Rev.Tom: THANKS for your posts. Haven't finished reading the Collective Empowerment & Entheogenic Freedom piece yet (though I've skimmed all of it & carefully read, so far, about a third of it--so far, so **brilliant**!!), but you post here, about forming a FutureHi Think Tank/Consulting Group is spot-on! I'd like to be professor of Law & Futuristics, say, but **there is no such position to be had in current academe!!** Plus, a Think Tank envrionment has much more freedom to pursue truly innovative, *avante-gard* stuff. To get **PAID** for doing what we love to do here, and for so much more communication/research/conceptual-innovation, etc., etc. that we'd LIKE to (be ABLE to, AFFORD to) do, **THAT** would be wonderful...

Posted by: MCP2012 at March 23, 2006 04:33 PM

Oh ok, so you are only in it for a "pile of money." Makes sense to me that you are trying to start your own religion. Hah, you even sign off as "reverend." What a bunch of thieving charlatans, you all are, following in the same path that others have done for thousands of years. You are no better than those rats.

Posted by: beavis at March 23, 2006 07:56 PM

MCP2012,

Thanks for the encouragement. It feels good after all the work I put into that Collective Empowerment material.
Let me know how you feel about the seven points of coherency when you get finished reading it.

Rev. Tom

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

Dear Beavis@Butthead,

I have to say your abusive tirade fits your name perfectly.

> Oh ok, so you are only in it for a "pile of money."

The line between psychedelic futurism and new-age flapdoodle becomes very thin if you don't deal with the issue of money. Perhaps we should let it all keep concentrating uncontrollably to the banks, corporations, and ultra-rich. Are you quite prepared to die as a result? If you bothered to read my writings you'd know that money is part of an integral whole.

> Makes sense to me that you are trying to start your own religion.

So what religion are you? An atheist or hard-core rationalist, or perhaps an environmentalist or eco-Pagan? Religion is ubiquitous in human culture, even if some versions of it pretend not to be religions. We're simply trying to be conscious of the ubiquity, and seeking to reconcile the opposing viewpoints instead of dissing everybody who holds a different viewpoint. If this leads to the formation of a new meta-religion, and/or a "visionary jihad" so what. What's your basis for casting judgement?

> What a bunch of thieving charlatans, you all are, following in the same path that
> others have done for thousands of years. You are no better than those rats.

Was Saint Francis a charlatan? Or the many other sincere saints like him? We all agree that hard biased fundamentalism is a problem. And if the narrow viewpoint therein gets promoted as the whole of reality, then perhaps we could make a legitimate accusation of charlatanism. But if so, then no greater group of charlatans has ever existed than the hard-core rationalists/skeptics who keep peddling the dogma of lumpen materialism and unidirectional causation despite the fact that holographic time-symmetric causation is easily proven by 12+ logical/philosophical arguments, and 40+ pieces of empirical/observational evidence. Likewise, a very close runner for all-time charlatanism is Sigmund Fraud and his early disciples — a group who managed to: a) establish themselves by pirating the hard earned respectability of the material sciences, b) market a system of psychotherapy that has been shown to have no statistical benefit even after ten years duration, and c) secure a monopoly for this worthless psychotherapy via the coercive lethal force of the law. And not to far behind we have there "disciplines" or cosmology and Darwinism where linear-time theories with a near-infinite number of adjustable parameters are routinely sold by hand-waving, and "heretics" are routinely banned from the field.

> Hah, you even sign off as "reverend."

For what it matters, I'm an ordained minister in 21 apostolic lineages.
And I'm committed to the great blossoming of Life that has been prearranged by universal intelligence.

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 24, 2006 07:18 AM

Dear Tom,

I definitely agree with your seven fundamentals. They are spot on. I have now read your manifesto a couple of times through and for the most part agree with every part of it. There are of course LOTS of specifics and details of it that I very much want to discuss with you - POINT BY POINT - to see more precisely how we are in alignment. Would you be amendable to a phone conversation in which we could do a read through? Contact me privately for my phone number.

In summation I can say that you have given this all a tremendous amount of thought and deep emotional and spiritual "work through". You address so many disparate issues with a degree of reconciliation I have never seen before. Your plans are ambitious but emminently logical that it is hard to find argument with the overall thrust of where you're heading. I definitely have concerns on portions of it, which I would like to discuss with you.

My biggest present concern, is that although your plans are brilliant, it seems that with the very little time remaining until this do-or-die bifurcation point, the odds of bringing your ideas to fruition seem awfully slim. Given sufficient time, ALL of your ideas would likely become manifest, but it is precisely that kind of time we dont have. This is why, recently, I have taken a different tack, which comes down to making peace with my life (thinking it may quite probably end soon), while still maintain hope that either I or the human spirit will continue in some form.

Posted by: Paul at March 24, 2006 09:52 AM

Rev - beavis is clearly eventhorizon - delete him or ignore him but dont waste your time trying to explain yourself to the nutbar - anyone who cant tell the difference between spirituality and religion isnt worth it...

Posted by: Glandmaster at March 24, 2006 10:16 AM

like paul said... it seems like life is pushing humans not to try and make extravagent plans but to fully resolve all the issues they face in life. if our consciousness is unified beyond death already, it should simply be a very personal spiritual journey before we reach our personal omega point of samsaric resolution. too much forward thinking without personal accountability in the now only seems like it distracts and puts off nirvana. scifi thought we'd be flying spaceships by now back in the early psychedelic days. interestingly we are being exposed to the same dead, re-run, corporate, collared-shirt archetypes instead of living out a prosperous reality that our "vast" technological knoweldge seems like it deserves. perhaps the plan of earth is to make the archetypes so defined that when the time comes for all humans to choose it will be their own self-judgement. it seems like an action-tank would be more useful than a think-tank at this point.

Posted by: erik at March 24, 2006 10:41 AM

Posted by: Paul at March 24, 2006 09:52 AM
> My biggest present concern, is that although your plans are brilliant, it seems that with the very little time remaining until this do-or-die bifurcation
> point, the odds of bringing your ideas to fruition seem awfully slim. Given sufficient time, ALL of your ideas would likely become manifest, but it is
> precisely that kind of time we dont have. This is why, recently, I have taken a different tack, which comes down to making peace with my life
> (thinking it may quite probably end soon), while still maintain hope that either I or the human spirit will continue in some form.

The full transformation of the human socio-economic system will take an entire Kondratieff cycle (~70 years). The do or die bifurcation point of circa 2010-2014 is a deadline for the Western world to prevent a catastrophic banking failure by becoming irrevocably aligned to this destiny. Fortunately, this alignment would not be a process to be struggled with, but a "quantum shift" that could be easily catalyzed within the core beliefs of our culture. As far as I can tell, this catalysis would be unstoppable given a three way alliance between: a) the visionary think-tank that I am proposing, b) the energy industry, and c) the Jewish faith. What would make it unstoppable would be, first and foremost, the coherency that would emerge vis a vis the seven points of agreement. This coherency would allow intelligent time-reverse energy from the living future to pass through us into the past, and by this means continually arrange synchronicities in our favor. (Indeed, I have been swimming in beneficent synchronicities the for the last few weeks, with some being utterly miraculous.)

At a more practical level, our initiative would be unstoppable due to: a) our ability to entrain Internet discussion groups as per the unwritten section IX of my paper, b) our ability to occupy the paradigmatic center, as per section XII, c) our ability to draw sustenance from our two partners, and d) the ability of said partners, together, to turn the banking industry in favor of paradigm change, and bring them into the alliance as fourth partner. When the visionary jihad has built up a good head of steam (and cash), the quantum shift would be precipitated by turning the jihad against the public school system, and engaging a prearranged "publicity stunt." We can talk about these things more on the phone.

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

Posted by: erik at March 24, 2006 10:41 AM:
> it seems like an action-tank would be more useful than a think-tank at this point.

