least vote and spoil our voting cards by way of protest.

At present we see one public service after another in a mess through the incompetent handling of some party hack and the unseen activities of interested parties. People are asking already why Sir Arthur Salter is not in control of Allied Shipping again, Sir John Orr directing our food supply with perhaps Sir Fredrick Keeble to help him, Sir Robert Vansittart in the Foreign Office. We want to know the individuals responsible for the incapacity of our Intelligence and Propaganda Ministries, so that we may induce them to quit public life. It would be quite easy now to excite a number of anxious people with a cry for "Competence not Party".

Most people in the British Isles are heartily sick of Mr Chamberlain and his government, but they cannot face up to a political split in wartime, and Mr Chamberlain sticks to office with all the pertinacity of a Barnacle. But if we do not attack the government as a whole, but individual ministers, and if we replace them one by one, we shall presently have a government so rejuvenated that even Mr Chamberlain will realise and accept his superannuation. Quite a small body of public-spirited people could organise an active Vigilance Society to keep these ideas before the mass of voters and begin the elimination of inferior elements from our public life. This would be a practical job of primary importance in our political regeneration. It would lead directly to a new and more efficient political structure to carry on after the present war has collapsed or otherwise ended.

Following upon this campaign for the conclusive interment of the played-out party system, there comes the necessity for a much more strenuous search for administrative and technical ability throughout the country. We do not want to miss a single youngster who can be of use in the great business of making over Great Britain, which has been so rudely, clumsily and wastefully socialised by our war perturbations, so that it may become a permanently efficient system.

And from the base of the educational pyramid up to its apex of higher education of teachers, heads of departments and research, there is need for such a quickening of minds and methods as only a more or less organised movement of sanely critical men can bring about. We want ministers now of the highest quality in every department, but in no department of public life is a man of creative understanding, bold initiative and administrative power so necessary as in the Education Ministry.

So tranquil and unobtrusive has been the flow of educational affairs in the British Empire that it seems almost scandalous, and it is certainly "vulgar", to suggest that we need an educational Ginger Group to discover and support such a minister. We want a Minister of Education who can shock teachers into self-examination, electrify and rejuvenate old dons or put them away in ivory towers, and stimulate the younger ones. Under the party system the Education Ministry has always been a restful corner for some deserving party politician with an abject respect for his Alma Mater and the permanent officials. During war time, when other departments wake up, the Education Department sinks into deeper lethargy. One cannot recall a single British Education Minister, since there have been such things in our island story as Ministers for Education, who signified anything at all educationally or did anything of his own impulse that was in the least worth while.

Suppose we found a live one - soon - and let him rip!

There again is something to be done far more revolutionary than throwing bombs at innocent policemen or assassinating harmless potentates or ex-potentates. And yet it is only asking that an existing department be what it pretends to be.

A third direction in which any gathering accumulation of sanity should direct its attention is the clumsy unfairness and indirectness of our present methods of expropriating the former well-to-do classes. The only observable principle seems to be widows and children first. Socialisation is being effected in Britain and America alike not by frank expropriation (with or without compensation) but by increasing government control and increasing taxation. Both our great communities are going into socialism backward and without ever looking round. This is good in so far as that technical experience and directive ability is changed over step by step from entirely private employment to public service, and on that side sane and helpful citizens have little to do beyond making the process conscious of itself and the public aware of the real nature of the change, but it is bad in its indiscriminate destruction of savings, which are the most exposed and vulnerable side of the old system. They are expropriated by profit-control and taxation alike, and at the same time they suffer in purchasing power by the acceleration of that process of monetary inflation which is the unavoidable readjustment, the petition in bankruptcy, of a community that has overspent.

The shareholding class dwindles and dies; widows and orphans, the old who are past work and the infirm who are incapable of it, are exposed in their declining years to a painful shrinkage of their modes of living; there is no doubt a diminution of social waste, but also there is an indirect impoverishment of free opinion and free scientific and artistic initiative as the endless societies, institutions and services which have enriched life for us and been very largely supported by voluntary subscriptions, shrivel. At present a large proportion of our scientific, artistic, literary and social workers are educated out of the private savings fund. In a class-war revolution these economically very defenceless but socially very convenient people are subjected to vindictive humiliation - it is viewed as a great triumph for their meaner neighbours - but a revolution sanely conducted will probably devise a system of terminable annuities and compensation, and of assistance to once voluntary associations, which will ease off the social dislocations due to the disappearance of one stratum of relatively free and independent people, before its successors, that is to say the growing class of retired officials, public administrators and so forth, find their feet and develop their own methods of assertion and enterprise.
26  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 08:00:46 pm
Chapter 8


LET US RETURN TO our main purpose, which is to examine the way in which we are to face up to this impending World Revolution.

To many minds this idea of Revolution is almost inseparable from visions of street barricades made of paving-stones and overturned vehicles, ragged mobs armed with impromptu weapons and inspired by defiant songs, prisons broken and a general jail delivery, palaces stormed, a great hunting of ladies and gentlemen, decapitated but still beautiful heads on pikes, regicides of the most sinister quality, the busy guillotine, a crescendo of disorder ending in a whiff of grapeshot. . . .

That was one type of Revolution. It is what one might call the Catholic type of Revolution, that it is to say it is the ultimate phase of a long period of Catholic living and teaching. People do not realise this and some will be indignant at its being stated so barely. Yet the facts stare us in the face, common knowledge, not to be denied. That furious, hungry, desperate, brutal mob was the outcome of generations of Catholic rule, Catholic morality and Catholic education. The King of France was the "Most Christian King, the eldest son of the Church", he was master of the economic and financial life of the community, and the Catholic Church controlled the intellectual life of the community and the education of the people absolutely. That mob was the outcome. It is absurd to parrot that Christianity has never been tried. Christianity in its most highly developed form has been tried and tried again. It was tried for centuries fully and completely, in Spain, France, Italy. It was responsible for the filth and chronic pestilence and famine of medieval England. It inculcated purity but it never inculcated cleanliness. Catholic Christianity had practically unchallenged power in France for generations. It was free to teach as it chose and as much as it chose. It dominated the common life entirely. The Catholic system in France cannot have reaped anything it did not sow, for no other sowers were allowed. That hideous mob of murderous ragamuffins we are so familiar with in pictures of the period, was the final harvest of its regime.

The more Catholic reactionaries revile the insurgent common people of the first French Revolution, the more they condemn themselves. It is the most impudent perversion of reality for them to snivel about the guillotine and the tumbrils, as though these were not purely Catholic products, as though they came in suddenly from outside to wreck a genteel Paradise. They were the last stage of the systematic injustice and ignorance of a strictly Catholic regime. One phase succeeded another with relentless logic. The Maseillaise completed the life-cycle of Catholicism.

In Spain too and in Mexico we have seen undisputed educational and moral Catholic ascendancy, the Church with a free hand, producing a similar uprush of blind resentment. The crowds there also were cruel and blasphemous; but Catholicism cannot complain; for Catholicism hatched them. Priests and nuns who had been the sole teachers of the people were insulted and outraged and churches defiled. Surely if the Church is anything like what it claims to be, the people would have loved it. They would not have behaved as though sacrilege was a gratifying relief.

But these Catholic Revolutions are only specimens of one single type of Revolution. A Revolution need not be a spontaneous storm of indignation against intolerable indignities and deprivations. It can take quite other forms.

As a second variety of Revolution, which is in sharp contrast with the indignation-revolt in which so many periods of unchallenged Catholic ascendancy have ended, we may take what we may call the "revolution conspiracy", in which a number of people set about organising the forces of discomfort and resentment and loosening the grip of the government’s forces, in order to bring about a fundamental change of system. The ideal of this type is the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, provided it is a little simplified and misunderstood. This, reduced to a working theory by its advocates, is conceived of as a systematic cultivation of a public state of mind favourable to a Revolution together with an inner circle of preparation for a "seizure of power". Quite a number of Communist and other leftish writers, bright young men, without much political experience, have let their imaginations loose upon the "technique" of such an adventure. They have brought the Nazi and Fascist Revolutions into the material for their studies. Modern social structure with its concentration of directive, information and coercive power about radio stations, telephone exchangers, newspaper offices, police stations, arsenals and the like, lends itself to quasi-gangster exploitation of this type. There is a great rushing about and occupation of key centres, an organised capture, imprisonment or murder of possible opponents, and the country is confronted with fait accompli. The regimentation of the more or less reluctant population follows.

But a Revolution need be neither an explosion nor a coup d’état. And the Revolution that lies before us now as the only hopeful alternative to chaos, either directly or after an interlude of world communism, is to be attained, if it is attained at all, by neither of these methods. The first is too rhetorical and chaotic and leads simply to a Champion and tyranny; the second is too conspiratorial and leads through an obscure struggle of masterful personalities to a similar end. Neither is lucid enough and deliberate enough to achieve a permanent change in the form and texture of human affairs.

An altogether different type of Revolution may or may not be possible. No one can say that it is possible unless it is tried, but one can say with some assurance that unless it can be achieved the outlook for mankind for many generations at least is hopeless. The new Revolution aims essentially at a change in directive ideas. In its completeness it is an untried method.

It depends for its success upon whether a sufficient number of minds can be brought to realise that the choice before us now is not a choice between further revolution or more or less reactionary conservatism, but a choice between so carrying on and so organising the process of change in our affairs as to produce a new world order, or suffering an entire and perhaps irreparable social collapse. Our argument throughout has been that things have gone too far ever to be put back again to any similitude of what they have been. We can no more dream of remaining where we are than think of going back in the middle of a dive. We must go trough with these present changes, adapt ourselves to them, adjust ourselves to the plunge, or be destroyed by them. We must go through these changes just as we must go through this ill-conceived war, because there is as yet no possible end for it.

There will be no possible way of ending it until the new Revolution defines itself. If it is patched up now without a clear-headed settlement understood and accepted throughout the world, we shall have only the simulacrum of a peace. A patched-up peace now will not even save us from the horrors of war, it will postpone them only to aggravate them in a few years time. You cannot end this war yet, you can at best adjourn it.

The reorganisation of the world has at first to be mainly the work of a "movement" or a Party or a religion or cult, whatever we choose to call it. We may call it New Liberalism or the New Radicalism or what not. It will not be a close-knit organisation, toeing the Party line and so forth. It may be a very loose-knit and many faceted, but if a sufficient number of minds throughout the world, irrespective of race, origin or economic and social habituations, can be brought to the free and candid recognition of the essentials of the human problem, then their effective collaboration in a conscious, explicit and open effort to reconstruct human society will ensue.

And to begin with they will do all they can to spread and perfect this conception of a new world order, which they will regard as the only working frame for their activities, while at the same time they will set themselves to discover and associate with themselves, everyone, everywhere, who is intellectually able to grasp the same broad ideas and morally disposed to realise them.

The distribution of this essential conception one may call propaganda, but in reality it is education. The opening phase of this new type of Revolution must involve therefore a campaign for re-invigorated and modernised education throughout the world, an education that will have the same ratio to the education of a couple of hundred years ago, as the electric lighting of a contemporary city has to the chandeliers and oil lamps of the same period. On its present mental levels humanity can do no better than what it is doing now.

Vitalising education is only possible when it is under the influence of people who are themselves learning. It is inseparable from the modern idea of education that it should be knit up to incessant research. We say research rather than science. It is the better word because it is free from any suggestion of that finality which means dogmatism and death.

All education tends to become stylistic and sterile unless it is kept in close touch with experimental verification and practical work, and consequently this new movement of revolutionary initiative, must at the same time be sustaining realistic political and social activities and working steadily for the collectivisation of governments and economic life. The intellectual movement will be only the initiatory and correlating part of the new revolutionary drive. These practical activities must be various. Everyone engaged in them must be thinking for himself and not waiting for orders. The only dictatorship he will recognise is the dictatorship of the plain understanding and the invincible fact.

And if this culminating Revolution is to be accomplished, then the participation of every conceivable sort of human+being who has the mental grasp to see these broad realities of the world situation and the moral quality to do something about it, must be welcomed.

Previous revolutionary thrusts have been vitiated by bad psychology. They have given great play to the gratification of the inferiority complexes that arise out of class disadvantages. It is no doubt very unjust that anyone should be better educated, healthier and less fearful of the world than anyone else, but that is no reason why the new Revolution should not make the fullest use of the health, education, vigour and courage of the fortunate. The Revolution we are contemplating will aim at abolishing the bitterness of frustration. But certainly it will do nothing to avenge it. Nothing whatever. Let the dead past punish its dead.

It is one of the most vicious streaks in the Marxist teaching to suggest that all people of wealth and capacity living in a community in which unco-ordinated private enterprise plays a large part are necessarily demoralised by the advantages they enjoy and that they must be dispossessed by the worker and peasant, who are presented as endowed with a collective virtue capable of running all the complex machinery of a modern community. But the staring truth of the matter is that an unco-ordinated scramble between individuals and nations alike, demoralises all concerned. Everyone is corrupted, the filching tramp by the roadside, the servile hand-kissing peasant of Eastern Europe, the dole-bribed loafer, as much as the woman who marries for money, the company promoter, the industrial organiser, the rent-exacting landlord and the diplomatic agent. When the social atmosphere is tainted everybody is ill.

