[GJM] Is Money Obsolete?

[ecopilgrim at aabol.com]

Dan Parker wrote in part: 



Shutting down the well and killing most of the populace

(i.e. eliminating the money system) would not enter into

the thought stream of anyone that understood the concept.



Eco: Dan, I very much agree with you that money is only

a "symbol" to which each of us must agree as to what it

represents. What is happening is that as human consciousness

matures and becomes more "response-enabled" then new and

more mature systems are required as we evolve into new system

configurations which bring the human family back into balance

with the natural system from which we originally emanate. 

Growth requires imbalance as it is the "friction" (disagreement)

created by this factor which creates the "spark" that ignites 

the fire to drive us forward into more and more so-called 

"progressive states of mind/consciousness.          



However, I disagree with regard to local currencies based on 

barter and trade being something associated with the middle

ages, in that turning toward local currencies will provide 

ways for local communities to obtain the means to do what 

is necessary at the local level and as determined community 

by community and ecosystem by ecosystem. There is no "one size 

fits all" answer to how to restore the earth in a manner that 

will allow it to continue to operate as our "life support system".

And communities need to be free to do "whatever it takes" to

accomplish sustainable living. 



As we are witnessing, large national economies are leading us

toward more and more aberrant behavior. They also serve to largely 

delink people from the basic qualities of life inherent at the 

beginning of our social evolution. Biologically unprepared for 

the "loss of soul" this causes, as a society we now suffer from 

the "pathology of dissociation" with the add-on disease of "mass

addiction" as we are led more and more into the promise of a false

"heaven" by religious belief systems. As an "electronagnetic system"

which science is now proving we are, we have become "ungrounded".         



What you suggest here may be viable in the long run, but I also

feel we have to look at the short-term as well. While it is 

going to be necessary for us to make a "quantum leap" it is my

feeling that this leap has to be prepared for "step-by-step"

with intuition paving the way forward.  



I have been thinking along the lines of a "mixed economy" in that

people at the local level must "delink" themselves from the 

national economy so they don't "go down with the ship" as it

collapses. However, as you say, we are going to need a way to

aggragate funding to develop the 'new' and 'appropriate' 

technologies so that we are, as you also write, moving toward:  



<a society so technologically advanced, that materialistic goods

can be created out of thin air, via nanotechnology or some such>



In order to move into the above configuration it is necessary 

for us to first develop Zero Point Energy.  



While many are not advanced enough in consciousness to embrace

ZPE, John Gordon reveals in his book:  "EGYPT - Child of ATLANTIS"

that the Egyptians knew of ZPE and how to utilize it. This is how

they were able to move the large blocks of the pyramids into place.

Gordon's book was initially published in 1997 and revised in 2004.

It is a "must read" for anyone contemplating the challenge of how

to move into the future.  



A lot to think about here. 



marguerite 



             





********** Original Email *********

** To:   "Discussion Forum for Global Justice"

	<discussion at globaljusticemovement.net>

** From: dan.parker at globaljusticemovement.org

** Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 02:44:08

**********



Money can be made obsolete by



a) a society so technologically advanced, that materialistic goods

can be created out of thin air, via nanotechnology or some such



or



b) through a return to the 90% self-produced consumption

and double coincidence barter system of the middle ages;

which would entail an early death for billions.



As it is, money eliminates the double coincidence needed

for a barter economy and makes possible wonderous

technology through the specialization that is only possible

where double coincidence is not a concern.



Money is strictly symbolic in nature, and can symbolize

whatever the system is designed for. If the poison

of compound interest math is put into the money system,

(or other injustices involving money's creation), then the

symbol will become a drag on what is really possible.

That is not the fault of money, or the symbol itself.



Imagine a tribe subsists on water from condensation and

struggles to survive ( as did *all* humans before the age

of specialization that money made possible). Now imagine

this tribe digs a well and can quench its thirst fairly easy.

Except that someone starts poisoning the well, causing

illness.



A wiseman of the village will look at the entire

history, at examples of unpoisoned wells (i.e. the Guesney

Island experiment for money, New Zealand's success in

climbing out of the depression before WWII ) and so on.

Shutting down the well and killing most of the populace

(i.e. eliminating the money system) would not enter into

the thought stream of anyone that understood the concept.



Regards

Dan Parker





----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Steve Consilvio" <steve at behappyandfree.com>

To: <discussion at globaljusticemovement.net>

Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:18 AM

Subject: [GJM] Is Money Obsolete?