I totally agree, and envision a very proactive initiative (as you can see from my response to Paul).
I called it a think-tank because people can relate to this word.

> like paul said... it seems like life is pushing humans not to try and make extravagent plans but to fully resolve all the issues they face in life.

Since the manifest extravagance of the living destiny is largely in the future, this has a large degree of truth to it. On the other hand, we need to have truly extravagant vision, and an ambitious plan for conveying that vision or we will become disconnected from our destiny. We likewise need to have an ambitious plan for establishing the dominion of wisdom over money.

> if our consciousness is unified beyond death already, it should simply be a very personal spiritual journey before we reach our personal omega point
> of samsaric resolution. too much forward thinking without personal accountability in the now only seems like it distracts and puts off nirvana.

The attainment of nirvana from this level of life is nominally impossible. It does happen to a few gurus etc. via the spiritual equivalent of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. For ordinary people like us, the seeking of nirvana is one of the most counter-productive things possible, for it distracts us from the path of collective embodied enlightenment (i.e. the path of the Bodhisattva) — which is the only way forward for 99.9999% of all humanity.

> scifi thought we'd be flying spaceships by now back in the early psychedelic days. interestingly we are being exposed to the same dead, re-run,
> corporate, collared-shirt archetypes instead of living out a prosperous reality that our "vast" technological knoweldge seems like it deserves.
> perhaps the plan of earth is to make the archetypes so defined that when the time comes for all humans to choose it will be their own self-judgement.

The dead, re-run, corporate, collared-shirt archetypes are indeed a big part of the problem, as will be the death of humanity at its own hands if we don't overcome these one-sided archetypes. Fortunately, the defining of the archetypes is also the thing that clears the way for the reconciliation of opposites. Do you feel like joining us in this effort? Can you agree with the seven points of coherency?

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

Posted by: Glandmaster at March 24, 2006 10:16 AM
> Rev - beavis is clearly eventhorizon - delete him or ignore him but dont waste your time trying to explain
> yourself to the nutbar - anyone who cant tell the difference between spirituality and religion isnt worth it...

Thanks for the heads-up about eventhorizon's alter egos. I thought about deleting his comment, but he concentrated so many negative distortions in such a short post, that I couldn't resist tearing it apart. Who knows, maybe my response will head off other "hit and run" posts of a similar nature.

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 24, 2006 05:24 PM

i agree with the points of coherency, and i think my own self-doubt comes from the fact that i (like most) am just one of the many who has been injected into this idea without the social hegemonic power to make such extravagent ideas powerful among those in my own life. at this stage in the game it seems like the community desires to be more closely networked so we can be supportive of each other individually. i see the information on futurehi as very powerful to those looking for answers but once you are turned on, all that is left to do is place more pressure on the specific writiers here to serve up the next step to enlightenment. i only feel lost when staring the inevitable aloneness of personality in the face, but to move closer together, to beat the aloneness for as long as possible, seems like itd be most powerful for our heart. the notion of a think-tank seems scarily, potentially elitist. maybe we should "come together, right now" before making any big steps.
always willing to help and hug :)

Posted by: erik at March 24, 2006 06:22 PM

I think a think tank is the way to go! Definately.

The only problem I have with the whole idea, especially the "Collective Empowerment" paper, is that so much is predicated on the 2012 thing, and quite frankly, that's the only idea I'm not so sure about...

Posted by: truthtechnician at March 24, 2006 06:22 PM

Eric,

There's a lot of wisdom in what you're saying. The desire for face to face community is very strong for me, and presumably for all of us — and maybe FutureHi will come together in this way (or at least some of us will). On the other hand, I'm going to be pursuing face to face community in my local environment in the months to come, and tend to look at the Internet endeavor as a complementary initiative (especially in regard to the making of money). In any case, I see the Body and Blood of Christ rituals (as described on page two of holographic libertarianism) as the ultimate community building tools (even without entheogenic potentiation) — for they create union at the very core of our souls. I'm going to be doing experiments with these rituals in the near future, and suspect mild entheogenic effects from the ritual alone. I'll share my results to help your own community building efforts.

> the notion of a think-tank seems scarily, potentially elitist. maybe we should "come together, right now" before making any big steps.

I'm hoping the points of coherency will bring us together. I resisted the idea of an Internet-based community for a long time in favor of face to face community, but finally came to accept the idea of a non-local coherency "through the astral" as a necessary complement for the work we will be doing in face to face community. As far as elitist goes, any person or group who can resonate with the living destiny has something of extreme value to offer. I saw another headline today about how global warming and ocean acidification during the next 100 years is going to melt all the ice-caps, raise sea levels by 1-x number of meters, and kill of all the carbonate-shell sea creatures. These stories are horribly lopsided in how they completely ignore the possibility that intelligent, organic, forward-looking actions on the part of humans could and would completely negate these hazards — without any of the draconian CO2 emission controls that are being relentlessly advocated. In the end, this scare-mongering is pure journalistic terrorism, akin to someone yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater, only a million times worse. And if we have something better to offer, lets not think twice about offering it in a coherent focused endeavor.

Tom

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

Truthtechnician, (nice name)

> I think a think tank is the way to go! Definately.
>
> The only problem I have with the whole idea, especially the "Collective Empowerment" paper, is that
> so much is predicated on the 2012 thing, and quite frankly, that's the only idea I'm not so sure about...

Granted, the Dec. 2012 deadline seems a little woo-woo or far-fetched to our mundane way of thinking. On the other hand, our mundane way of thinking is not necessarily an accurate judge of how a time-symmetric reality actually works. Granted the Mayan calender and McKenna time-wave may seem like new age superstitions, but other factors are converging to powerfully support the timing of this point of crisis. Three of the most significant are:

1. The tribal memories of the Hopi that extend all the way back to that of a previous, failed, civilization that was much like ours.
2. The growing recognition by some that the cycle of Yugas is not an arbitrary 4,320,000 years, but a process driven by the 26,000 year equinoctial cycle.
3. The work of a recent Christian fundamentalist who through pure Bible study placed the mid-point of the tribulation at exactly this date.

Of course, none of these additional pieces of evidence are acceptable to the mundane mind either. The clincher for me however, is the fact that quantum-thermodynamic law (as I have come to know it) depicts a catastrophic economic failure as occurring, by default, in exactly that timeframe — and describes socio-economic triggers that are easily recognizable in modern society. I can't go into all the details here, but in short, it predicts a catastrophic collapse at the nadir of the seventh long-wave economic downturn subsequent to the dawning of the European enlightenment. In particular, it predicts that the following three highly obvious trends will cause a precipitous drop in monetary velocity circa 2010-2014:

1. The relentless displacement of jobs in the West caused by both automation and the outsourcing of jobs to the far-east.
2. The relentless burdening of the macro-economy by the ever-deepening war/conflict/terrorism between Islam and the west.
3. The relentless burdening of the macro-economy by an ever-deepening fear-based ecological fanaticism/fundamentalism.

Since I see quantum uncertainty as applying to the spiritual realm, I tend to view it as a four year period of danger rather than narrowing it down to a specific date. None the less, the hyper-holistic theory that I have been exploring unambiguously indicates that "Mother Earth" has as no more interest in preserving a static "post-industrial" civilization, then would the body of a young fertile nonpregnant woman have in preserving the fertile lining of her uterus past the point of ovulation. And in the end, the stark either/or destiny depicted in the Old Testament is warning us about this exact challenge.

I hope this helps clarify the 2012 issue.

Reverend Tom

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 24, 2006 08:49 PM

May I just point out that what you are talking about seems to be meaningless, and that as much as you hope for it, you appear to be discussing an entirely different world?

"Millions in the world are miserable and suffering, and if any of us are positive and hopeful we're deluding ourselves, and we should all be miserable and fight against these injustices: the only true reality is to be depressed and struggle for change.
This is a valid point of view but hearing it hundreds of times over and over in huge posts is boring, and destroys any real discussion of the issues, and therefore has the same effect as off-topic posting."