Wealth, personal freedom and education, may and do produce wasters and oppressive people, but they may also release creative and administrative minds to opportunity. The history of science and invention before the nineteenth century confirms this. On the whole if we are to assume there is anything good in humanity at all, it is more reasonable to expect it to appear when there is most opportunity.

And in further confutation of the Marxist caricature of human motives, we have the very considerable number of young people drawn from middle-class and upper-class homes, who figure in the extreme left movement everywhere. It is their moral reaction to the "stuffiness" and social ineffectiveness of their parents and their own sort of people. They seek an outlet for their abilities that is not gainful but serviceable. Many have sought an honourable life - and often found it, and death with it - in the struggle against the Catholics and their Moorish and Fascist helpers in Spain.

It is a misfortune of their generation, that so many of them have fallen into the mental traps of Marxism. It has been my absurd experience to encounter noisy meetings of expensive young men at Oxford, not one of them stunted physically as I was by twenty years of under-nourishment and devitalised upbringing, all pretending to be rough-hewn collarless proletarians in shocked revolt against my bourgeois tyranny and the modest comfort of my declining years, and reciting the ridiculous class-war phrases by which they protected their minds from any recognition of the realities of the case. But though that attitude demonstrates the unstimulating education of their preparatory and public schools, which had thrown them thus uncritical and emotional into the problems of the undergraduate life, it does not detract from the fact that they had found the idea of abandoning themselves to a revolutionary reconstruction of society, that promised to end its enormous waste of potential happiness and achievement, extremely attractive, notwithstanding that their own advantages seemed to be reasonably secure.

Faced with the immediate approach of discomfort, indignity, wasted years, mutilation - death is soon over but one wakes up again to mutilation every morning - because of this ill-conceived war; faced also by the reversion of Russia to autocracy and the fiscal extinction of most of the social advantages of their families; these young people with a leftish twist are likely not only to do some very profitable re-examination of their own possibilities but also to find themselves joined in that re-examination by a very considerable number of others who have hitherto been repelled by the obvious foolishness and insincerity of the hammer and sickle symbols (workers and peasants of Oxford!) and the exasperating dogmatism of the orthodox Marxist. And may not these young people, instead of waiting to be overtaken by an insurrectionary revolution from which they will emerge greasy, unshaven, class-conscious and in incessant danger of liquidation, decide that before the Revolution gets hold of them they will get hold of the Revolution and save it from the inefficiency, mental distortions, disappointments and frustrations that have over-taken it in Russia.

This new and complete Revolution we contemplate can be defined in a very few words. It is (a) outright world-socialism, scientifically planned and directed, plus (b) a sustained insistence upon law, law based on a fuller, more jealously conceived resentment of the personal Rights of Man, plus (c) the completest freedom of speech, criticism and publication, and sedulous expansion of the educational organisation to the ever-growing demands of the new order. What we may call the eastern or Bolshevik Collectivism, the Revolution of the Internationale, has failed to achieve even the first of these three items and it has never even attempted the other two.

Putting it at its compactest, it is the triangle of Socialism, Law and Knowledge, which frames the Revolution which may yet save the world.

Socialism! Become outright collectivists? Very few men of the more fortunate classes in our old collapsing society who are over fifty will be able to readjust their minds to that. It will seem an entirely repulsive suggestion to them. (The average age of the British Cabinet at the present time is well over sixty.) But it need not be repulsive at all to their sons. They will be impoverished anyhow. The stars in their courses are seeing to that. And that will help them greatly to realise that an administrative control to administrative participation and then to direct administration are easy steps. They are being taken now, first in one matter and then in another. On both sides of the Atlantic. Reluctantly and often very disingenuously and against energetic but diminishing resistances. Great Britain, like America, may become a Socialist system with a definitive Revolution, protesting all the time that it is doing nothing of the sort.

In Britain we have now no distinctively educated class, but all up and down the social scale there are well-read men and women who have thought intensely upon these great problems we have been discussing. To many of them and maybe to enough of them to start the avalanche of purpose that will certainly develop from a clear and determined beginning, this conception of Revolution to evoke a liberal collectivised world may appeal. And so at last we narrow down our enquiry to an examination of what has to be done now to save the Revolution, what the movement or its Party - so far as it may use the semblance of a Party will do, what its Policy will be. Hitherto we have been demonstrating why a reasonable man, of any race or language anywhere, should become a "Western" Revolutionary. We have now to review the immediate activities to which he can give himself.
27  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 08:00:17 pm
Chapter 7


LET US NOW TAKE up certain vaguely constructive proposals which seem at present to be very much in people’s minds. They find their cardinal expression in a book called Union Now by Mr Clarence K. Streit, which has launched the magic word "Federation" upon the world. The "democracies" of the world are to get together upon a sort of enlargement of the Federal constitution of the United States (which produced one of the bloodiest civil wars in all history) and then all will be well with us.

Let us consider whether this word "Federation" is of any value in organising the Western Revolution. I would suggest it is. I think it may be a means of mental release for many people who would otherwise have remained dully resistant to any sort of change.

This Federation project has an air of reasonableness. It is attractive to a number of influential people who wish with the minimum of adaptation to remain influential in a changing world, and particularly is it attractive to what I may call the liberal-conservative elements of the prosperous classes in America and Great Britain and the Oslo countries, because it puts the most difficult aspect of the problem, the need for collective socialisation, so completely in the background that it can be ignored. This enables them to take quite a bright and hopeful view of the future without any serious hindrance to their present preoccupations.

They think that Federation, reasonably defined, may suspend the possibility of war for a considerable period and so lighten the burden of taxation that the present crushing demands on them will relax and they will be able to resume, on a slightly more economical scale perhaps, their former way of living. Everything that gives them hope and self-respect and preserves their homes from the worst indignities of panic, appeasement, treason-hunting and the rest of it, is to be encouraged, and meanwhile their sons will have time to think and it may be possible so to search, ransack and rationalise the Streit project as to make a genuine and workable scheme for the socialisation of the world.

In The Fate of Homo sapiens I examined the word "democracy" with some care, since it already seemed likely that great quantities of our young men were to be asked to cripple and risk their lives for its sake. I showed that it was still a very incompletely realised aspiration, that its complete development involved socialism and a level of education and information attained as yet by no community in the world. Mr Streit gives a looser, more rhetorical statement - a more idealistic statement, shall we say? - of his conception of democracy, the sort of statement that would be considered wildly exaggerated even if it was war propaganda, and though unhappily it is remote from any achieved reality, he proceeds without further enquiry as if it were a description of existing realities in what he calls the "democracies" of the world. In them he imagines he finds "governments of the people, by the people, for the people".

In the book I have already cited I discuss What is Democracy? And Where is Democracy? I do my best there to bring Mr Streit down to the harsh and difficult facts of the case. I will go now a little more into particulars in my examination of his project.

His "founder democracies" are to be: "The American Union, the British Commonwealth (specifically the United Kingdom, the Federal Dominion of Canada, the Commonwealth of Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Ireland), the French Republic, Belgium, the Netherlands, the Swiss Confederation, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland."

Scarcely one of these, as I have shown in that former book, is really a fully working democracy. And the Union of South Africa is a particularly bad and dangerous case of race tyranny. Ireland is an incipient religious war and not one country but two. Poland, I note, does not come into Mr Streit’s list of democracies at all. His book was written in 1938 when Poland was a totalitarian country holding, in defiance of the League of Nations, Vilna, which it had taken from Lithuania, large areas of non-Polish country it had conquered from Russia, and fragments gained by the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia. It only became a democracy, even technically and for a brief period, before its collapse in September 1939, when Mr Chamberlain was so foolish as to drag the British Empire into a costly and perilous war, on its behalf. But that is by the way. None of these fifteen (or ten) "founder democracies" are really democracies at all. So we start badly. But they might be made socialist democracies and their federation might be made something very real indeed - at a price. The U.S.S.R. is a federated socialist system, which has shown a fairly successful political solidarity during the past two decades, whatever else it has done or failed to do.

Now let us help Mr Streit to convert his "federation" from a noble but extremely rhetorical aspiration into a living reality. He is aware that this must be done at a price, but I want to suggest that that price is, from what I judge to be his point of view, far greater, and the change much simpler, more general and possibly even closer at hand, than he supposes. He is disposed to appeal to existing administrative organisations, and it is questionable whether they are the right people to execute his designs. One of the difficulties he glosses over is the possible reluctance of the India Office to hand over the control of India (Ceylon and Burma he does not mention) to the new Federation Government, which would also, I presume, take charge of the fairly well governed and happy fifty-odd million people of the Dutch East Indies, the French colonial empire, the West Indies and so on. This, unless he proposes merely to re-christen the India Office, etc., is asking for an immense outbreak of honesty and competence on the part of the new Federal officialdom. It is also treating the possible contribution of these five or six hundred million of dusky peoples to the new order with a levity inconsistent with democratic ideals.

Quite a lot of these people have brains which are as good or better than normal European brains. You could educate the whole world to the not very exalted level of a Cambridge graduate in a single lifetime, if you had schools, colleges, apparatus and teachers enough. The radio, the cinema, the gramophone, the improvements in both production and distribution, have made it possible to increase the range and effectiveness of a gifted teacher a thousandfold. We have seen intensive war preparations galore, but no one has dreamt yet of an intensive educational effort. None of us really like to see other people being educated. They may be getting an advantage over our privileged selves. Suppose we overcome that primitive jealousy. Suppose we speed up - as we are now physically able to do - the education and enfranchisement of these huge undeveloped reservoirs of human capacity. Suppose we tack that on the Union Now idea. Suppose we stipulate that Federation, wherever it extends, means a New and Powerful Education. In Bengal, in Java, in the Congo Free State, quite as much as in Tennessee or Georgia or Scotland or Ireland. Suppose we think a little less about "gradual enfranchisement" by votes and experiments in local autonomy and all these old ideas, and a little more about the enfranchisement of the mind. Suppose we drop that old cant about politically immature peoples.

There is one direction in which Mr Streit’s proposals are open to improvement. Let us turn to another in which he does not seem to have realised all the implications of his proposal. This great Union is to have a union money and a union customs-free economy. What follows upon that? More I think than he realises.

There is one aspect of money to which the majority of those that discuss it seem to be incurably blind. You cannot have a theory of money or any plan about money by itself in the air. Money is not a thing in itself; it is a working part of an economic system. Money varies in its nature with the laws and ideas of property in a community. As a community moves towards collectivism and communism, for example, money simplifies out. Money is a necessary in a communism as it is in any other system, but its function therein is at its simplest. Payment in kind to the worker gives him no freedom of choice among the goods the community produces. Money does. Money becomes the incentive that "works the worker" and nothing more.

But directly you allow individuals not only to obtain goods for consumption, but also to obtain credit to produce material for types of production outside the staple productions of the state, the question of credit and debt arises and money becomes more complicated. With every liberation of this or that product or service from collective control to business or experimental exploitation, the play of the money system enlarges and the laws regulating what you may take for it, the company laws, bankruptcy laws and so forth increase. In any highly developed collective system the administration will certainly have to give credits for hopeful experimental enterprises. When the system is not collectivism, monetary operations for gain are bound to creep in and become more and more complicated. Where most of the substantial side of life is entrusted to uncoordinated private enterprise, the intricacy of the money apparatus increases enormously. Monetary manipulation becomes a greater and greater factor in the competitive struggle, not only between individuals and firms, but between states. As Mr Streit himself shows, in an excellent discussion of the abandonment of the gold standard, inflation and deflation become devices in international competition. Money becomes strategic, just as pipe lines and railways can become strategic.

This being so it is plain that for the Federal Union a common money means an identical economic life throughout the Union. And this too is implied also in Mr Streit’s "customs-free" economy. It is impossible to have a common money when a dollar or a pound, or whatever it is, can buy this, that or the other advantage in one state and is debarred from anything but bare purchases for consumption in another. So that this Federal Union is bound to be a uniform economic system. There can be only very slight variations in the control of economic life.

In the preceding sections the implacable forces that make for the collectivisation of the world or disaster, have been exposed. It follows that "Federation" means practically uniform socialism within the Federal limits, leading, as state after state is incorporated, to world socialism. There manifestly we carry Mr Streit farther than he realises he goes - as yet. For it is fairly evident that he is under the impression that a large measure of independent private business is to go on throughout the Union. I doubt if he imagines it is necessary to go beyond the partial socialisation already achieved by the New Deal. But we have assembled evidence to show that the profit scramble, the wild days of uncorrelated "business" are over for ever.

And again though he realises and states very clearly that governments are made for man and not man for governments, though he applauds the great declarations of the Convention that created the American Constitution, wherein "we the people of the United States" overrode the haggling of the separate states and established the American Federal Constitution, nevertheless he is curiously chary of superseding any existing legal governments in the present world. He is chary of talking of "We the people of the world". But many of us are coming to realise that all existing governments have to go into the melting pot, we believe that it is a world revolution which is upon us, and that in the great struggle to evoke a Westernised World Socialism, contemporary governments may vanish like straw hats in the rapids of Niagara. Mr Streit, however, becomes extraordinarily legal-minded at this stage. I do not think that he realises the forces of destruction that are gathering and so I think he hesitates to plan a reconstruction upon anything like the scale that may become possible.