> Hi All,

>

> In watching the discussion here, there and everywhere, always the

> discussion is about money. The rich fear the poor, the poor fear the

> rich. Nobody can get their budget to balance. Corporations,

> governments, NGO's are all perpetually seeking more money to survive,

> the same as the individual and families.

>

> Maybe the time has come to recognize the obvious: Money itself is the

> problem. Not who has more of it, or who has less of it, but the

> intellectual idea that time and land should be "valued" by this third

> party we call "The Marketplace," and the concept of money.

>

> We need to have a Jubillee and move on. What you possess is what you

> own. The Charters are meaningless. In reading over some peace

> treaties of prior centuries yesterday, I was amazed at how the

> concept of debt endures even at the end of war and a cycle of

> destruction. Why is there so much fear in regard to forgiving debt

> and moving on? This is all indicative of an inability to trust one

> another, and a perpetuation of the idea that money is "real" and of

> primary importance.

>

> Until we recognize that money is meaningless, and that it is the

> relationship between people that is the most important, any attempt

> at reform is simply to recreate the problem anew. The marketplace of

> profit and interest is not about making fair exchanges (much less

> charity) it is about "regulating" unfair exchanges. What an oxymoron!

> Like "the rules of war," it simply makes no sense to regulate what is

> an insane behavior with "rules" to legitimize the insanity.

>

> Money is all the media and everyone talks about. Prices are good,

> bad, too rich, too poor, going up, going down, meeting expectations,

> passing expectations not meeting expectations, needing relief,

> underbudget, foreclose, bankruptcy, eviction, overpaid, underpaid,

> fines, penalty etc., and so on. All of these "financial

> relationships" are defined by the supremacy of money in the exchanges

> between men and institutions. The law creates money, but it is men

> that accept the concept.

>

> Rather than burning books, burning buildings, burning people, burning

> ships, burning bridges and burning our possessions, maybe what we

> need to burn is the currency. Forgive all debts, erase all the rules,

> and start over. All of those things that were just burned, however,

> belong to "other" people. We need to start locally, in our own

> community, and with ourself.

>

> The only promise that democracy ever offered was the ability to

> change the world without the need for blood being spilled. Thus far

> it is a failure because both the people and the leaders think alike

> regarding money. (Even Cromwell returned to the idea of tolerating

> Interest once victorious.) Democracy can only solve a political

> problem, it takes a change in economic behavior to solve an economic

> problem.  The politically ambitious do not have an economic analysis

> of what is wrong, only WHO is to blame. What I am describing is not a

> political action, it does not require political power; what it does

> require is a change in social mores regarding money. In essence, we

> need a divestiture movement from banking, insurance and the stock

> market. The promise of making wealth grow is the seduction that

> creates this ponzi scheme we are all trapped in. These institutions

> find it impossible to survive, too.

>

> In other words, by creating a PERSONAL DIVESTITURE MOVEMENT, the net

> effect is that the ponzi scheme will collapse. The ponzi scheme only

> works if new people are perpetually buying into the existing scheme.

> This should prevent an economic collapse, or war, because the net

> effect, as it is done slowly, will be to create a pricing

> equilibrium. As institutions follow suit, because they only do what

> everybody else does, too, we eventually end up with a society where

> people and relationships are valued more than money and objects. If

> the ponzi scheme cannot pay its dividends, then nobody will play, and

> there will be nobody working its ropes in a desperate attempt to

> survive. Mao's "paper tiger" will be slayed. At a minimum, the next

> generation will be warned not to play, whereas today they are

> indoctrinated into playing, and are taught the idea that stockholders

> are "owners" of the company.

>

> The world doesn't need more absentee "owners" it needs more people

> sharing and working together. That is true of both political and

> economic power. Our crisis can be understood as the economic

> mismanagement of surplus. People can only invest what they can afford

> to lose. Rather than using their surplus, what they are really doing

> is abusing their surplus, and devaluing it by creating inflation, the

> very thing they hoped to avoid. The more successfully money "grows"

> the less value it holds. The cure is worse than the disease. Our

> money, and our money system, is obsolete. A better world is possible.

>

> peace,

> steve consilvio

> www.behappyandfree.com

>

> _______________________________________________

> Discussion mailing list

> Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net

> http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net

>

>

> -- 

> No virus found in this incoming message.

> Checked by AVG Free Edition.

> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 3/8/2007 

> 10:58 AM

> 





_______________________________________________

Discussion mailing list

Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net

http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net