What you appear to not want to hear on this site is what is actually happening. Yes, you are doing well, and I am sure what you believe makes you feel special. It is because that you believe you are special, and invent all sorts of cod-science and spirituality to make it 'true'. However, you are making no change to anything, except for yourself. This is presumably why you get so angry with eventhorizon, and why you will get angry with me now.

You are writing about who you are, what you want, and where you want to be. You are not writing or thinking or even living in this world. And the many, many unhappy people will never thank you, because you are doing nothing for them. You are choosing to please yourselves with the lie that you are helping others.

It makes me both angry and sad.

Posted by: Tom at March 25, 2006 06:24 AM

Rev Tom,

Haven’t made it all the way through, but all I have read so far resonates within me.
Just wanted to add some similar thoughts that I have ran across. Yes, something is happening to us, messages are being sent. The discovery of the double helix “DNA” galaxy, speaks to me in “woo woo” ways. I think your ideas are breath taking.

When we honor that human consciousness is a resonant shell around the Earth that contributes significantly to the overall harmony of the Earthgrid, it becomes easy to acknowledge our conscious state to also determine whether the Earthgrid harmoniously integrates the influxes of cosmic energy when activation windows open. Thus, we have an intimate role in determining the nature and extent of seismic activity--as well as all cataclysmic "acts of God." If we are discordant with the natural resonances of the Earth and her cycles and resistant to integrate the very energy resonances supportive to our own evolutionary unfoldment and fulfillment, we essentially are attempting to isolate ourselves from life itself. As we do, we atrophy, crystallize and eventually, we seismically shatter in crisis.

To establish a Love-based Earthgrid resonance is to surrender resistance to experience, and to surrender judgment of ourselves for our all of our human experience. To unconditionally accept our humanness while we simultaneously act to better our human condition is a form of communion, an act of Love that creates a condition of geo-physical and cultural stability, and an Earthgrid resonance that supports a harmonious infusion of Evolutionary Intelligence into the Earth and into ourselves. Acting from Love with conscious deliberation makes possible safe passage through the Holy Cross; it makes possible our graduation as a spiritually awakened world into galactic awareness and extraterrestrial co-participation.

A MESSAGE OF HOPE FROM THE HOPI NATION

To my fellow swimmers,

There is a river flowing now very fast. It is so great and swift that
there are those who will be afraid. They will try to hold on to the
shore. They will feel that they are being torn apart and will suffer greatly.
Know that the river has it's destination.
The elders say we must let go of the shore, push off into the middle of
the river, keep our eyes open and our heads above the water. And I say,
"See who is in there with you and celebrate! At this time in history we
are to take nothing personally, least of all ourselves. For the moment
that we do, our spiritual growth and journey comes to a halt.

The time of the lone wolf is over. Gather yourselves!
Banish the word "struggle" from your vocabulary.
All that we do now must be done in a sacred manner and in celebration.

WE ARE THE ONES WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR.

Oraibi, Arizona
Hopi Nation
Author Unknown

http://www.lunarplanner.com/HolyCross.html#HolyCrossContents

Posted by: Connie at March 25, 2006 06:34 AM

"When we honor that human consciousness is a resonant shell around the Earth that contributes significantly to the overall harmony of the Earthgrid..."

Does this mean anything?

Posted by: Tom at March 25, 2006 07:43 AM

I read the first two comments two days ago, and thought it best for me to stay out of this post.
Having a contributor call for a 'resolution' to the problem of my lack of self control, and admittedly respect, when arguing points in a specific topic, made me think a bit of time out might be in order.

I find it disturbing that posts that dont 'sit' well in FutureHi are rediculed, and attributed to me.

Does it have my name on it?

Standing up for your points of view, arguing a position in spite of numerous opposition, makes one some kind of demon? Makes one some kind of blathering mouthed coward? Beavis is 'clearly' me?

First of all, I say what I think, when I think it, to anyone, anywhere, at any time. Regardless of how many oppose my points of view, redicule what I say, or blatantly personally attack me and over and over, I have no need to hide, no desire to hide.

Obviously I have stirred up alot of 'feeling' here to be immediatly castigated and strung up whenever a post appears that doesnt praise and worship everything done here. Hate to say it, and I probably had a part to play in it which is unfortunate, but there is a lot of dismissing or ignoring of arguements, personal attacks and flames, hero worship and a whole host of other annoying, trivial, and frustrating aspects going on here. Not all of it stemming from me, that ofcourse being my opinion...

However one slight clue should have enlightened people here to the fact Beavis is not me, when have my posts ever consisted of two lines?

Had I anything I wish to say to anyone, it would be said, and you would know it was from me.

Forgive my off-topic posting, and perhaps lack of respect which is after all a two-way thing.

I dont disagree with 'Beavis' however, I should obviously have posted my thoughts straight after.

Money, for all the fact it is an inescapable ball-and-chain of human life (recently read a comment that said 'life is a game, insert coin to continue'), has to be the most appaling and pityable human creation there has ever been.

The nuclear weapon, built to kill people admittedly, was dropped to bring about a swift resolution to a conflict that could easilly have claimed many hundreds of thousands of lives more than the two bombings of cities.

Money on the other hand serves no purpose other than being the complete focus of human life, after life itself, and is entireally dependant upon human greed.

It was 'created' as a means of repaying debt in times of need. A token of a deed done for which there was not yet any reconstitution made.

It has since then been manipulated and distorted to become the 'ant scent' of humanity which is blindly followed regardless and inspite of any and all other considerations.

Money has to be removed somehow from the workings of our societies and our species. But im no fool, it will not happen any time soon, it might never happen although that thought has to be met with hope that it can, and from where are now our world and lives are entireally governed by money.

Money is a tool for discrimination, oppression, and greed. Money doesnt feed people, it doesnt enable those who would otherwise starve to be able to eat. Money has served no purpose to our species but to provide an incentive for its own self-generation. For the self sustainment of the persuit of our own greed.

There can be no end to the ills that money has embued upon our society. Having said that, there may not have been any other realistic way for our world to have reached the situation is it now. That statement alone can mean many things, but the future of our species has to be devoid of these kinds of systems of oppression and discrimination.

As for your work, Reverand Tom, I have read perhaps 2/3rds of it, and there is a lot of great stuff in there, and there is also alot of stuff which to my mind is put there for no reason other than to appeal to people. While I would be both a fool and hypocrite to speak ill of your attempts, your successes, and perhaps your revelations and realisations, I cannot say that I dont have concerns about some of it.

Twenty six thousand year reproductive cycle for one thing. While their might be a vast amount of religious and spiritual thinking and revelation to this particular 'cycle' of our Earth, I cannot see where it is revelant anywhere outside of religious and spiritual cycles. Such as geologic, evolutionary, anthropologically, meteoroligically, climatologically, infact in any physical sense whatsoever. Please point out to me, if I may be so impertinent, as to which process of a physical nature currently cycles at 26,000 years, and is absolutely fundamental to 'everything'.

And as a I stated in one other thread, and if it is my ignorance and lack of understanding then I implore you to enlighten me, but your claim that "holographic time-symmetric causation is easily proven by 12+ logical/philosophical arguments, and 40+ pieces of empirical/observational evidence." has not yet been defended in regards to my claim that not all causation is fundamentally time symmetrical. Perhaps I dont grasp your arguement, in which case again I would be grateful for any kind of enlightenment.

"Who knows, maybe my response will head off other "hit and run" posts of a similar nature."

The only hit and run being done in this thread is by the guy who claimed Beavis was I, and you should check the 'Secrets of Pronoia' thread for more of his 'contributions'.