He evades even the obvious necessity that under a Federal Government the monarchies of Great Britain, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Holland, if they survive at all, must becomes like the mediatised sovereigns of the component states of the former German Empire, mere ceremonial vestiges. Perhaps he thinks that, but he does not say it outright. I do not know if he has pondered the New York World Fair of 1939 nor the significance of the Royal Visit to America in that year, and thought how much there is in the British system that would have to be abandoned if his Federation is to become a reality. In most of the implications of the word, it must cease to be "British". His Illustrative Constitution is achieved with an altogether forensic disregard of the fundamental changes in human conditions to which we have to adapt ourselves or perish. He thinks of war by itself and not as an eruption due to deeper maladaptations. But if we push his earlier stipulations to their necessary completion, we need not trouble very much about that sample constitution of his, which is to adjust the balance so fairly among the constituent states. The abolition of distance must inevitably substitute functional associations and loyalties for local attributions, if human society does not break up altogether. The local divisions will melt into a world collectivity and the main conflicts in a progressively unifying Federation are much more likely to be these between different world-wide types and associations of workers.

So far with Union Now. One of Mr Streit’s outstanding merits is that he has had the courage to make definite proposals on which we can bite. I doubt if a European could have produced any such book. Its naïve political legalism, its idea of salvation by constitution, and its manifest faith in the magic beneficence of private enterprise, are distinctly in the vein of an American, almost a pre-New Deal American, who has become, if anything, more American, through his experiences of the deepening disorder of Europe. So many Americans still look on at world affairs like spectators at a ball game who are capable of vociferous participation but still have no real sense of participation; they do not realise that the ground is moving under their seats also, and that the social revolution is breaking surface to engulf them in their turn. To most of us - to most of us over forty at any rate - the idea of a fundamental change in our way of life is so unpalatable that we resist it to the last moment.

Mr Streit betrays at times as vivid a sense of advancing social collapse as I have, but it has still to occur to him that that collapse may be conclusive. There may be dark ages, a relapse into barbarism, but somewhen and somehow he thinks man must recover. George Bernard Shaw has recently been saying the same thing.

It may be worse that that.

I have given Mr Streit scarcely a word of praise, because that would be beside the mark here. He wrote his book sincerely as a genuine contribution to the unsystematic world conference that is now going on, admitting the possibility of error, demanding criticism, and I have dealt with it in that spirit.

Unfortunately his word has gone much further than his book. His book says definite things and even when one disagrees with it, it is good as a point of departure. But a number of people have caught up this word "Federation", and our minds are distracted by a multitude of appeals to support Federal projects with the most various content or with no content at all.

All the scores and hundreds of thousands of nice people who are signing peace pledges and so forth a few years ago, without the slightest attempt in the world to understand what they meant by peace, are now echoing this new magic word with as little conception of any content for it. They did not realise that peace means so complicated and difficult an ordering and balancing of human society that it has never been sustained since man became man, and that we have wars and preparatory interludes between wars because that is a much simpler and easier sequence for our wilful, muddle-headed, suspicious and aggressive species. These people still think we can get this new and wonderful state of affairs just by clamouring for it.

And having failed to get peace by saying "Peace" over and over again, they are now with an immense sense of discovery saying "Federation". What must happen to men in conspicuous public positions I do not know, but even an irresponsible literary man like myself finds himself inundated with innumerable lengthy private letters, hysterical post-cards, pamphlets from budding organisations, "declarations" to sign, demands for subscriptions, all in the name of the new panacea, all as vain and unproductive as the bleating of lost sheep. And I cannot open a newspaper without finding some eminent contemporary writing a letter to it, saying gently, firmly and bravely, the same word, sometimes with bits of Union Now tacked on to it, and sometimes with minor improvements, but often with nothing more than the bare idea.

All sorts of idealistic movements for world peace which have been talking quietly to themselves for years and years have been stirred up to follow the new banner. Long before the Great War there was a book by Sir Max Waechter, a friend of King Edward the Seventh, advocating the United States of Europe, and that inexact but flattering parallelism to the United States of America has recurred frequently; as a phase thrown out by Monsieur Briand for example, and as a project put forward by an Austrian-Japanese writer, Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, who even devised a flag for the Union. The main objection to the idea is that there are hardly any states completely in Europe, except Switzerland, San Marino, Andorra and a few of the Versailles creations. Almost all the other European states extend far beyond the European limits both politically and in their sympathies and cultural relations. They trail with them more than half mankind. About a tenth of the British Empire is in Europe and still less of the Dutch Empire; Russia, Turkey, France, are less European than not; Spain and Portugal have their closest links with South America.

Few Europeans think of themselves as "Europeans". I, for example, am English, and a large part of my interests, intellectual and material, are Transatlantic. I dislike calling myself "British" and I like to think of myself as a member of a great English-speaking community, which spreads irrespective of race and colour round and about the world. I am annoyed when an American calls me a "foreigner" - war with America would seem to me just as insane as war with Cornwall - and I find the idea of cutting myself off from the English-speaking peoples of America and Asia to follow the flag of my Austrian-Japanese friend into a federally bunched-up European extremely unattractive.

It would, I suggest, be far easier to create the United States of the World, which is Mr Streit’s ultimate objective, than to get together the so-called continent of Europe into any sort of unity.

I find most of these United States of Europe movements are now jumping on to the Federation band-wagon.

My old friend and antagonist, Lord David Davies, for instance, has recently succumbed to the infection. He was concerned about the problem of a World Pax in the days when the League of Nations Society and other associated bodies were amalgamated in the League of Nations Union. He was struck then by an idea, an analogy, and the experience was unique for him. He asked why individuals went about in modern communities in nearly perfect security from assault and robbery, without any need to bear arms. His answer was the policeman. And from that he went on to the question of what was needed for states and nations to go their ways with the same blissful immunity from violence and plunder, and it seemed to him a complete and reasonable answer to say "an international policeman". And there you were! He did not see, he is probably quite incapable of seeing, that a state is something quite different in its nature and behaviour from an individual human+being. When he was asked to explain how that international policeman was to be created and sustained, he just went on saying "international policeman". He has been saying it for years. Sometimes it seems it is to be the League of Nations, sometimes the British Empire, sometimes an international Air Force, which is to undertake this grave responsibility. The bench before which the policeman is to hale the offender and this position of the lock-up are not indicated. Finding our criticisms uncongenial, his lordship went off with his great idea, like a penguin which has found an egg, to incubate it alone. I hope he will be spared to say "international policeman" for many years to come, but I do not believe he has ever perceived or ever will perceive that, brilliant as his inspiration was, it still left vast areas of the problem in darkness. Being a man of considerable means, he has been able to sustain a "New Commonwealth" movement and publish books and a periodical in which his one great idea is elaborated rather than developed.

But I will not deal further with the very incoherent multitude that now echoes this word "Federation". Many among them will cease to cerebrate further and fall by the wayside, but many will go on thinking, and if they go on thinking they will come to perceive more and more clearly the realities of the case. Federation, they will feel, is not enough.

So much for the present "Federalist" front. As a fundamental basis of action, as a declared end, it seems hopelessly vague and confused and, if one may coin a phrase, hopelessly optimistic. But since the concept seems to be the way to release a number of minds from belief in the sufficiency of a League of Nations, associated or not associated with British Imperialism, it has been worth while to consider how it can be amplified and turned in the direction of that full and open-eyed world-wide collectivisation which a study of existing conditions obliges us to believe is the only alternative to the complete degeneration of our species.
28  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 07:58:53 pm
Chapter 6


LET US, EVEN AT the cost of a certain repetition, look a little more closely now into the fashion in which the disruptive forces are manifesting themselves in the Western and Eastern hemispheres.

In the Old World the hypertrophy of armies is most conspicuous, in America it was the hypertrophy of big business. But in both the necessity for an increasing collective restraint upon uncoordinated over-powerful business or political enterprise is more and more clearly recognised.

There is a strong opposition on the part of great interests in America to the President, who has made himself the spear-head of the collectivising drive; they want to put the brake now on his progressive socialisation of the nation, and quite possibly, at the cost of increasing social friction, they may slow down the drift to socialism very considerably. But it is unbelievable that they dare provoke the social convulsion that would ensue upon a deliberate reversal of the engines or upon any attempt to return to the glorious days of big business, wild speculation and mounting unemployment before 1927. They will merely slow down the drive. For in the world now all roads lead to socialism or social dissolution.

The tempo of the process is different in the two continents; that is the main difference between them. It is not an opposition. They travel at different rates but they travel towards an identical goal. In the Old World at present the socialisation of the community is going on far more rapidly and thoroughly than it is in America because of the perpetual war threat.

In Western Europe now the dissolution and the drive towards socialisation progress by leaps and bounds. The British governing class and British politicians generally, overtaken by a war they had not the intelligence to avert, have tried to atone for their slovenly unimaginativeness during the past twenty years in a passion of witless improvisation. God knows what their actual war preparations amount to, but their domestic policy seems to be based on an imperfect study of Barcelona, Guernica, Madrid and Warsaw. They imagine similar catastrophes on a larger scale - although they are quite impossible, as every steady-headed person who can estimate the available supplies of petrol knows - and they have a terrible dread of being held responsible. They fear a day of reckoning with their long-bamboozled lower classes. In their panic they are rapidly breaking up the existing order altogether.

The changes that have occurred in Great Britain in less than a year are astounding. They recall in many particulars the social dislocation of Russia in the closing months of 1917. There has been a shifting and mixing-up of people that would have seemed impossible to anyone in 1937. The evacuation of centres of population under the mere exaggerated threat of air raids has been of frantic recklessness. Hundreds of thousands of families have been broken up, children separated from their parents and quartered in the homes of more or less reluctant hosts. Parasites and skin diseases, vicious habits and insanitary practices have been spread, as if in a passion of equalitarian propaganda, the slums of such centres as Glasgow, London and Liverpool, throughout the length and breadth of the land. Railways, road traffic, all the normal communications have been dislocated by a universal running about. For a couple of months Great Britain has been more like a disturbed ant-hill than an organised civilised country.

The contagion of funk has affected everyone. Public institutions and great business concerns have bolted to remote and inconvenient sites; the BBC organisation, for example, scuffled off headlong from London, needlessly and ridiculously, no man pursuing it. There has been a wild epidemic of dismissals, of servants employed in London, for example, and a still wilder shifting of unsuitable men to novel, unnecessary jobs. Everyone has been exhorted to serve the country, children of twelve, to the great delight of conservative-minded farmers, have been withdrawn from school and put to work on the land, and yet the number of those who have lost their jobs and cannot find anything else to do, has gone up by over 100,000.

There have been amateurish attempts to ration food, producing waste here and artificial scarcity there. A sort of massacre of small independent businesses is in progress mainly to the advantage of the big provision-dealing concerns, who changed in a night from open profiteers to become the "expert" advisers of food supply. All the expertise they have ever displayed has been the extraction of profits from food supply. But while profits mount, taxation with an air of great resolution sets itself to prune them.

The British public has always been phlegmatic in the face of danger, it is too stout-hearted and too stupid to give way to excesses of fear, but the authorities have thought it necessary to plaster the walls with cast, manifestly expensive, posters, headed with a Royal Crown, "Your courage, your resolution, your cheerfulness will bring us victory."

"Oh yus," said the London Cockney. "You’ll get the victory all right. Trust you. On my courage, my resolution, my cheerfulness; you’ll use up ‘Tommy Atkins’ all right. Larf at ‘im in a kindly sort of way and use him. And then you think you’ll out him back again on the dust-heap. Again? Twice?"

That is all too credible. But this time our rulers will emerge discredited and frustrated from the conflict to face a disorganised population in a state of mutinous enquiry. They have made preposterous promises to restore Poland and they will certainly have to eat their words about that. Or what is more probable the government will have to give place to another administration which will be able to eat those words for them with a slightly better grace. There is little prospect of Thanksgiving Services or any Armistice night **** this time. People at home are tasting the hardships of war even more tediously and irritating than the men on active service. Cinemas, theatres, have been shut prematurely, black-outs have diminished the safety of the streets and doubled the tale of road casualties. The British crowd is already a sullen crowd. The world has not seen it in such a bad temper for a century and half, and, let there be no mistake about it, it is far less in a temper with the Germans than it is with its own rulers.

Through all this swirling intimidating propaganda of civil disorder and a systematic suppression of news and criticism of the most exasperating sort, war preparation has proceeded. The perplexed and baffled citizen can only hope that on the military side there has been a little more foresight and less hysteria.

The loss of confidence and particularly confidence in the government and social order is already enormous. No one feels secure, in his job, in his services, in his savings, any longer. People lose confidence even in the money in their pockets. And human society is built on confidence. It cannot carry on without it.

Things are like this already and it is only the opening stage of this strange war. The position of the ruling class and the financial people who have hitherto dominated British affairs is a peculiar one. The cast of the war is already enormous, and there is no sign that it will diminish. Income tax, super tax, death duties, taxes on war profits have been raised to a level that should practically extinguish the once prosperous middle strata of society altogether. The very wealthy will survive in a shorn and diminished state, they will hang on to the last, but the graded classes that have hitherto intervened between them and the impoverished masses of the population, who will be irritated by war sacrifices, extensively unemployed and asking more and more penetrating questions, will have diminished greatly. Only by the most ingenious monetary manipulation, by dangerous tax-dodging and expedients verging on sheer scoundrelism, will a clever young man have the ghost of a chance of climbing by the old traditional money-making ladder, above his fellows. On the other hand, the career of a public employee will become continually more attractive. There is more interest in it and more self-respect. The longer the war continues, the completer and more plainly irreparable will be the dissolution of the old order.