Eventhorizen

Posted by: eventhorizen at March 25, 2006 10:48 AM

Dear Tom,

> May I just point out that what you are talking about seems to be meaningless, and that
> as much as you hope for it, you appear to be discussing an entirely different world?

I totally agree that I am discussing an entirely different world. Whether we call it "collective enlightenment," or "the living destiny," or "the millennium" it is an entirely different world. In fact, the only point of connection between our realm and this realm is the possibility that we may be a part of its evolutionary heritage. As far as meaninglessness goes, you have it completely backwards. For the 99.9999% of humanity that will never know enlightenment in the traditional eastern sense, the only thing of any true meaning is the preservation and nurturing of the connection between the reality we have now and this future realm. Nor do I speak of "meaning" in some abstract philosophical/theological sense, but in the blood and guts reality of apocalyptic destruction (at our own hands) should the connection between our reality and this future destiny be severed. In this regard, we should note that God's plan is not in any way limited to the specific version of history that we are living upon, and that the "living destiny" receives all versions of history that willingly connect to it.

>> Quoted from Dlight's post in the Pronoia discussion:
>> "Millions in the world are miserable and suffering, and if any of us are positive and hopeful we're deluding ourselves, and we should all be miserable
>> and fight against these injustices: the only true reality is to be depressed and struggle for change. This is a valid point of view but hearing it hundreds
>> of times over and over in huge posts is boring, and destroys any real discussion of the issues, and therefore has the same effect as off- topic posting."

> This is presumably why you get so angry with eventhorizon, and why you will get angry with me now.

If you reread the latter part of the pronoia thread, you will find that Dlight made the comment that you just quoted, and that I followed that with a detailed proposal for reconciling eventhorizon's perceptions and passion with our overall mission.

> What you appear to not want to hear on this site is what is actually happening.

I presume you are referring to the misery, suffering, injustice that are happening in the world, and the social, ecological, and economic devastation, and the way everything "just keeps getting worse." To the extent that the world's default course is toward a "global menstruation" in which civilization will dissolve in "rivers of blood," I totally agree that all of the above are what's happening. What you are apparently failing to acknowledge is the way the influx of cosmic wisdom could guide the proactive altering of our destiny, and the possibility that a coherent resonance could be created by the focusing and clarification of this wisdom (as per this site's basic purpose).

> Yes, you are doing well, and I am sure what you believe makes you feel special.

I never said I was doing well. I merely said that I have been swimming in beneficent synchronicities for the last few weeks (i.e. since the moment I started on this FutureHi endeavor). I could be doing better in a lot of ways, and while I'm waiting for that to happen, I will imbibe the fuels of faith and pronoia.

> It is because that you believe you are special...

We are all both special and generic in a paradoxical way (even you). We can engage our specialness and genericness to create a functional whole that is greater than the sum of the parts, or use it to create a destructive dissonance that goes nowhere.

> ...and invent all sorts of cod-science and spirituality to make it 'true'.

Time-symmetric causation/thermodynamics is REALITY at the most fundamental level. For primers on this subject you can check out The Boundary Institute and Everything Forever. The deepest superstition in the whole of humanity is the idea that "cause" always precedes "effect," but this is a belief born of terror in depths of the human ego. And since this superstition is wired into the very structure of our language, it is generally invisible unless one examines the subject of causation in a formal mathematical sense (as per the above web-sites). In the end, the real "cod-science" is the hard-core rationalism that continues to deny the full ramifications of quantum-mechanics vis a vis the even deeper science of quantum-thermodynamics — despite the unambiguous confirmation of such by both: a) hard mathematical logic, and b) an undeniable body of empirical/observational evidence. Indeed, modern rationalism misstates the fundamental nature of our "motion through time" every bit as deeply as the ancient Ptolemaic cosmology misstated the fundamental nature of our "motion through space." And when we correct the fundamental error of science, an integral spirituality follows quite naturally.

> However, you are making no change to anything, except for yourself.

Why don't you join us in the instigation of proactive change instead of repeating the old drone "it'll never work."

> You are writing about who you are, what you want, and where you want to be.

I totally agree.

> You are not writing or thinking or even living in this world.

All the events involved in my writing, thinking, and living are, by definition, happening in this world. What you really seem to be saying is "why don't you bow down and worship this world of pain and devastation as some kind of reality that we have to conform to/struggle with" — but that's flat out lunacy.

> And the many, many unhappy people will never thank you, because you are doing nothing for them.
> You are choosing to please yourselves with the lie that you are helping others.

Caution — Snap judgements and slander are two of the most dangerous endeavors for the human soul.

> It makes me both angry and sad.

You've been angry and sad for a long long long long time. Can you finally let go of it.
Maybe you should consider finding an experienced shaman and drinking some ayahuasca.

>> From Connie
>> "When we honor that (harmonious) human consciousness is a resonant shell around
>> the Earth that contributes significantly to the overall harmony of the Earthgrid..."

> Does this mean anything?

When we clarify Connie's statement by adding the word "(harmonious)" it means that:

1. The human collective consciousness is the gateway/grid for the macro-scale flow of time-reverse energy.
2. The quality and depth of our harmony is what will keep us from blowing ourselves up, and keep Mother Earth from spewing lava upon us.

Sincerely,
Reverend Tom

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 25, 2006 12:30 PM

In the last couple of months this site has put forward three 'community praised' methods of overcoming the problems facing our species, and bringing about a 'new dawn', and these have been:

1. Technological Singularity.
2. Emracement and spread of 'Joy'
3. Spiritual awakening and unification.

Of those three only the first has any chance, in our lifetimes and thereafter, of actually overcoming the issues facing our species. The last two, in themselves, offer no solutions for practical problems.

Problems, which are often produced on this site as the antithesis of those original three points.

1. Death
2. Unhappiness
3. Complete destruction and annihilation.

However those are not the problems facing our species, the problems facing our species are the practicalities of real life. Political, social, economic and enviromental.

While these problems are at best ignored here at FutureHi in any 'meaty' sense, and at worst 'condemned' as being 'entireally thought about, discussed, and understood', there is absolutely no work of any kind going on here at FutureHi in regards to the absolutely fundamental process that is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED in the short to medium term.

The only person, apart from myself, who has once even alluded to these issues is MCP2012, who encourages to 'write to our parliament/government critters'.

What is absolutely and fundemntaly required in the very near future is complete and total infrastructural, economic, and social change.

Without this, neither focus 2 nor 3, Joy nor Spiritualism, will have a snowballs chance in hell in preventing a really serious collision of massive problems in the near future.

While yes, it has to be admitted that the internet shall most likely be the catalyst for the materialisation of change, and that both the spread of Joy and embracement of our spiritual natures will immeasurably help in 'our quest', without infrastructural, social, and economic and political change, it will be all for nothing as the stark realities of living real life around the world sweeps all this work away.

The stark realities alluded to here
"I asked Paul recently if a full-time salary would make a difference in the amount of time available for his participation here. He affirmed that it would definitely be a factor. I suspect the same applies for many others here, and I know that it applies for myself."

The stark reality is that the preaching of the spreading of a Joyous existance, and the unification of mankind into spiritual understanding of its true existance, has been a quest that has been sought since the dawn of humanity, and if anyone here thinks that this is likely to be achieved, in time to self-propogate a landslide revolution to Utopia, then they are dangerously hedging their bets and the bets of all mankind on the largest outside odds and chance there can be for our 'salvation'.

For most people, happiness and spiruality comes after they have a roof over their heads, have provided for their families, have the political/social/economic institutions in their locality to ensure this, or turn to violence if they must to ensure this, and not before.

I get accused of scare-mongering, being blatantly 'negative', short sighted and closed minded, but I do not preach Utopia and Trascendance or Armageddon. We must change how we live, regardless of whether or not we change how we think enough to reach Utopia and Spiritual absoluteness, wholeness, and truth or not.