Now to many readers who have been incredulous of the statement of the first section of this book, that we are living in the End of an Age, to those who have been impervious to the account of the disruptive forces that are breaking up the social order and to the argument I have drawn from them, who may have got away from all that, so to speak, by saying they are "scientific" or "materialistic" or "sociological" or "highbrow", or that Providence that has hitherto displayed such a marked bias in favour of well-off, comfortable, sluggish-minded people is sure to do something nice for them at the eleventh hour, the real inconveniences, alarms, losses and growing disorder of the life about them may at last bring a realisation that the situation in Western Europe is approaching revolutionary conditions. It will be a hard saying for many people in the advantage-holding classes, and particularly if they are middle-aged, that the older has already gone to pieces can never be put back. But how can they doubt it?

A revolution, that is to say a more or less convulsive effort at social and political readjustment, is bound to come in all these overstrained countries, in Germany, in Britain and universally. It is more likely than not to arise directly out of the exasperating diminuendos and crescendos of the present war, as a culminating phase of it. Revolution of some sort we must have. We cannot prevent its onset. But we can affect the course of its development. It may end in utter disaster or it may release a new world, far better than the old. Within these broad limits it is possible for us to make up our minds how it will come to us.

And since the only practical question before us is the question of how we will take this world revolution we cannot possibly evade, let me recall to your attention the reasons I have advanced in the second section of this book for the utmost public discussion of our situation at the present time. And also let me bring back to mind the examination of Marxism in the fourth section. There it is shown how easily a collectivist movement, especially when it is faced by the forcible-feeble resistances and suppressions of those who have hitherto enjoyed wealth and power, may degenerate into an old-fashioned class-war, become conspiratorial, dogmatic and inadaptable, and sink towards leader worship and autocracy. That apparently is what has happened in Russia in its present phase. We do not know how much of the original revolutionary spirit survives there, and a real fundamental issue in the world situation is whether we are to follow in the footsteps of Russia or whether we are going to pull ourselves together, face the stern logic of necessity and produce a Western Revolution, which will benefit by the Russian experience, react upon Russia and lead ultimately to a world understanding.

What is it that the Atlantic world finds most objectionable in the Soviet world of to-day? Is it any disapproval of collectivism as such? Only in the case of a dwindling minority of rich and successful men - and very rarely of the sons of such people. Very few capable men under fifty nowadays remain individualists in political and social matters. They are not even fundamentally anti-Communist. Only it happens that for various reasons the political life of the community is still in the hands of unteachable old-fashioned people. What are called "democracies" suffer greatly from the rule of old men who have not kept pace with the times. The real and effective disapproval, distrust and disbelief in the soundness of the Soviet system lies not in the out-of-date individualism of these elderly types, but in the conviction that it can never achieve efficiency or even maintain its honest ideal of each for all and all for each, unless it has free speech and an insistence upon legally-defined freedoms for the individual within the collectivist framework. We do not deplore the Russian Revolution as a Revolution. We complain that it is not a good enough Revolution and we want a better one.

The more highly things are collectivised the more necessary is a legal system embodying the Rights of Man. This has been forgotten under the Soviets, and so men go in fear there of arbitrary police action. But the more functions your government controls the more need there is for protective law. The objection to Soviet collectivism is that, lacking the antiseptic of legally assured personal freedom, it will not keep. It professes to be fundamentally a common economic system based on class-war ideas; the industrial director is under the heel of the Party commissar; the political police have got altogether out of hand; and the affairs gravitate inevitably towards an oligarchy or an autocracy protecting its incapacity by the repression of adverse comment.

But these valid criticisms merely indicate the sort of collectivisation that has to be avoided. It does not dispose of collectivism as such. If we in our turn do not wish to be submerged by the wave of Bolshevisation that is evidently advancing from the East, we must implement all these valid objections and create a collectivisation that will be more efficient, more prosperous, tolerant, free and rapidly progressive than the system we condemn. We, who do not like the Stalinised-Marxist state, have, as they used to say in British politics, to "dish" it by going one better. We have to confront Eastern-spirited collectivism with Western-spirited collectivism.

Perhaps this may be better put. We may be giving way to a sub-conscious conceit here and assuming that the West is always going to be thinking more freely and clearly and working more efficiently than the East. It is like that now, but it may not always be like that. Every country has had its phases of illumination and its phases of blindness. Stalin and Stalinism are neither the beginning nor the end of the collectivisation of Russia.

We are dealing with something still almost impossible to estimate, the extent to which the new Russian patriotism and the new Stalin-worship, have effaced and how far they have merely masked, the genuinely creative international communism of the revolutionary years. The Russian mind is not a docile mind, and most of the literature available for a young man to read in Russia, we must remember, is still revolutionary. There has been no burning of the books there. The Moscow radio talks for internal consumption since the Hitler-Stalin understanding betray a great solicitude on the part of the government to make it clear that there has been no sacrifice of revolutionary principle. That witnesses to the vitality of public opinion in Russia. The clash between the teachings of 1920 and 1940 may have a liberating effect on many people’s minds. Russians love to talk about ideas. Under the Czar they talked. It is incredible that they do not talk under Stalin.

That question whether collectivisation is to be "Westernised" or "Easternised", using these words under the caveat of the previous paragraph, is really the first issue before the world to-day. We need a fully ventilated Revolution. Our Revolution has to go on in the light and air. We may have to accept sovietisation à la Russe quite soon unless we can produce a better collectivisation. But if we produce a better collectivisation it is more probable than not that the Russian system will incorporate our improvements, forget its reviving nationalism again, debunk Marx and Stalin, so far as they can be debunked, and merge into the one world state.

Between these primary antagonists, between Revolution with its eyes open and Revolution with a mask and a gag, there will certainly be complications of the issue due to patriotism and bigotry and the unteachable wilful blindness of those who do not want to see. Most people lie a lot to themselves before they lie to other people, and it is hopeless to expect that all the warring cults and traditions that confuse the mind of the race to-day are going to fuse under a realisation of the imperative nature of the human situation as I have stated it here. Multitudes will never realise it. Few human+beings are able to change their primary ideas after the middle thirties. They get fixed in them and drive before them no more intelligently than animals drive before their innate impulses. They will die rather than change their second selves.

One of the most entangling of these disconcerting secondary issues is that created by the stupid and persistent intrigues of the Roman Catholic Church.

Let me be clear here. I am speaking of the Vatican and of its sustained attempts to exercise a directive rôle in secular life. I number among my friends many Roman Catholics who have built the most charming personalities and behaviour systems on the framework provided them by their faith. One of the loveliest characters I have ever known was G. K. Chesterton. But I think he was just as fine before he became a Catholic as afterwards. Still he found something he needed in Catholicism. There are saints of all creeds and of none, so good are better possibilities of human nature. Religious observances provide a frame that many find indispensable for the seemly ordering of their lives. And outside the ranks of "strict" observers many good people with hardly more theology than a Unitarian, love to speak of goodness and kindness as Christianity. So-and-so is a "good Christian". Voltaire, says Alfred Noyes, the Catholic writer, was a "good Christian". I do not use the word "Christianity" in that sense because I do not believe that Christians have any monopoly of goodness. When I write of Christianity, I mean Christianity with a definite creed and militant organisation and not these good kind people, good and kind but not very fastidious about the exact use of the words.

Such "good Christians" can be almost as bitterly critical as I am of the continual pressure upon the faithful by that inner group of Italians in Rome, subsidised by the Fascist government, who pull the strings of Church policy throughout the world, so as to do this or that tortuous or uncivilised thing, to cripple education, to persecute unorthodox ways of living.

It is to the influence of the Church that we must ascribe the foolish support by the British Foreign Office of Franco, that murderous little "Christian gentleman", in his overthrow of the staggering liberal renascence of Spain. It is the Roman Catholic influence the British and French have to thank, for the fantastic blundering that involved them in the defence of the impossible Polish state and its unrighteous acquisitions; it affected British policy in respect to Austria and Czechoslovakia profoundly, and now it is doing its utmost to maintain and develop a political estrangement between Russia and the Western world by its prejudiced exacerbation of the idea that Russia is "anti-God" while we Westerners are little children of the light, gallantly fighting on the side of the Cross, Omnipotence, Greater Poland, national sovereignty, the small uneconomic prolific farmer and shopkeeper and anything else you like to imagine constitutes "Christendom".

The Vatican strives perpetually to develop the present war into a religious war. It is trying to steal the war. By all the circumstances of its training it is unteachable. It knows no better. It will go on - until some economic revolution robs it of its funds. Then as a political influence it may evaporate very rapidly. The Anglican Church and many other Protestant sects, the wealthy Baptists, for example, follow suit.

It is not only in British affairs that this propaganda goes on. With the onset of war France becomes militant and Catholic. It has suppressed the Communist Party, as a gesture of resentment against Russia and a precaution against post-war collectivisation. The Belgian caricaturist Raemaekers is now presenting Hitler day after day as a pitiful weakling already disposed of and worthy of our sympathy, while Stalin is represented as a frightful giant with horns and a tail. Yet both France and Britain are at peace with Russia and have every reason to come to a working understanding with that country. The attitude of Russia to the war has on the whole been cold, contemptuous and reasonable.

It is not as if these devious schemes can take us somewhere; it is not that this restoration of the Holy Roman Empire is a possibility. You confront these Catholic politicians, just as you confront the politicians of Westminster, with these two cardinal facts, the abolition of distance and the change of scale. In vain. You cannot get any realisation of the significance of these things into those idea-proofed skulls. They are deaf to it, blind to it. They cannot see that it makes any difference at all to their long-established mental habits. If their minds waver for a moment they utter little magic prayers to exorcise the gleam.

What, they ask, has "mere size" to do with the soul of man, "mere speed, mere power"? What can the young do better than subdue their natural urgency to live and do? What has mere life to do with the religious outlook? The war, these Vatican propagandists insist, is a "crusade" against modernism, against socialism and free thought, the restoration of priestly authority is its end; our sons are fighting to enable the priest to thrust his pious uncleanliness once again between reader and book, child and knowledge, husband and wife, sons and lovers. While honest men are fighting now to put an end to military aggression, to resume indeed that "war to end war" that was aborted to give us the League of Nations, these bigots are sedulously perverting the issue, trying to represent it as a religious war against Russia in particular and the modern spirit in general.

The well-trained Moslem, the American fundamentalists, the orthodox Jew, all the fixed cultures, produce similar irrelevant and wasteful resistances, but the Catholic organisation reaches further and is more persistent. It is frankly opposed to human effort and the idea of progress. It makes no pretence about it.

Such cross-activities as these complicate, delay and may even sabotage effectively every effort to solve the problem of a lucid collectivisation of the world’s affairs, but they do not alter the essential fact that it is only through a rationalisation and coalescence of constructive revolutionary movements everywhere and a liberal triumph over the dogmatism of the class war, that we can hope to emerge from the present wreckage of our world.
29  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 07:58:20 pm
Chapter 5


WE HAVE NOW TO examine these disruptive forces a little more closely, these disruptive forces which are manifestly overstraining and destroying the social and political system in which most of us have been reared. At what particular points in our political and social life are these disruptive forces discovering breaking-points?

Chief among these breaking-points, people are beginning to realise more and more clearly, is the common, half-educated young man.

One particular consequence of the onrush of power and invention in our time, is the release of a great flood of human energy in the form of unemployed young people. This is a primary factor of the general political instability.

We have to recognise that humanity is not suffering, as most animal species when they suffer to do, from hunger or want in any material form. It is threatened not by deficiency but by excess. It is plethoric. It is not lying down to die through physical exhaustion; it is knocking itself to pieces.

Measured by any standards except human contentment and ultimate security, mankind appears to be much wealthier now than in 1918. The qualities of power and material immediately available are much greater. What is called productivity in general is greater. But there is sound reason for supposing that a large part of this increased productivity is really a swifter and more thorough exploitation of irreplaceable capital. It is a process that cannot go on indefinitely. It rises to a maximum and then the feast is over. Natural resources are being exhausted at a great rate, and the increased output goes into war munitions whose purpose is destruction, and into sterile indulgences no better than waste. Man, "heir of the ages", is a demoralised spendthrift, in a state of galloping consumption, living on stimulants.

When we look into the statistics of population, there is irrefutable proof that everywhere we are passing a maximum (see for this Enid Charles’ The Twilight of Parenthood, or R. R. Kuczynski’s Measurement of Population Growth) and that a rapid decline is certain not only in Western Europe bur throughout the world. There is sound reason for doubting the alleged vast increase of the Russian people (see Souvarine’s Stalin). Nevertheless, because of the continually increasing efficiency of productive methods, the relative pressure of this new unemployed class increases. The "mob" of the twentieth century is quite different from the almost animal "mob" of the eighteenth century. It is a restless sea of dissatisfied young people, of young men who can find no outlet for their natural urgencies and ambitions, young people quite ready to "make trouble" as soon as they are shown how.

In the technically crude past, the illiterate Have-nots were sweated and overworked. It was easy to find toil to keep them all busy. Such surplus multitudes are wanted no more. Toil is no longer marketable. Machines can toil better and with less resistance.

These frustrated multitudes have been made acutely aware of their own frustration. The gap of their always partly artificial disadvantage has been greatly diminished because now they all read. Even for incidental employment it has been necessary to teach them that, and the new reading public thus created has evoked a press and literature of excitement and suggestion. The cinema and the radio dazzle them with spectacles of luxury and unrestricted living. They are not the helpless Hodges and factory fodder of a hundred years ago. They are educated up to what must have been the middle-class level in 1889. They are indeed largely a squeezed-out middle class, restless, impatient and as we shall see extremely dangerous. They have assimilated almost all of the lower strata that were formerly illiterate drudges.

And this modernised excess population has no longer any social humility. It has no belief in the infallible wisdom of its rulers. It sees them too clearly; it knows about them, their waste, vices and weaknesses, with an even exaggerated vividness. It sees no reason for its exclusion from the good things of life by such people. It has lost enough of its inferiority to realise that most of that inferiority is arbitrary and artificial.

You may say that this is a temporary state of affairs, that the fall in population will presently relieve the situation, by getting rid of this surplus of the "not wanted". But it will do nothing of the sort. As population falls, consumption will fall. Industries will still be producing more and more efficiently for a shrinking market and they will be employing fewer and fewer hands. A state of five million people with half a million of useless hands, will be twice as unstable as forty million with two million standing off. So long as the present state of affairs continues, this stratum of perplexed young people "out of it" will increase relatively to the total community.

It is still not realised as clearly as it should be, how much the troubles of the present time are due to this new aspect of the social puzzle. But if you will scrutinise the events of the past half century in the light of this idea, you will see more and more convincingly that it is mainly through this growing mass of unfulfilled desire that the disruptive forces manifest themselves.

The eager and adventurous unemployed young are indeed the shock troops in the destruction of the old social order everywhere. They find guidance in some confident Party or some inspired Champion, who organises them for revolutionary or counter-revolutionary ends. It scarcely matters which. They become Communists or they become Fascists, Nazis, the Irish Republican Army, Ku Klux Klansmen and so forth and so on. The essence is the combination of energy, frustration and discontent. What all such movements have in common, is a genuine indignation at the social institutions that have begotten and then cold-shouldered them, a quasi-military organisation and the resolve to seize power for themselves embodied in their leaders. A wise and powerful government would at any cost anticipate and avert these destructive activities by providing various and interesting new employment and the necessary condition for a satisfying successful life for everyone. These young people are life. The rise of the successful leader only puts off the trouble for a time. He seizes power in the name of his movement. And then? When the seizure of power has been effected, he finds himself obliged to keep things going, to create justification for his leadership, exciting enterprises, urgencies.

A leader of vision with adequate technical assistance might conceivedly direct much of the human energy he has embodied into creative channels. For example he could rebuild the dirty, inadequate cities of our age, turn the still slovenly country-side into a garden and play-ground, re-clothe, liberate and stimulate imaginations, until the ideas of creative progress became a habit of mind. But in doing this he will find himself confronted by those who are sustained by the pre-emptions and appropriations of the old order. These relatively well-off people will bargain with him up to the last moment for their money and impede his seizure and utilisation of land and material resources, and will be further hampered by the fact that in organising his young people he has had to turn their minds and capacities from creative work to systematic violence and militant activities. It is easy to make an unemployed young man into a Fascist or gangster, but it is hard to turn him back to any decent social task. Moreover the Champion’s own leadership was largely due to his conspiratorial and adventurous quality. He is himself unfit for a creative job. He finds himself a fighter at the head of a fighting pack.

And furthermore, unless his country is on the scale of Russia and the United States, whatever he attempts in order to make good his promises of an abundant life, has to be done in face of that mutual pressure of the sovereign states due to the abolition of distance and change of scale which we have already considered. He has no elbow-room in which to operate. The resultant of these convergent difficulties is to turn him and his fighting pack releasing flux of predatory war.

Everywhere in the world, under varying local circumstances, we see governments primarily concerned with this supreme problem of what to do with these young adults who are unemployable under present conditions. We have to realise that and bear it constantly in mind. It is there in every country. It is the most dangerous and wrong-headed view of the world situation, to treat the totalitarian countries as differing fundamentally from the rest of the world.

The problem of reabsorbing the unemployable adult is the essential problem in all states. It is the common shape to which all current political dramas reduce. How are we to use up or slake this surplus of human energy? The young are the live core of our species. The generation below sixteen or seventeen has not yet begun to give trouble, and after forty, the ebb of vitality disposes men to accept the lot that has fallen to them.

Franklin Roosevelt and Stalin find themselves in control of vast countries under-developed or so misdeveloped that their main energies go into internal organisation or reorganisation. They do not press against their frontiers therefore and they do not threaten war. The recent Russian annexations have been precautionary-defensive. But all the same both Russia and America have to cater for that troublesome social stratum quite as much as Europe. The New Deal is plainly an attempt to achieve a working socialism and avert a social collapse in America; it is extraordinarily parallel to the successive "policies" and "Plans" of the Russian experiment. Americans shirk the word "socialism", but what else can one call it?

The British oligarchy, demoralised and slack with the accumulated wealth of a century of advantage, bought off social upheaval for a time by the deliberate and socially demoralising appeasement of the dole. It has made no adequate effort to employ or educate these surplus people; it has just pushed the dole at them. It even tries to buy off the leader of the Labour Party with a salary of £2000 a year. Whatever we may think of the quality and deeds of the Nazi or Fascist regimes or the follies of their leaders, we must at any rate concede that they attempt, however clumsily, to reconstruct life in a collectivist direction. They are efforts to adjust and construct and so far they are in advance of the British ruling class. The British Empire has shown itself the least constructive of all governing networks. It produces no New Deals, no Five Year Plans; it keeps on trying to stave off its inevitable dissolution and carry on upon the old lines - and apparently it will do that until it has nothing more to give away.

"Peace in our time", that foolishly premature self-congratulation of Mr Chamberlain, is manifestly the guiding principle of the British elder statesman. It is that natural desire we all begin to feel after sixty to sit down comfortably somewhere. Unprogressive tranquillity they want at any price, even at the price of a preventive war. This astonishing bunch of rulers has never revealed any conception whatever of a common future before its sprawling Empire. There was a time when that Empire seemed likely to become the nexus of a world system, but now manifestly it has no future but disintegration. Apparently its rulers expected it to go on just as it was for ever. Bit by bit its component parts have dropped away and become quasi-independent powers, generally after an unedifying struggle; Southern Ireland for example is neutral in the present war, South Africa hesitated.

Now, and that is why this book is being written, these people, by a string of almost incredible blunders, have entangled what is left of their Empire in a great war to "end Hitler", and they have absolutely no suggestion to offer their antagonists and the world at large, of what is to come after Hitler. Apparently they hope to paralyse Germany in some as yet unspecified fashion and then to go back to their golf links or the fishing stream and doze by the fire after dinner. That is surely one of the most astounding things in history, the possibility of death and destruction beyond all reckoning and our combatant governments have no idea of what is to follow when the overthrow of Hitler is accomplished. They seem to be as void of any sense of the future, as completely empty-headed about the aftermath of their campaigns, as one of those American Tories who are "just out against F.D.R. Damn him!"

So the British Empire remains, paying its way down to ultimate bankruptcy, buying itself a respite from the perplexing problems of the future, with the accumulated wealth and power of its past. It is rapidly becoming the most backward political organisation in the world. But sooner or later it will have no more money for the dole and no more allies to abandon nor dominions to yield up to their local bosses, and then possibly its disintegration will be complete (R.I.P.), leaving intelligent English people to line up at last with America and the rest of the intelligent world and face the universal problem. Which is: how are we to adapt ourselves to these mighty disruptive forces that are shattering human society as it is at present constituted?

In the compressed countries which have little internal scope and lack the vast natural resources of the Russian and Atlantic communities, the internal tension makes more directly for aggressive warfare, but the fundamental driving-force behind their aggressiveness is still the universal trouble, that surplus of young men.

Seen in this broader vision, the present war falls into its true proportions as a stupid conflict upon secondary issues, which is delaying and preventing an overdue world adjustment. That is may kill hundreds of thousands of people does not alter that. An idiot with a revolver can murder a family. He remains an idiot.

From 1914 to 1939 has been a quarter of a century of folly, meanness, evasion and resentment, and only a very tedious and copious historian would attempt to distribute the blame among those who had played a part in the story. And when he had done it, what he had done would not matter in the least. An almost overwhelmingly difficult problem has confronted us all, and in some measure we have all of us lost our heads in the face of it, lost our dignity, been too clever by half, pinned ourselves to cheap solutions, quarrelled stupidly among ourselves. "We have erred and strayed . . . . We have lest undone those things that we ought to have done and we have done those things which we ought not to have done and there is no health in us."

I do not see any way to a solution of the problem of World Peace unless we begin with a confession of universal wrong-thinking and wrong-doing. Then we can sit down to the question of a solution with some reasonable prospect of finding an answer.

Now let us assume that "we" are a number of intelligent men, German, French, English, American, Italian, Chinese and so forth, who have decided in consequence of the war and in spite of the war, while the war is still going on, to wipe out all these squabbling bygones from our minds, and discuss plainly and simply the present situation of mankind. What is to be done with the world? Let us recapitulate the considerations that so far have been brought in, and what prospects they open, if any, of some hopeful concerted action, action that would so revolutionise the human outlook as to end war and that hectic recurrent waste of human life and happiness, for ever.

Firstly then it has been made apparent that humanity is at the end of an age, an age of fragmentation in the management of its affairs, fragmentation politically among separate sovereign states and economically among unrestricted business of organisations competing for profit. The abolition of distance, the enormous increase of available power, root causes of all our troubles, have suddenly made what was once a tolerable working system - a system that was perhaps with all its inequalities and injustices the only practicable working system in its time - enormously dangerous and wasteful, so that it threatens to exhaust and destroy our world altogether. Man is like a feckless heir who has suddenly been able to get at his capital and spend it as though it were income. We are living in a phase of violent and irreparable expenditure. There is an intensified scramble among nations and among individuals to acquire, monopolise and spend. The dispossessed young find themselves hopeless unless they resort to violence. They implement the ever-increasing instability. Only a comprehensive collectivisation of human affairs can arrest this disorderly self-destruction of mankind. All this has been made plain in what has gone before.

This essential problem, the problem of collectivisation, can be viewed from two reciprocal points of view and stated in two different ways. We can ask, "What is to be done to end the world chaos?" and also "How can we offer the common young man a reasonable and stimulating prospect of a full life?"

These two questions are the obverse and reverse of one question. What answers one answers the other. The answer to both is that we have to collectivise the world as one system with practically everyone playing a reasonably satisfying part in it. For sound practical reasons, over and above any ethical or sentimental considerations, we have to devise a collectivisation that neither degrades nor enslaves.

Our imaginary world conference then has to turn itself to the question of how to collectivise the world, so that it will remain collectivised and yet enterprising, interesting and happy enough to content that common young man who will otherwise reappear, baffled and sullen, at the street corners and throw it into confusion again. To that problem the rest of this book will address itself.

As a matter of fact it is very obvious that at the present time a sort of collectivisation is being imposed very rapidly upon the world. Everyone is being enrolled, ordered about, put under control somewhere - even if it is only in an evacuation or concentration camp or what not. This process of collectivisation, collectivisation of some sort, seems now to be in the nature of things and there is no reason to suppose it is reversible. Some people imagine world peace as the end of that process. Collectivisation is going to be defeated and a vaguely conceived reign of law will restore and sustain property, Christianity, individualism and everything to which the respectable prosperous are accustomed. This is implicit even on the title of such a book as Edward Mousley’s Man or Leviathan? It is much more reasonable to think that world peace has to be the necessary completion of that process, and that the alternative is a decadent anarchy. If so, the phrase for the aims of liberal thought should be no Man or Leviathan but Man masters Leviathan.

On this point, the inevitability of collectivisation as the sole alternative to universal brigandage and social collapse, our world conference must make itself perfectly clear.

Then it has to turn itself to the much more difficult and complicated question of how.
30  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 07:57:33 pm
Chapter 4


NOW HERE IT IS necessary to make a distinction which is far too frequently ignored. Collectivisation means the handling of the common affairs of mankind by a common control responsible to the whole community. It means the suppression of go-as-you-please in social and economic affairs just as much as in international affairs. It means the frank abolition of profit-seeking and of every devise by which human+beings contrive to be parasitic on their fellow man. It is the practical realisation of the brotherhood of man through a common control. It means all that and it means no more than that.

The necessary nature of that control, the way to attain it and to maintain it have still to be discussed.

The early forms of socialism were attempts to think out and try out collectivist systems. But with the advent of Marxism, the larger idea of collectivism became entangled with a smaller one, the perpetual conflict of people in any unregulated social system to get the better of one another. Throughout the ages this has been going on. The rich, the powerful generally, the more intelligent and acquisitive have got away with things, and sweated, oppressed, enslaved, bought and frustrated the less intelligent, the less acquisitive and the unwary. The Haves in every generation have always got the better of the Have-nots, and the Have-nots have always resented the privations of their disadvantage.