The simple truth is that the only future for our species is one where we live with each others differences in all forms of philosophy, spirituality, points of view, but live equally and justly with ourselves and with our surroundings.

Nothing else matters to our species in the near future beyond its continued existance, the simple unarguable fact of life, and keeping the scales balanced in favour of progress and developement rather than a slide into regression and more suffering.

Nothing else matters to 'this quest' than the absolute truth of itself, the changes to the 'real world' that enables us to have a future. Not joy, not spirituality, but real physical changes to how we humans currently live our lives, how we rule ourselves, how we govern ourselves, how we manage ourselves, not how we percieve our lives, not how we understand our lives, not even the quality of our lives.

And it is in that sense that this site is in constant danger of becoming sidetracked and distracted by its own points of view.

So lets simply not forget why we are all here.

Posted by: eventhorizen at March 25, 2006 02:18 PM

EventHorizon: Rev. Tom is proposing a coherent means/mechanism for doing that (those things) which you're concerned about. Now, whether it (Rev. Tom's proposal[s]) is (are) sufficiently **viable** and realistic remain to be seen. But Rev. Tom at least sincerely intends to be addressing (and sincerely sees himself as addressing) most if not all of the concerns you mention here. I haven't finished fully-assimilating the Rev's stuff yet, but it certainly looks interesting. I should very much appreciate it if *YOU*, EventHorizon, would read and assimilate/digest all of the Rev's stuff (as well as The Boundary Institute's stuff, and then give us your 2 cents on it all. I think you might be a good member of a Think Tank team, if one can be put together. Also, I'm waiting to hear from both the Rev. and Paul, after they have a soul-to-soul on the phone here soon.

Oh, and just as a btw to whom it might be of interest, I'm an ordained minister under both Universal Life and Spiritual Humanism, yet I'm very sympathetic and respectful toward atheism, agnosticism, deism, etc. Indeed, superficially (and even not so superficially) I closely resemble an atheistic (trans)humanist (after all, the stuff by, say, George Smith and Mike Martin [among others] is outstanding, philosophically), but it would ultimately be more accurate to term me a neo-Taoist evolutionary panentheist (see John Smart's discussion at his SingularityWatch.com--except he winds-up plumping for neo-deism [a minor semantic quibble or two...] (but ***ssshhhhhhh***--that's just between this blog-site and me, OK?! [wink])

Posted by: MCP2012 at March 25, 2006 04:14 PM

Dear Eventhorizon,

Thank you for engaging the discussion with respectful questioning. I suspect we may be closer in viewpoint than first appears to be the case. I'll address the many points you brought up in your two posts in order of increasing difficulty.

> And as a I stated in one other thread, and if it is my ignorance and lack of understanding then I implore you to enlighten me, but your
> claim that "holographic time-symmetric causation is easily proven by 12+ logical/philosophical arguments, and 40+ pieces of empirical/
> observational evidence." has not yet been defended in regards to my claim that not all causation is fundamentally time symmetrical.

This is a very good point. When I made my initial post, I prioritized the list of new experiments over the list of already extant arguments/evidence. The most basic argument is that thermodynamics can not possibly be mathematically self-consistent unless the particle and wave aspects of matter have opposing time-symmetric definitions of entropy. I've made the detailed listing of these arguments/evidence my highest priority following this post. It should be ready in a couple of days; for now you can refer to The Boundary Institute and Everything Forever/Two Kinds of Order for introductory material.

> Please point out to me, if I may be so impertinent, as to which process of a physical nature currently cycles at 26,000 years...

The equinoctial cycle of the planet (i.e. the precession of the equinoxes). This cycle is almost exactly 26,000 years long, and it represents a cycle in which the Earth's angular-momentum/axis-orientation retraces the set of values that it had 26,000 years previously. In a time-symmetric reality, this retracing defines a cycle in complex-numbered time, and as such would presumably gate the overall flow of time-reverse energy for the planet as a whole. This cyclic-time concept is foreign to the linear-time mind-set of the West, but is well known in Vedic culture, and in many of the Native American cultures such as the Hopi and Maya (and is subtly present in the Bible). Meditate on it and seek divine guidance.

> ...there is also alot of stuff which to my mind is put there for no reason other than to appeal to people

Granted, that people on both sides of the political spectrum will find a lot of appealing ideas in what I write, but at the same time both sides are going to have some of there deepest sacred cows overturned. In particular, my work demands the complete abandonment of religious and ecological fanaticism/ fundamentalism as a structural component of our culture, and utterly repudiates the infatuation and power-lust of both religious and ecological fanatics in regard to their willy nilly embrace of coercive centralized political power.

> In the last couple of months this site has put forward three 'community praised' methods of overcoming
> the problems facing our species, and bringing about a 'new dawn', and these have been:
>
> 1. Technological Singularity.
> 2. Emracement and spread of 'Joy'
> 3. Spiritual awakening and unification.
>
> Of those three only the first has any chance, in our lifetimes and thereafter, of actually overcoming
> the issues facing our species. The last two, in themselves, offer no solutions for practical problems.

I fundamentally disagree on this point. The three solutions are an integral whole. The first by itself would lead to catastrophic/apocalyptic consequences in the social, ecological, and economic realms. As an integral whole, they will lead to the fundamental restructuring of the socio-economic realm that you and I both agree is necessary in the very near future. Please suspend judgement on this point until I have posted my argument/evidence list for time-symmetric causation, and then meditate on it after rereading my final post in the pronoia forum about the impact of our subjective thoughts/beliefs upon the "past."

> What is absolutely and fundemntaly required in the very near future is
> complete and total infrastructural, economic, and social change.

We are in 100% agreement on this. In fact, this is what "visionary jihad" is all about. And within the transcendent non-violent context of this effort, we should make group coherency toward this very goal item ‘4' in the above list, and pursue it with the focus and intensity of an Islamic Jihadist. (And make sure to also address the myriad factual details so that we can be successful.)

> However those are not the problems facing our species, the problems facing our
> species are the practicalities of real life. Political, social, economic and enviromental.
>
> While these problems are at best ignored here at FutureHi in any 'meaty' sense, and at worst 'condemned' as being 'entireally thought
> about, discussed, and understood', there is absolutely no work of any kind going on here at FutureHi in regards to the absolutely
> fundamental process that is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED in the short to medium term.

Uhm, isn't the whole purpose of this "coherent opportunity" thread the creation of a think-tank/action-tank/consulting-service that will allow us to get full-time salaries for doing the very thing that you are advocating. (I know this involves the "evil" thing that we call "money." I'll address that below.)

> The only person, apart from myself, who has once even alluded to these issues
> is MCP2012, who encourages to 'write' to our parliament/government critters'.

This could be useful, and I'll go one further and say that some highly focused lawsuits could be very useful too (after all visionary jihad is serious business). But since coercive centralized political power is one of the most dangerous things we face, I would also advise extreme caution in any interaction that we might have with the government. Indeed, these kinds of actions could easily make things worse until we have established internal coherency in regard to both: a) the specific solutions being proposed, and b) our fundamental commitment to holographic libertarianism.

> I get accused of scare-mongering, being blatantly 'negative', short sighted and closed minded, but I do not preach Utopia and
> Trascendance or Armageddon. We must change how we live, regardless of whether or not we change how we think enough to reach
> Utopia and Spiritual absoluteness, wholeness, and truth or not.
>
> The simple truth is that the only future for our species is one where we live with each others differences in all forms of philosophy,
> spirituality, points of view, but live equally and justly with ourselves and with our surroundings.

We are in total agreement in regard to the above simple truth. What I would point out however, is that this simple truth represents the embodiment of transcendence. Indeed, the four-fold hyper-holism is all about living with and respecting opposing spiritual viewpoints, and the holographic libertarianism is all about individuals and communities relating in a just and equitable way with each other and with their surroundings (via internal self-regulation). What I also feel utterly clear on, is that failure to reach this goal will lead to an apocalyptic scenario — and since you've already stated that "What is absolutely and fundemntaly required in the very near future is complete and total infrastructural, economic, and social change," I don't see how you can deny that failure leads straight to an apocalyptic scenario.

> Nothing else matters to our species in the near future beyond its continued existance, the simple unarguable fact of life, and keeping
> the scales balanced in favour of progress and developement rather than a slide into regression and more suffering.

Indeed, you have described the outward reflection of the upcoming bifurcation between transcendence and apocalypse — as the do or die scenario unambiguously unfolds within the realm of "money." It is at this point that I'd like to ask you to consider a deeper perspective about the nature of money
vis a vis the things that you have previously expressed.

> It (money) was 'created' as a means of repaying debt in times of need. A
> token of a deed done for which there was not yet any reconstitution made.

I do not deny that money, especially in modern times, is created as a counter-balance to debt. But it is well understood, neigh obvious, that money can act as a generic medium of exchange independent of any and all debts. And just as matter can exist and flow within the cosmos independent of the gravity wells and black holes that such matter may perhaps be sucked into, so too can money exist and flow independent of greed and debts that it may perhaps be sucked into. And this is one place where we disagree in a fundamental way, as per the following:

> Money, for all the fact it is an inescapable ball-and-chain of human life (recently read a comment that said 'life is a game, insert coin
> to continue'), has to be the most appaling and pityable human creation there has ever been.
>
> Money on the other hand serves no purpose other than being the complete focus of human life...

In actual fact, basic time-symmetric theory very strongly indicates that:

1. Money is "holographic echo/analogy/reflection" of matter that is built into the very heart of human culture.
2. Likewise, the flow of money is governed by a "holographic echo/analogy/reflection" of the basic laws of physics.
3. The human race is inexorably bound to this holographic echo/analogy as a fundamental test of our spiritual wisdom.
4. The entire socio-economic system is now analogous to an exhausted super-giant star that is on the brink of collapsing into a black-hole.
5. The dominion of wisdom over money is the one and only thing that can truly alter the human situation so as to avoid this collapse.
6. This dominion of wisdom over money is integral to the flowering of the Divine Feminine that is poised to awaken within culture.

If unidirectional causation is the greatest delusion to ever bedevil mankind, than right behind it is the delusion that money is a creation of humans. In actual fact, money is a challenge given by God to see if we have the wisdom to advance to a new evolutionary level. In the eons to come, we will routinely dismantle stars by subjecting them to immense electrostatic fields (even stars that are one minute from the point of collapse). But before we can advance to this destiny, we must first dismantle Leviathan, i.e. the analog of a supergiant star within the heart of culture — and must do so according to a strict set of laws. In particular, we must dismantle this beast within the framework of libertarian freedom/self-regulation, for political coercion in each and every form is nothing but a reflection of the thermal/monetary chaos that is driving culture toward the black-hole that awaits. Indeed, we have only one major tool for dealing with the as yet unenlightened forces of the financial world, i.e. holistic win-win deals pursuant to a scenario of ultra-high-growth — for this tool IS the holographic analog of a coherent electrostatic field as applied to the "supergiant star" at the heart of the economy. Thence to actually integrate liberated money into a truly intelligent, lifelike socio-economic system, we have two other non-coercive tools: voluntary communalism, and visionary philanthropy. And for this reason, the very things that you legitimately see, want, and call for — all require an integral approach that includes all six of the following items:

1. Technological singularity.
2. The embrace of joy, faith, and pronoia.
3. Spiritual awakening and unification.
4. Non-violent visionary jihad.
5. The embrace of libertarian ideals.
6. Holistic ultra-high-growth.

And by this means we will achieve the primal physical change that you say is "all that matters":

> Nothing else matters to 'this quest' than the absolute truth of itself, the changes to the 'real world'
> that enables us to have a future. ... ... ... ... but real physical changes to how we humans currently
> live our lives, how we rule ourselves, how we govern ourselves, how we manage ourselves...

So Eventhorizon, I invite you to consider the points that I have made, examine the file that I released (including the update to section XVI), and see if you can agree with the seven points of coherency. I agree with MCP2012 that you might be a good part of the team, and would welcome your passion, and your grounded no-nonsense focus.

Sincerely,
Rev. Tom

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 25, 2006 07:33 PM

Reverend Tom,

I would ask that we definitely drop the 'jihad' term from our vocubulary. It is definitely a word I am not comfortable with, and I'm absolutely certain it will repel most people we are trying to communicate with. I don't like any term which uses 'war', such as the war on poverty, or the war on drugs, or the war on terror. And I certainly don't like the word 'jihad' for its equal like resonance with all things war like. Perhaps for you this word has a strong Neuro-linguistic programming effect, but for me it does not. I say we transmutate your meaning of this word into an alternate, more positive, meaningful and conducive word.

Posted by: Paul at March 25, 2006 08:02 PM

Two Quick Notes:

1. Paul, I am open to finding an alternative for the term jihad. I was hoping to honor the Islamic concept of a "sacred duty or struggle" while at the same time lifting it to a higher-plane by referring to it as a non-violent "visionary jihad" (and would note that "visionary holy war" is one of the four "areas of ultimate mastery" on the main four-fold chart). I also felt that it might have been useful in addressing the concerns of EventHorizon about "doing something," but will defer to the greater good if it would burden to our efforts by turning people off. It is possible that I am using an unnecessarily warlike term, but to cover all bases, I'd also like to ask if your own concern about "lack of time" is related to a discomfort vis a vis the "primal imperative" that the Divine Masculine requires of us if we are to "short-circuit time." If we do replace this term, I hope we can find an alternative that accurately describes both: a) the preternatural focus and directionality that we must maintain in the ideological realm, and b) the way we will have to deliberately "target" the primal superstitions that inspire people to reflexively reject the possibility of collective enlightenment/apotheosis. Any feedback, comments, suggestions?

2. It is a bold claim to say that the economy is on the brink of collapsing into a black-hole. For those who doubt the reality of this I invite you to check out Eternal Value Review. This is a web-site by a person who is both an investment banker and a Christian fundamentalist. If you dig through his web-site, and read the online periodical of the same name, you will find a wealth of highly accurate information from an insider who knows the true state of the economy. He's not afraid to take the Bible at face value, and he paints a picture so bleak that I normally wouldn't direct people to his web-site. On the other hand, I believe that destructive prophecies are warnings, not destinies, and that an accurate awareness of the real state of affairs will help us overcome this hazard pursuant to the expansive utopian destiny that we seek.

P.S. MCP2012, I like how you describe yourself as a "neo-Taoist evolutionary panentheist." I really resonate with that.

Reverend Tom

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 25, 2006 09:10 PM

Dear Tom,

I'm a bit confused what you are asking me regarding 'lack of time'. Are you referring to my personal lack of time due to financial responsibilities, or lack of time that we in the west have of changing course?

Also I'm confused when you say that we in the west have run out of time, but the 'whole plan' as you described will take 70 years. Tom, I can't, in any conception, imagine that humanity has 70 years to get it right before things bifurcate. I can however see that the 2010-14 timeframe seems right for a bifurcation point. Also, since you are saying we are basically running out of time AND the site you mentioned paints a very bleak picture, I'm very unclear how any of us here (WE ARE IN THE WEST) having anything to do about it.

Tom, I am in the west, live in the west, am western, and am regrettfully utterly dependent on the west sustaining itself in some form to even survive the next 10 years. This is why I'm reitterating to you again, that I personally don't see much of chance of surviving, and as such have with deep regret moved my conciousness in a direction more towards personal and familial peace and harmony than towards "saving the world" as you are trying to do. Sorry Tom, but I am not that depersonalized or deattached (in Buddhist terms) to put my own well being second to a very uncertain and cloudy possibility that humanity might survive me. Why? Well, I love who I am, and more than that I love my friends and family. They have deep and abiding meaning and love for me, and so I put my energies towards their survival. I can't and I won't sacrifice my family on the alter of some meta-religious, visionary "jihad" no matter how much you convince me of its potential success, if it means I personally have to suffer more than I already have. And if that IS essentially what you are asking, then as a person with over 15 years experience in sales, that is a very bad sales pitch.