So it is and so in the uncollectivised world it has always been. The bitter cry of the expropriated man echoes down the ages from ancient Egypt and the Hebrew prophets, denouncing those who grind the faces of the poor. At times the Have-nots have been so uneducated, so helplessly distributed among their more successful fellows that they have been incapable of social disturbance, but whenever such developments as plantation of factory labour, the accumulation of men in seaport towns, the disbanding of armies, famine and so forth, brought together masses of men at the same disadvantage, their individual resentments flowed together and became a common resentment. The miseries underlying human society were revealed. The Haves found themselves assailed by resentful, vindictive revolt.

Let us note that these revolts of the Have-nots throughout the ages have sometimes been very destructive, but that invariably they have failed to make any fundamental change in this old, old story of getting and not getting the upper hand. Sometimes the Have-nots have frightened or otherwise moved the Haves to more decent behaviour. Often the Have-nots have found a Champion who has ridden to power on their wrongs. Then the ricks were burnt or the châteaux. The aristocrats were guillotined and their heads carried on exemplary pikes. Such storms passed and when they passed, there for all practical purposes was the old order returning again; new people but the old inequalities. Returning inevitably, with only slight variations in appearance and phraseology, under the condition of a non-collective social order.

The point to note is that in the unplanned scramble of human life through the centuries of the horse-and-foot period, these incessantly recurring outbreaks of the losers against the winners have never once produced any permanent amelioration of the common lot, or greatly changed the features of the human community. Not once.

The Have-nots have never produced the intelligence and the ability and the Haves have never produced the conscience, to make a permanent alteration of the rules of the game. Slave revolts, peasant revolts, revolts of the proletariat have always been fits of rage, acute social fevers which have passed. The fact remains that history produces no reason for supposing that the Have-nots, considered as a whole, have available any reserves of directive and administrative capacity and disinterested devotion, superior to that of the more successful classes. Morally, intellectually, there is no reason to suppose them better.

Many potentially able people may miss education and opportunity; they may not be inherently inferior but nevertheless they are crippled and incapacitated and kept down. They are spoilt. Many specially gifted people may fail to "make good" in a jostling, competitive, acquisitive world and so fall into poverty and into the baffled, limited ways of living of the commonalty, but they too are exceptions. The idea of a right-minded Proletariat ready to take things over is a dream.

As the collectivist idea has developed out of the original propositions of socialism, the more lucid thinkers have put this age-long bitterness of the Haves and the Have-nots into its proper place as part, as the most distressing part, but still only as part, of the vast wastage of human resources that their disorderly exploitation entailed. In the light of current events they have come to realise more and more clearly that the need and possibility of arresting this waste by a world-wide collectivisation is becoming continually more possible and at the same time imperative. They have had no delusions about the education and liberation that is necessary to gain that end. They have been moved less by moral impulses and sentimental pity and so forth, admirable but futile motives, as by the intense intellectual irritation of living in a foolish and destructive system. They are revolutionaries not because the present way of living is a hard and tyrannous way of living, but because it is from top to bottom exasperatingly stupid.

But thrusting athwart the socialist movement towards collectivisation and its research for some competent directive organisation of the world’s affairs, came the clumsy initiative of Marxism with its class-war dogma, which has done more to misdirect and sterilise human good-will than any other misconception of reality that has ever stultified human effort.

Marx saw the world from a study and through the hazes of a vast ambition. He swam in the current ideologies of his time and so he shared the prevalent socialist drive towards collectivisation. But while his sounder-minded contemporaries were studying means and ends he jumped from a very imperfect understanding of the Trades Union movement in Britain to the wildest generalisations about the social process. He invented and antagonised two phantoms. One was the Capitalist System; the other the Worker.

There never has been anything on earth that could be properly called a Capitalist System. What was the matter with his world was manifestly its entire want of system. What the Socialists were feeling their way towards was the discovery and establishment of a world system.

The Haves of our period were and are a fantastic miscellany of people, inheriting or getting their power and influence by the most various of the interbreeding social solidarity even of a feudal aristocracy or an Indian caste. But Marx, looking rather into his inner consciousness than at any concrete reality, evolved that monster "System" on his Right. Then over against it, still gazing into that vacuum, he discovered on the Left the proletarians being steadily expropriated and becoming class-conscious. They were just as endlessly various in reality as the people at the top of the scramble; in reality but not in the mind of the Communist seer. There they consolidated rapidly.

So while other men toiled at this gigantic problem of collectivisation, Marx found his almost childlishy simple recipe. All you had to do was to tell the workers that they were being robbed and enslaved by this wicked "Capitalist System" devised by the "bourgeoisie". They need only "unite"; they had "nothing to lose but their chains". The wicked Capitalist System was to be overthrown, with a certain vindictive liquidation of "capitalists" in general and the "bourgeoisie" in particular, and a millennium would ensue under a purely workers’ control, which Lenin later on was to crystallise into a phrase of supra-theological mystery, "the dictatorship of the proletariat". The proletarians need learn nothing, plan nothing; they were right and good by nature; they would just "take over". The infinitely various envies, hatreds and resentments of the Have-nots were to fuse into a mighty creative drive. All virtue resided in them; all evil in those who had bettered them. One good thing there was in this new doctrine of the class war, it inculcated a much needed brotherliness among the workers, but it was balanced by the organisation of class hate. So the great propaganda of the class war, with these monstrous falsifications of manifest fact, went forth. Collectivisation would not so much be organised as appear magically when the incubus of Capitalism and all those irritatingly well-to-do people, were lifted off the great Proletarian soul.

Marx was a man incapable in money matters and much bothered by tradesmen’s bills. Moreover he cherished absurd pretensions to aristocracy. The consequence was that he romanced about the lovely life of the Middle Ages as if he were another Belloc and concentrated his animus about the "bourgeoisie", whom he made responsible for all those great disruptive forces in human society that we have considered. Lord Bacon, the Marquis of Worcester, Charles the Second and the Royal Society, people like Cavendish and Joule and Watt for example, all became "bourgeoisie" in his inflamed imagination. "During its reign of scarce a century", he wrote in the Communist Manifesto, "the bourgeoisie has created more powerful, more stupendous forces of production than all preceding generations rolled into one . . . . What earlier generations had the remotest inkling that such productive forces slumbered within the wombs of associated labour?"

"The wombs of associated labour!" (Golly, what a phrase!) The industrial revolution which was a consequence of the mechanical revolution is treated as the cause of it. Could facts be muddled more completely?

And again: " . . . the bourgeois system is no longer able to cope with the abundance of wealth it creates. How does the bourgeoisie overcome these crises? On the one hand, by the compulsory annihilation of a quantity of the productive forces; on the other, by the conquest of new markets and the more thorough exploitation of old ones. With what results? The results are that the way is paved for more widespread and more disastrous crises and that the capacity for averting such crises is lessened.

"The weapons" (Weapons! How that sedentary gentleman in his vast beard adored military images!) "with which the bourgeoisie overthrew feudalism are now being turned against the bourgeoisie itself.

"But the bourgeoisie has not only forged the weapons that will slay it; it has also engendered the men who will use these weapons - the modern workers, the proletarians."

And so here they are, hammer and sickle in hand, chest stuck out, proud, magnificent, commanding, in the Manifesto. But go and look for them yourself in the streets. Go and look at them in Russia.

Even for 1848 this is not intelligent social analysis. It is the outpouring of a man with a B in his bonnet, the hated Bourgeoisie, a man with a certain vision, uncritical of his own sub-conscious prejudices, but shrewd enough to realise how great a driving force is hate and the inferiority complex. Shrewd enough to use hate and bitter enough to hate. Let anyone read over that Communist Manifesto and consider who might have shared the hate or even have got it all, if Marx had not been the son of a rabbi. Read Jews for Bourgeoisie and the Manifesto is pure Nazi teaching of the 1933-8 vintage.

Stripped down to its core in this fashion, the primary falsity of the Marxist assumption is evident. But it is one of the queer common weakness of the human mind to be uncritical of primary assumptions and to smother up any enquiry into their soundness in secondary elaboration, in technicalities and conventional formulæ. Most of our systems of belief rest upon rotten foundations, and generally these foundations are made sacred to preserve them from attack. They become dogmas in a sort of holy of holies. It is shockingly uncivil to say "But that is nonsense". The defenders of all the dogmatic religions fly into rage and indignation when one touches on the absurdity of their foundations. Especially if one laughs. That is blasphemy.

This avoidance of fundamental criticism is one of the greatest dangers to any general human understanding. Marxism is no exception to the universal tendency. The Capitalist System has to be a real system, the Bourgeoisie an organised conspiracy against the Workers, and every human conflict everywhere has to be an aspect of the Class War, or they cannot talk to you. They will not listen to you. Never once has there been an attempt to answer the plain things I have been saying about them for a third of a century. Anything not in their language flows off their minds like water off a duck’s back. Even Lenin - by far the subtlest mind in the Communist story - has not escaped this pitfall, and when I talked to him in Moscow in 1920 he seemed quite unable to realise that the violent conflict going on in Ireland between the Catholic nationalists and the Protestant garrison was not his sacred insurrection of the Proletariat in full blast.

To-day there is quite a number of writers, and among them there are men of science who ought to think better, solemnly elaborating a pseudo-philosophy of science and society upon the deeply buried but entirely nonsensical foundations laid by Marx. Month by month the industrious Left book Club pours a new volume over the minds of its devotees to sustain their mental habits and pickle them against the septic influence of unorthodox literature. A party Index of Forbidden Books will no doubt follow. Distinguished professors with solemn delight in their own remarkable ingenuity, lecture and discourse and even produce serious-looking volumes, upon the superiority of Marxist physics and Marxist research, to the unbranded activities of the human mind. One tries not to be rude to them, but it is hard to believe they are not deliberately playing the fool with their brains. Or have they a feeling that revolutionary communism is ahead, and are they doing their best to rationalise it with an eye to those red days to come? (See Hogben’s Dangerous Thoughts.)

Here I cannot pursue in any detail the story of the Rise and Corruption of Marxism in Russia. It confirms in every particular my contention that the class-war idea is an entanglement and perversion of the world drive towards a world collectivism, a wasting disease of cosmopolitan socialism. It has followed in its general outline the common history of every revolt of the Have-nots since history began. Russia in the shadows displayed an immense inefficiency and sank slowly to Russia in the dark. Its galaxy of incompetent foremen, managers, organisers and so forth, developed the most complicated system of self-protection against criticism, they sabotaged one another, they intrigued against one another. You can read the quintessence of the thing in Littlepage’s In Search of Soviet Gold. And like every other Have-not revolt since the dawn of history, hero worship took possession of the insurgent masses. The inevitable Champion appeared. They escape from the Czar and in twenty years they are worshipping Stalin, originally a fairly honest, unoriginal, ambitious revolutionary, driven to self-defensive cruelty and inflated by flattery to his present quasi-divine autocracy. The cycle completes itself and we see that like every other merely insurrectionary revolution, nothing has changed; a lot of people have been liquidated and a lot of other people have replaced them and Russia seems returning back to the point at which it started, to a patriotic absolutism of doubtful efficiency and vague, incalculable aims. Stalin, I believe, is honest and benevolent in intention, he believes in collectivism simply and plainly, he is still under the impression that he is making a good thing of Russia and of the countries within her sphere of influence, and he is self-righteously impatient of criticism or opposition. His successor may not have the same disinterestedness.

But I have written enough to make it clear why we have to dissociate collectivisation altogether from the class war in our minds. Let us waste no more time on the spectacle of the Marxist putting the cart in front of the horse and tying himself up with the harness. We have to put all this proletarian distortion of the case out of our minds and start afresh upon the problem of how to realise the new and unprecedented possibilities of world collectivisation that have opened out upon the world in the past hundred years. That is a new story. An entirely different story.

We human+beings are facing gigantic forces that will either destroy our species altogether or lift it to an altogether unprecedented level of power and well-being. These forces have to be controlled or we shall be annihilated. But completely controlled they can abolish slavery - by the one sure means of making these things unnecessary. Class-war communism has its opportunity to realise all this, and it has failed to make good. So far it has only replaced one autocratic Russia by another. Russia, like all the rest of the world, is still facing the problem of the competent government of a collective system. She has not solved it.

The dictatorship of the proletariat has failed us. We have to look for possibilities of control in other directions. Are they to be found?