Respectfully Yours,

Paul

Posted by: Paul at March 25, 2006 10:29 PM

I suppose what I am trying to say, is that love is all I have left. I have no "fight" in me, no lust for jihad. Only a deepening desire to love and be loved, heal and be healed. I have no energy left except to find and spread joy and contentment for all.

Posted by: Paul at March 26, 2006 12:26 AM

I am terribly off subject here but the forums arn't up. i'll keep it respectfuly breif. I just watched "what the bleep do we know."(probably the worst film name ever, imo) i'm enthusiastic abut what i saw, but they described a water experiment where thought changes water. I'm having a lot of trouble verifying this, or finding any information on it. Does anybody have a more experianced finger to point me in a direction? If so e-mail me so i don't gum up the blog further with responses.

BrotherCactus

Posted by: BrotherCactus at March 26, 2006 01:28 AM

Tom,
You've obviously put lots of thought into this work, and it is clearly the product of a creative and intelligent mind.

Nevertheless, I don't see this essay as any kind of rallying point unless you're planning to start your own religion. If so, I'm not sure FutureHi is the best place to do it, because there are lots of independent thinkers here (I hope).

You are condensing an extremely wide range of subjects and much of the work is highly speculative. Maybe there will be a banking collapse, maybe not, I personally don't think so. But you say it as though you *know* it to be true. This kind of self-assurance is infused through your speculations, and in my opinion, is indicative of someone who has a religious rather than a scientific viewpoint.

The stuff about the Jewish faith is rather odd. I find it particularly strange to call the Jewish religion a "goddess" when it was actually the Jewish religion that fought hardest against the goddess religions (which are referred to in the Old Testament as Ba'al)

Extreme danger of zero point energy? This is a very far-fetched concern since we don’t even know what’s real with zero point energy yet.

There's so many different subjects packed into almost every sentence of your work that it's difficult to know where to begin. I’ll respond to your seven points:

>> 1. Agree that civilization faces a stark bifurcation of destiny, and further agree that the acorn and fertility cycle analogies in section III describe this bifurcation in a fairly accurate way.

Maybe, maybe not. There are clear dangers in the world; I guess that greatest danger now is some kind of terrorist attack which triggers an economic meltdown.

But there are also many powerful positive trends taking place on the planet.

My guess is that the trend towards democracy, as evidenced by Ukraine and many other states, and the massive movement towards decentralization created by the Internet will dramatically prevail over the regressive forces at work now.

We may well avoid any cataclysm and instead move smoothly into a highly enlightened age.

>> 2. Commit to the cosmic/utopian destiny depicted in section XVI with the whole of our body, heart, mind, and soul — and further commit to allowing the time-reverse influence of this Holy Destiny to "impregnate" each one of us at the deepest level of our being.

The reverse-time wave concept makes the future sound almost predetermined since it implies that future realities are pulling us towards them. I personally prefer the idea that the future is waiting to be created by us.

>> 3. Utterly renounce the logic and politics of scarcity and "limits to growth," and in so doing, commit wholeheartedly to a destiny in which the total population, macro-economy, and use of energy will grow at a robust exponential rate for centuries to come.

I fully support this idea, though you’ll find many on mushroom-eating progressives who don’t.

>> 4. Utterly renounce the politics of coercion and the use of centralized political power for achieving even the most enlightened of goals — and pursuant to this, embrace Holographic Libertarianism as our basic political stance (as depicted in the attached chart).

I agree with this too. I believe many problems arise from the hierarchical structure of our society. However, because of the dominance of the Internet and other networking technologies, hierarchy is now obsolete. We don’t have to fight against it since it’s going the way of vinyl records and typewriters.

>> 5. Embrace the four-fold perspective in its full symmetry (as depicted in the two attached charts) and make it the basis for a radically new, hyper-holistic meta-religion — and further embrace the political bootstrap of section XII, and the "visionary jihad" depicted therein.

Religion, in the sense of a formal set of unquestioned beliefs, around which a church of believers is built, is a highly centralized, highly regressive form, which totally contradicts your item #4. Religious institutions should be dismantled and avoided; we certainly don’t need to create new ones.

6. Suspend judgment against the conservative elites (and the socio-economic leviathan that they have created in the corporate/banking/political world), and instead view them as puppets dancing to the tune of archetypal forces — and beyond that, see if we can we find the courage to walk up to the "devil himself" and say, "hey we've got a win-win deal for you."

These guys are losing power fast to decentralization. However, if you listen to the old mass media you still get the idea that they’re becoming even more powerful. The death of the record industry is just the tip of the iceberg, all corporations and governments are losing power to the decentralized networks.

I agree that we should suspend judgment about them. I don’t think that large corporations are evil; they just follow their own logic, and usually try to conform to their own conceptions about being “good citizens”. For example, concern about the environment is standard within all large corporations now, although of course sometimes their core businesses may be older technologies that will have to give way to cleaner ones.

>> 7. Agree to wade into the morass of counter-cultural thought without preconceptions pro or con — and by exploring the issues in depth, disentangle the "bramble" in which political, ecological, technical, and economic issues are routinely confused with each other, and/or desperately embraced as pretexts for underlying agendas of a wholly different nature.

I don’t feel as though your work has disentangled the issues. In fact you’ve mixed stuff together in an almost unbelievable way, reminiscent of schizophrenic prose.

In my opinion, combining Judiasm, Quantum Computing, Zero Point Energy, The International Banking system, DMT, the Daime Church and so many other subjects together into a “unified synthesis” just adds to the confusion.

This kind of synthesis has overtones of David Icke. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke

Your essay is filled with “WE MUST DO THIS” (or else). But there is no WE. There are just billions of people doing their own thing. And the Internet is causing the WE to diminish in power further and instead encouraging countless tribes each promoting their own agenda. I view this continued decentralization as a very hopeful trend.

If we want to make a difference, we can use FutureHi as a forum for envisioning a beautiful future, and creating practical scenarios by which this future can be reached. If the seeds we conjure up are useful, they will propagate out into the world at the speed of light. Additionally, whenever possible, let’s start actually living our visions immediately.

Peace,
Dlight

Posted by: dlight at March 26, 2006 04:47 AM

Dear Paul,

I apologize for the confusion. Unfortunately, I've spoken in an unclear way in regard to the subject of time, and projected some of my own confusion and darkness into the discussion in regard to the use of the term "jihad." Please let me clarify and correct.

> I'm a bit confused what you are asking me regarding 'lack of time'. Are you referring to my personal
> lack of time due to financial responsibilities, or lack of time that we in the west have of changing course?

I was referring to the lack of time left before we in the West change course, not your own personal time.

> Also I'm confused when you say that we in the west have run out of time, but the 'whole plan' as you described will take 70 years. Tom,
> I can't, in any conception, imagine that humanity has 70 years to get it right before things bifurcate. I can however see that the 2010-14
> timeframe seems right for a bifurcation point. Also, since you are saying we are basically running out of time AND the site you mentioned
> paints a very bleak picture, I'm very unclear how any of us here (WE ARE IN THE WEST) having anything to do about it.

The complete transformation of the socio-economic system is something that I envision as taking an entire Kondratieff cycle. What has to happen in the much shorter time-frame is that holistic win-win deals get cut with the financial elite pursuant to the functional, albeit embryonic implementation of both: a) holographic libertarianism, and b) the pattern of holistic ultra-high-growth that must characterize the decades to come. In terms of the stark bifurcation of destiny, I claim that holistic win-win deals along these lines will prevent the catastrophic banking failure that Wilfred Hahn and many others have so clearly and accurately depicted — and that it is entirely within our power to secure these deals in the next few years.