A friendly adviser reading the passage on p.47 protests against "the wombs of associated labour" as a mistranslation of the original German of the Manifesto. I took it from the translation of Professor Hirendranath Mukherjee in an Indian students’ journal, Sriharsha, which happened to be at my desk. But my adviser produces Lily G. Aitken and Frank C. Budgen in a Glasgow Socialist Labour Press publication, who gave it as "the lap of social labour", which is more refined but pure nonsense. The German word is "schoss", and in its widest sense it means the whole productive maternal outfit from bosom to knees and here quite definitely the womb. The French translation gives "sein", which at the first glance seems to carry gentility to an even higher level. But as you can say in French that an expectant mother carries her child in her "sein", I think Professor Mukherjee has it. Thousands of reverent young Communists must have read that "lap" without observing its absurdity. Marx is trying to make out that the increase of productive efficiency was due to "association" in factories. A better phrase to express his (wrong-headed) intention would have been "the co-ordinated operations of workers massed in factories".
31  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 07:56:50 pm
Chapter 3


AND NOW LET US come to the disruptive forces that have reduced that late-nineteenth-century dream of a powerful world patchwork of more and more civilised states linked by an ever-increasing financial and economic interdependence, to complete incredibility, and so forced upon every intelligent mind the need to work out a new conception of the World that ought to be. It is supremely important that the nature of these disruptive forces should be clearly understood and kept in mind. To grasp them is to hold the clues to the world’s present troubles. To forget about them, even for a moment, is to lose touch with essential reality and drift away into minor issues.

The first group of these forces is what people are accustomed to speak of as "the abolition of distance" and "the change of scale" in human operations. This "abolition of distance" began rather more than a century ago, and its earlier effects were not disruptive at all. It knit together the spreading United States of America over distances that might otherwise have strained their solidarity to the breaking-point, and it enabled the sprawling British Empire to sustain contacts round the whole planet.

The disruptive influence of the abolition of distance appeared only later. Let us be clear upon its essential significance. For what seemed like endless centuries the swiftest means of locomotion had been the horse on the high-road, the running man, the galley and the uncertain, weather-ruled sailing ship. (There was the Dutchman on skates on skates on his canals, but that was an exceptional culmination of speed and not for general application.) The political, social and imaginative life of man for all those centuries was adapted to these limiting conditions. They determined the distances to which marketable goods could conveniently be sent, the limits to which the ruler could send his orders and his solders, the bounds set to getting news, and indeed the whole scale of living. There could be very little real community feeling beyond the range of frequent intercourse.

Human life fell naturally therefore into areas determined by the interplay between these limitations and such natural obstacles as seas and mountains. Such countries as France, England, Egypt, Japan, appeared and reappeared in history like natural, necessary things, and though there were such larger political efforts as the Roman Empire, they never attained an enduring unity. The Roman Empire held together like wet blotting-paper; it was always falling to pieces. The older Empires, beyond their national nuclei, were mere precarious tribute-levying powers. What I have already called the world patchwork of the great and little Powers, was therefore, under the old horse-and-foot and sailing-ship conditions, almost as much a matter of natural necessity as the sizes of trees and animals.

Within a century all this has been changed and we have still to face up to what that change means for us.

First came steam, the steam-railway, the steamship, and then in a quickening crescendo came the internal combustion engine, electrical traction, the motor car, the motor boat, the aeroplane, the transmission of power from central power stations, the telephone, the radio. I feel apologetic in reciting this well-known story. I do so in order to enforce the statement that all the areas that were the most convenient and efficient for the old, time-honoured way of living, became more and more inconveniently close and narrow for the new needs. This applied to every sort of administrative area, from municipalities and urban districts and the range of distributing businesses, up to sovereign states. They were - and for the most part they still are - too small for the new requirements and far too close together. All over the social layout this tightening-up and squeezing together is an inconvenience, but when it comes to the areas of sovereign states it becomes impossibly dangerous. It becomes an intolerable thing; human life cannot go on, with the capitals of most of the civilised countries of the world within an hour’s bombing range of their frontiers, behind which attacks can be prepared and secret preparations made without any form of control. And yet we are still tolerant and loyal to arrangements that seek to maintain this state of affairs and treat it as though nothing else were possible.

The present war for and against Hitler and Stalin and Mr. Chamberlain and so forth, does not even touch upon the essential problem of the abolition of distance. It may indeed destroy everything and still settle nothing. If one could wipe out all the issues of the present conflict, we should still be confronted with the essential riddle, which is the abolition of the boundaries of most existing sovereign states and their merger in some larger Pax. We have to do that if any supportable human life is to go on. Treaties and mutual guarantees are not enough. We have surely learnt enough about the value of treaties during the last half-century to realise that. We have, because of the abolition of distance alone, to gather human affairs together under one common war-preventing control.

But this abolition of distance is only one most vivid aspect of the change in the conditions of human life. Interwoven with that is a general change of scale in human operations. The past hundred years has been an age of invention and discovery beyond the achievements of the preceding three millennia. In a book I published eight years ago, The Work, Wealth and Happiness of Mankind, I tried to summarise the conquest of power and substances that is still going on. There is more power expended in a modern city like Birmingham in a day than we need to keep the whole of Elizabethan England going for a year; there is more destructive energy in a single tank than sufficed the army of William I for the conquest of England. Man is able now to produce or destroy on a scale beyond comparison greater than he could before this storm of invention began. And the consequence is the continual further dislocation of the orderly social life of our great-great-grandfathers. No trade, no profession, is exempt. The old social routines and classifications have been, as people say, "knocked silly". There is no sort of occupation, fisheries, farming, textile work, metal work, mining which is not suffering from constant readjustment to new methods and facilities. Our traditions of trade and distribution flounder after these changes. Skilled occupations disappear in the general liquefaction.

The new power organisations are destroying the forests of the world at headlong speed, ploughing great grazing areas into deserts, exhausting mineral resources, killing off whales, seals and a multitude of rare and beautiful species, destroying the morale of every social type and devastating the planet. The institutions of the private appropriation of land and natural resources generally, and of private enterprise for profit, which did produce a fairly tolerable, stable and "civilised" social life for all but the most impoverished, in Europe, America and East, for some centuries, have been expanded to a monstrous destructiveness by the new opportunities. The patient, nibbling, enterprising profit-seeker of the past, magnified and equipped now with the huge claws and teeth the change of scale has provided for him, has torn the old economic order to rags. Quite apart from war, our planet is being wasted and disorganised. Yet the process goes on, without any general control, more monstrously destructive even than the continually enhanced terrors of modern warfare.

Now it has to be made clear that these two things, the manifest necessity for some collective world control to eliminate warfare and the less generally admitted necessity for a collective control of the economic and biological life of mankind, are aspects of one and the same process. Of the two the disorganisation of the ordinary life which is going on, war or no war, is the graver and least reversible. Both arise out of the abolition of distance and the change of scale, they affect and modify each other, and unless their parallelism and interdependence are recognised, any projects for world federation or anything of the sort are doomed inevitably to frustration.

That is where the League of nations broke down completely. It was legal; it was political. It was devised by an ex-professor of the old-fashioned history assisted by a few politicians. It ignored the vast disorganisation of human life by technical revolutions, big business and modern finance that was going on, of which the Great War itself was scarcely more than a by-product. It was constituted as though nothing of that sort was occurring.

This war storm which is breaking upon us now, due to the continued fragmentation of human government among a patchwork of sovereign states, is only one aspect of the general need for a rational consolidation of human affairs. The independent sovereign state with its perpetual war threat, armed with the resources of modern mechanical frightfulness, is only the most blatant and terrifying aspect of that same want of a coherent general control that makes overgrown, independent, sovereign, private business organisations and combinations, socially destructive. We should still be at the mercy of the "Napoleons" of commerce and the "Attilas" of finance, if there was not a gun or a battleship or a tank or a military uniform in the world. We should still be sold up and dispossessed.

Political federation, we have to realise, without a concurrent economic collectivisation, is bound to fail. The task of the peace-maker who really desires peace in a new world, involves not merely a political but a profound social revolution, profounder even than the revolution attempted by the Communists in Russia. The Russian Revolution failed not by its extremism but through the impatience, violence and intolerance of its onset, through lack of foresight and intellectual insufficiency. The cosmopolitan revolution to a world collectivism, which is the only alternative to chaos and degeneration before mankind, has to go much further than the Russian; it has to be more thorough and better conceived and its achievement demands a much more heroic and more steadfast thrust.

It serves no useful purpose to shut our eyes to the magnitude and intricacy of the task of making the world peace. These are the basic factors of the case.
32  General / General Discussion / Re: H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 07:55:59 pm

Chapter 2


BEFORE WE EXAMINE WHAT I have called so far the "disruptive forces" in the current social order, let me underline one primary necessity for the most outspoken free discussion of the battling organisations and the crumbling institutions amidst which we lead our present uncomfortable and precarious lives. There must be no protection for leaders and organisations from the most searching criticism, on the plea that out country is or may be at war. Or on any pretence. We must talk openly, widely and plainly. The war is incidental; the need for revolutionary reconstruction is fundamental. None of us are clear as yet upon some of the most vital questions before us, we are not lucid enough in our own minds to be ambiguous, and a mumbling tactfulness and indirect half-statements made with an eye upon some censor, will confuse our thoughts and the thoughts of those with whom we desire understanding, to the complete sterilisation and defeat of every reconstructive effort.

We want to talk and tell exactly what our ideas and feelings are, not only to our fellow citizens, but to our allies, to neutrals and, above all, to the people who are marshalled in arms against us. We want to get the same sincerity from them. Because until we have worked out a common basis of ideas with them, peace will be only an uncertain equilibrium while fresh antagonisms develop.

Concurrently with this war we need a great debate. We want every possible person in the world to take part in that debate. It is something much more important than the actual warfare. It is intolerable to think of this storm of universal distress leading up to nothing but some "conference" of diplomatists out of touch with the world, with secret sessions, ambiguous "understandings." . . . Not twice surely can that occur. And yet what is going to prevent its recurring?

It is quite easy to define the reasonable limits of censorship in a belligerent country. It is manifest that the publication of any information likely to be of the slightest use to an enemy must be drastically anticipated and suppressed; not only direct information, for example, but intimations and careless betrayals about the position and movements of ships, troops, camps, depots of munitions, food supplies, and false reports of defeats and victories and coming shortages, anything that may lead to blind panic and hysteria, and so forth and so on. But the matter takes on a different aspect altogether when it comes to statements and suggestions that may affect public opinion in one’s own country or abroad, and which may help us towards wholesome and corrective political action.

One of the more unpleasant aspects of a state of war under modern conditions is the appearance of a swarm of individuals, too clever by half, in positions of authority. Excited, conceited, prepared to lie, distort and generally humbug people into states of acquiescence, resistance, indignation, vindictiveness, doubt and mental confusion, states of mind supposed to be conductive to a final military victory. These people love to twist and censor facts. It gives them a feeling of power; if they cannot create they can at least prevent and conceal. Particularly they poke themselves in between us and the people with whom we are at war to distort any possible reconciliation. They sit, filled with the wine of their transitory powers, aloof from the fatigues and dangers of conflict, pulling imaginary strings in people’s minds.

In Germany popular thought is supposed to be under the control of Herr Dr Goebbels; in Great Britain we writers have been invited to place ourselves at the disposal of some Ministry of Information, that is to say at the disposal of hitherto obscure and unrepresentative individuals, and write under its advice. Officials from the British Council and the Conservative Party Headquarters appear in key positions in this Ministry of Information. That curious and little advertised organisation I have just mentioned, the creation I am told of Lord Lloyd, that British Council, sends emissaries abroad, writers, well-dressed women and other cultural personages, to lecture, charm and win over foreign appreciation for British characteristics, for British scenery, British political virtues and so forth. Somehow this is supposed to help something or other. Quietly, unobtrusively, this has gone on. Maybe these sample British give unauthorised assurances but probably they do little positive harm. But they ought not to be employed at all. Any government propaganda is contrary to the essential spirit of democracy. The expression of opinion and collective thought should be outside the range of government activities altogether. It should be the work of free individuals whose prominence is dependent upon the response and support of the general mind.

But here I have to make amends to Lord Lloyd. I was led to believe that the British Council was responsible for Mr. Teeling, the author of Crisis for Christianity, and I said as much in The Fate of Homo Sapiens. I now unsay it. Mr. Teeling, I gather, was sent out upon his journeys by a Catholic newspaper. The British Council was entirely innocent of him.

It is not only that the Ministries of Information and Propaganda do their level best to divert the limited gifts and energies of such writers, lecturers and talkers as we possess, to the production of disingenuous muck that will muddle the public mind and mislead the enquiring foreigner, but that they show a marked disposition to stifle any free and independent utterances that my seem to traverse their own profound and secret plans for the salvation of mankind.

Everywhere now it is difficult to get adequate, far-reaching publicity for outspoken discussion of the way the world is going, and the political, economic and social forces that carry us along. This is not so much due to deliberate suppression as to the general disorder into which human affairs are dissolving. There is indeed in the Atlantic world hardly a sign as yet of that direct espionage upon opinion that obliterates the mental life of the intelligent Italian or German or Russian to-day almost completely; one may still think what one likes, say what one likes and write what one likes, but nevertheless there is already an increasing difficulty in getting bold, unorthodox views heard and read. Newspapers are afraid upon all sorts of minor counts, publishers, with such valiant exceptions as the publishers of this matter, are morbidly discreet; they get Notice D to avoid this or that particular topic; there are obscure boycotts and trade difficulties hindering the wide diffusion of general ideas in countless ways. I do not mean there is any sort of organised conspiracy to suppress discussion, but I do say that the Press, the publishing and bookselling organisations in our free countries, provide a very ill-organised and inadequate machinery for the ventilation and distribution of thought.

Publishers publish for nothing but safe profits; it would astound a bookseller to tell him he was part of the world’s educational organisation or a publisher’s traveller, that he existed for any other purpose than to book maximum orders for best sellers and earn a record commission - letting the other stuff, the highbrow stuff and all that, go hang. They do not understand that they ought to put public service before gain. They have no inducement to do so and no pride in their function. Theirs is the morale of a profiteering world. Newspapers like to insert brave-looking articles of conventional liberalism, speaking highly of peace and displaying a noble vagueness about its attainment; now we are at war they will publish the fiercest attacks upon the enemy - because such attacks are supposed to keep up the fighting spirit of the country; but any ideas that are really loudly and clearly revolutionary they dare not circulate at all. Under these baffling conditions there is no thorough discussion of the world outlook whatever, anywhere. The democracies are only a shade better than the dictatorships in this respect. It is ridiculous to represent them as realms of light at issue with darkness.

This great debate upon the reconstruction of the world is a thing more important and urgent than the war, and there exist no adequate media for the utterance and criticism and correction of any broad general convictions. There is a certain fruitless and unproductive spluttering of constructive ideas, but there is little sense of sustained enquiry, few real interchanges, inadequate progress, nothing is settled, nothing is dismissed as unsound and nothing is won permanently. No one seems to hear what anyone else is saying. That is because there is no sense of an audience for these ideologists. There is no effective audience saying rudely and obstinately: "What A. has said, seems important. Will B. and C., instead of bombinating in the void, tell us exactly where and why they differ from A.? And now we have got to the common truth of A., B., C., and D. Here is F. saying something. Will he be so good as to correlate what he has to say with A., B., C., and D.?"

But there is no such background of an intelligently observant and critical world audience in evidence. There are a few people here and there reading and thinking in disconnected fragments. This is all the thinking our world is doing in the face of planetary disaster. The universities, bless them! are in uniform or silent.

We need to air our own minds; we need frank exchanges, if we are to achieve any common understanding. We need to work out a clear conception of the world order we would prefer to this present chaos, we need to dissolve or compromise upon our differences so that we may set our faces with assurance towards an attainable world peace. The air is full of the panaceas of half-wits, none listening to the others and most of them trying to silence the others in their impatience. Thousands of fools are ready to write us a complete prescription for our world troubles. Will people never realise their own ignorance and incompleteness, from which arise this absolute necessity for the plainest statement of the realities of the problem, for the most exhaustive and unsparing examination of differences of opinion, and for the most ruthless canvassing of every possibility, however unpalatable it may seem at first, of the situation?

Before anything else, therefore, in this survey of the way to world peace, I put free speech and vigorous publication. It is the thing best worth fighting for. It is the essence of your personal honour. It is your duty as a world citizen to do what you can for that. You have not only to resist suppressions, you have to fight your way out of the fog. If you find your bookseller or newsagent failing to distribute any type of publication whatever - even if you are in entire disagreement with the views of that publication - you should turn the weapon of the boycott upon the offender and find another bookseller or newsagent for everything you read. The would-be world citizen should subscribe also to such organisation as the National Council for Civil Liberties; he should use any advantage his position may give him to check suppression of free speech; and he should accustom himself to challenge nonsense politely but firmly and say fearlessly and as clearly as possible what is in his mind and to listen as fearlessly to whatever is said to him. So that he may know better either through reassurance or correction. To get together with other people to argue and discuss, to think and organise and then implement thought is the first duty of every reasonable man.

This world of ours is going to pieces. It has to be reconstructed and it can only be effectively reconstructed in the light. Only the free, clear, open mind can save us, and these difficulties and obstructions on our line of thought are as evil as children putting obstacles on a railway line or scattering nails on an automobile speed track.

This great world debate must go on, and it must go on now. Now while the guns are still thudding, is the time for thought. It is incredibly foolish to talk as so many people do of ending the war and then having a World Conference to inaugurate a new age. So soon as the fighting stops the real world conference, the live discussion, will stop, too. The diplomats and politicians will assemble with an air of profound competence and close the doors upon the outer world and resume - Versailles. While the silenced world gapes and waits upon their mysteries.
33  General / General Discussion / H. G. WELLS - THE NEW WORLD ORDER on: July 23, 2010, 07:55:18 pm
Suggest this be added to the 'documents' section


Whether it is attainable, how it can be attained, and what sort of world a world at peace will have to be.

Chapter 1


IN THIS SMALL BOOK I want to set down as compactly, clearly and usefully as possible the gist of what I have learnt about war and peace in the course of my life. I am not going to write peace propaganda here. I am going to strip down certain general ideas and realities of primary importance to their framework, and so prepare a nucleus of useful knowledge for those who have to go on with this business of making a world peace. I am not going to persuade people to say "Yes, yes" for a world peace; already we have had far too much abolition of war by making declarations and signing resolutions; everybody wants peace or pretends to want peace, and there is no need to add even a sentence more to the vast volume of such ineffective stuff. I am simply attempting to state the things we must do and the price we must pay for world peace if we really intend to achieve it.

Until the Great War, the First World War, I did not bother very much about war and peace. Since then I have almost specialised upon this problem. It is not very easy to recall former states of mind out of which, day by day and year by year, one has grown, but I think that in the decades before 1914 not only I but most of my generation - in the British Empire, America, France and indeed throughout most of the civilised world - thought that war was dying out.

So it seemed to us. It was an agreeable and therefore a readily acceptable idea. We imagined the Franco-German War of 1870-71 and the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78 were the final conflicts between Great Powers, that now there was a Balance of Power sufficiently stable to make further major warfare impracticable. A Triple Alliance faced a Dual Alliance and neither had much reason for attacking the other. We believed war was shrinking to mere expeditionary affairs on the outskirts of our civilisation, a sort of frontier police business. Habits of tolerant intercourse, it seemed, were being strengthened every year that the peace of the Powers remained unbroken.

There was in deed a mild armament race going on; mild by our present standards of equipment; the armament industry was a growing and enterprising on; but we did not see the full implication of that; we preferred to believe that the increasing general good sense would be strong enough to prevent these multiplying guns from actually going off and hitting anything. And we smiled indulgently at uniforms and parades and army manœuvres. They were the time-honoured toys and regalia of kings and emperors. They were part of the display side of life and would never get to actual destruction and killing. I do not think that exaggerates the easy complacency of, let us say, 1895, forty-five years ago. It was a complacency that lasted with most of us up to 1914. In 1914 hardly anyone in Europe or America below the age of fifty had seen anything of war in his own country.

The world before 1900 seemed to be drifting steadily towards a tacit but practical unification. One could travel without a passport over the larger part of Europe; the Postal Union delivered one’s letters uncensored and safely from Chile to China; money, based essentially on gold, fluctuated only very slightly; and the sprawling British Empire still maintained a tradition of free trade, equal treatment and open-handedness to all comers round and about the planet. In the United States you could go for days and never see a military uniform. Compared with to-day that was, upon the surface at any rate, an age of easy-going safety and good humour. Particularly for the North Americans and the Europeans.

But apart from that steady, ominous growth of the armament industry there were other and deeper forces at work that were preparing trouble. The Foreign Offices of the various sovereign states had not forgotten the competitive traditions of the eighteenth century. The admirals and generals were contemplating with something between hostility and fascination, the hunger weapons the steel industry was gently pressing into their hands. Germany did not share the self-complacency of the English-speaking world; she wanted a place in the sun; there was increasing friction about the partition of the raw material regions of Africa; the British suffered from chronic Russophobia with regard to their vast apportions in the East, and set themselves to nurse Japan into a modernised imperialist power; and also they "remembered Majuba"; the United States were irritated by the disorder of Cuba and felt that the weak, extended Spanish possessions would be all the better for a change of management. So the game of Power Politics went on, but it went on upon the margins of the prevailing peace. There were several wars and changes of boundaries, but they involved no fundamental disturbance of the general civilised life; they did not seem to threaten its broadening tolerations and understandings in any fundamental fashion. Economic stresses and social trouble stirred and muttered beneath the orderly surfaces of political life, but threatened no convulsion. The idea of altogether eliminating war, of clearing what was left of it away, was in the air, but it was free from any sense of urgency. The Hague Tribunal was established and there was a steady dissemination of the conceptions of arbitration and international law. It really seemed to many that the peoples of the earth were settling down in their various territories to a litigious rather than a belligerent order. If there was much social injustice it was being mitigated more and more by a quickening sense of social decency. Acquisitiveness conducted itself with decorum and public-spiritedness was in fashion. Some of it was quite honest public-spiritedness.

In those days, and they are hardly more than half a lifetime behind us, no one thought of any sort of world administration. That patchwork of great Powers and small Powers seemed the most reasonable and practicable method of running the business of mankind. Communications were far too difficult for any sort of centralised world controls. Around the World in Eighty Days, when it was published seventy years ago, seemed an extravagant fantasy. It was a world without telephone or radio, with nothing swifter than a railway train or more destructive than the earlier types of H.E. shell. They were marvels. It was far more convenient to administer that world of the Balance of Power in separate national areas and, since there were such limited facilities for peoples to get at one another and do each other mischiefs, there seemed no harm in ardent patriotism and the complete independence of separate sovereign states.

Economic life was largely directed by irresponsible private businesses and private finance which, because of their private ownership, were able to spread out their unifying transactions in a network that paid little attention to frontiers and national, racial or religious sentimentality. "Business" was much more of a world commonwealth than the political organisations. There were many people, especially in America, who imagined that "Business" might ultimately unify the world and governments sink into subordination to its network.

Nowadays we can be wise after the event and we can see that below this fair surface of things, disruptive forces were steadily gathering strength. But these disruptive forces played a comparatively small rôle in the world spectacle of half a century ago, when the ideas of that older generation which still dominates our political life and the political education of its successors, were formed. It is from the conflict of those Balance of Power and private enterprise ideas, half a century old, that one of the main stresses of our time arises. These ideas worked fairly well in their period and it is still with extreme reluctance that our rulers, teachers, politicians, face the necessity for a profound mental adaptation of their views, methods and interpretations to these disruptive forces that once seemed so negligible and which are now shattering their old order completely.

It was because of this belief in a growing good-will among nations, because of the general satisfaction with things as they were, that the German declarations of war in 1914 aroused such a storm of indignation throughout the entire comfortable world. It was felt that the German Kaiser had broken the tranquillity of the world club, wantonly and needlessly. The war was fought "against the Hohenzollerns." They were to be expelled from the club, certain punitive fines were to be paid and all would be well. That was the British idea of 1914. This out-of-date war business was then to be cleared up once for all by a mutual guarantee by all the more respectable members of the club through a League of Nations. There was no apprehension of any deeper operating causes in that great convulsion on the part of the worthy elder statesmen who made the peace. And so Versailles and its codicils.

For twenty years the disruptive forces have gone on growing beneath the surface of that genteel and shallow settlement, and twenty years there has been no resolute attack upon the riddles with which their growth confronts us. For all that period of the League of Nations has been the opiate of liberal thought in the world.

To-day there is war to get rid of Adolf Hitler, who has now taken the part of the Hohenzollerns in the drama. He too has outraged the Club Rules and he too is to be expelled. The war, the Chamberlain-Hitler War, is being waged so far by the British Empire in quite the old spirit. It has learnt nothing and forgotten nothing. There is the same resolute disregard of any more fundamental problem.

Still the minds of our comfortable and influential ruling-class people refuse to accept the plain intimation that their time is over, that the Balance of Power and uncontrolled business methods cannot continue, and that Hitler, like the Hohenzollerns, is a mere offensive pustule on the face of a deeply ailing world. To get rid of him and his Nazis will be no more a cure for the world’s ills than scraping will heal measles. The disease will manifest itself in some new eruption. It is the system of nationalist individualism and unco-ordinated enterprise that is the world’s disease, and it is the whole system that has to go. It has to be reconditioned down to its foundations or replaced. It cannot hope to "muddle through" amiably, wastefully and dangerously, a second time.

World peace means all that much revolution. More and more of us begin to realise that it cannot mean less.

The first thing, therefore that has to be done in thinking out the primary problems of world peace is to realise this, that we are living in the end of a definite period of history, the period of the sovereign states. As we used to say in the eighties with ever-increasing truth: "We are in an age of transition". Now we get some measure of the acuteness of the transition. It is a phase of human life which may lead, as I am trying to show, either to a new way of living for our species or else to a longer or briefer dégringolade of violence, misery, destruction, death and the extinction of mankind. These are not rhetorical phrases I am using here; I mean exactly what I say, the disastrous extinction of mankind.

That is the issue before us. It is no small affair of parlour politics we have to consider. As I write, in the moment, thousands of people are being killed, wounded, hunted, tormented, ill-treated, delivered up to the most intolerable and hopeless anxiety and destroyed morally and mentally, and there is nothing in sight at present to arrest this spreading process and prevent its reaching you and yours. It is coming for you and yours now at a great pace. Plainly in so far as we are rational foreseeing creatures there is nothing for any of us now but to make this world peace problem the ruling interest and direction of our lives. If we run away from it it will pursue and get us. We have to face it. We have to solve it or be destroyed by it. It is as urgent and comprehensive as that.
34  General / General Discussion / Re: CNN Broadcasts Major Cyber War Game Propaganda on: July 23, 2010, 07:49:39 pm
Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Part 9
Pages: [1]
Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy
Page created in 0.27 seconds with 19 queries.