> Tom, I am in the west, live in the west, am western, and am regrettfully utterly dependent on the west sustaining itself in some form
> to even survive the next 10 years.... .... .... and as such have with deep regret moved my conciousness in a direction more towards
> personal and familial peace and harmony than towards "saving the world" as you are trying to do.

The point of my post at the top of this thread is that God has created both a Reality of potentially infinite abundance, and a road toward that abundance in which we can "make a pile of money" here and now while at the same time working to "save the world." I have created a rough map of where that road begins, and the direction in which it leads. You've pointed out a major flaw in my work in regard to the subject of jihad, and both EventHorizon and Dlight have asked pointed questions about what I am proposing that may well uncover other fundamental flaws. By bringing my work out here, I'm surrendering it to a collective intelligence that I hope can engage it, debug it, and profitably use it.

> They have deep and abiding meaning and love for me, and so I put my energies towards their survival. I can't and I won't sacrifice
> my family on the alter of some meta-religious, visionary "jihad" no matter how much you convince me of its potential success, if it
> means I personally have to suffer more than I already have. And if that IS essentially what you are asking, then as a person with
> over 15 years experience in sales, that is a very bad sales pitch.

By no means am I suggesting even one additional moment of suffering and sacrifice. What I am suggesting is a coherent ultra-abundant endeavor that would be far beyond what any of us could accomplish on our own as individuals. I narrowed it down to the seven points of coherency to see if we could create a collective starting point for dealing with the extremely wide range of subjects and speculative ideas that Dlight has commented on. Your objection to the use of the term Jihad has uncovered a major flaw in point five. Upon further reflection, I've concluded that I was in error in regard to the idea of a "visionary jihad," and that I was not self-consistently embracing the enlightened ideas that I am espousing. In this regard I propose the new term
"visionary insemination" and note that it:

1. Far more accurately reflects the quality of lovemaking inherent to the reconciliation of the Divine Feminine and Divine Masculine.
2. Far more accurately reflects the immense receptivity to collective enlightenment/apotheosis that I believe is latent within culture.
3. Describes the preternatural focus and directionality that we must maintain in the ideological realm every bit as well.
4. Far more accurately reflects the fact that humanity's primal/cardinal superstitions must be overcome by the insemination of
enlightened self-replicating ideas (as opposed to any kind of ideological struggle).

With this, I'd like to propose the following replacement for item ‘5' in the seven points of coherency:

5. Embrace the four-fold perspective in its full symmetry (as depicted in the attached charts) and make it the basis for the hyper-holism that reconciles religious opposites — and further embrace both: a) the cultivation of humanity's receptivity for visionary hyper-holistic ideas, and b) the insemination of said ideas as a sacred duty (as depicted in section XII).

Since the old item five was so fundamentally flawed, I'll update the main article now (and section XII in the .pdf file). If anybody has further objections and/or suggestions, we can explore them and make additional changes.

Sincerely,
Reverend Tom

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 26, 2006 08:41 AM

Dear Dlight,

Thank you for the detailed response. I am grateful for the challenge that you presented, and the possibility to clarify what I am saying. To start, I would like to commend you on the incredible community endeavor that you are involved with, and postulate that what I am proposing is a complementary endeavor in the noosphere. And I believe I can make a strong argument for the reality and complementarity of what I am proposing.

In summary, the context for what I am proposing is that the emergence of a hyper-holism capable of reconciling religious and political opposites without compromise (or the failure of said emergence) will 99.99+% determine whether or not the future is characterized by: a) a utopian scenario in which communities like yours will be robustly self-replicating, or b) a randomly dystopian and/or apocalyptic scenario driven by catastrophic banking failure.

> If we want to make a difference, we can use FutureHi as a forum for envisioning a beautiful future, and creating practical scenarios
> by which this future can be reached. If the seeds we conjure up are useful, they will propagate out into the world at the speed of
> light. Additionally, whenever possible, let's start actually living our visions immediately.

In terms of complementarity, I claim that what you are proposing is not sufficient. In particular, I propose that just as the empowered self-replication of free-floating bacteria and blue-green algae does not in and of itself lead to the formation of a complex eukaryotic cell capable of high-order life — so too does the speed of light replication of disjoint memes/ideas not lead by itself to the formation of a complex ideology/epistemology capable of high-order life.

> I don't feel as though your work has disentangled the issues. In fact you've mixed stuff
> together in an almost unbelievable way, reminiscent of schizophrenic prose.
>
> In my opinion, combining Judiasm, Quantum Computing, Zero Point Energy, The International Banking system,
> DMT, the Daime Church and so many other subjects together into a "unified synthesis" just adds to the confusion.

Please note that the seventh point of coherency was that we'd agree to wade into the morass of entangled ideas and disentangle them. I never in any way claimed to have a whole lot more than the two necessary starting points as per:

1. The four-fold hyper-holism as a general statement of epistemology and ontology that will let us construct an
accurate description of an overarching REALITY that is physical, spiritual, economic, and political.

2. The way the general principles of holographic libertarianism are indispensable for resolving the
primal challenge posed by the actual four-fold ontology of REALITY.

Everything else that I've presented is but the most preliminary attempt to begin dealing with: a) the incredible morass of interlocking issues that are indeed a part of our REALITY, b) the incredible abdication of true holism within the discipline of "rationalism," and within the ever more hyper-specialized realm called "academia," and c) the valuable but stunted lower-dimensional holism of the counter-culture that is hopelessly inadequate.

> This kind of synthesis has overtones of David Icke. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke

Please note that the synthesis of David Icke and so many others like him leads to the kind of paranoid conspiracy theories that I utterly denounce. By contrast, my basic claim, based on my understanding of time-symmetric causation, is that: a) everything attributed to "evil conspirators," is entirely the result of chaotic/mechanistic forces non-locally present within the heart of culture, b) the only conspirator is God, and that His influence is utterly beneficent if we but invite it in, c) God does uphold a basic framework of objective hyper-dimensional law, and d) we must use our human- level free-will to cooperate with God in establishing the Dominion of Wisdom over said chaotic/mechanistic forces (and by this means ascend to the next level of evolution). Indeed, your objection denies the very essence of holism in favor of specialization and reductionism, and hence denies the possibility of a true evolutionary breakthrough.

> You are condensing an extremely wide range of subjects and much of the work is highly speculative. Maybe there will be a banking
> collapse, maybe not, I personally don't think so. But you say it as though you *know* it to be true. This kind of self-assurance is
> infused through your speculations, and in my opinion, is indicative of someone who has a religious rather than a scientific viewpoint.

Please note that I proposed 21 experiments based on time-symmetric theory that predict specific phenomena that have not yet observed, with the bulk of these predictions relating to phenomena reproducible at the human level — and note that predictions based on logically coherent theory are the sine quo non of "science." As far as things like banking failure are concerned, there are some dangers/phenomena that are utterly beyond the realm of controlled experiments vis a vis "the scientific method," but which can none the less lead to apocalyptic consequences. Indeed, one of the single most dangerous trends in Western culture is the hubris by which modern rationalism would deny the very reality of anything that is beyond the realm of direct human experiment. I am by no means a "lone wolf" in saying that the banking system is poised for a catastrophic failure, and there are some real experts out there who are saying that (Wilfred Hahn). On the other hand, I am virtually alone in acknowledging this very real danger, and at the same time saying that there is conceptually simple way of addressing it. I'll address the banking failure issue more in the review of items one and seven. In summary, I offer the best that we mortal humans can do in this area, by: a) showing how we can begin constructing a hyper-holism that can address this life or death issue, and b) offering a detailed set of experiments that can test the basic ideas of time-symmetric causation and hyper- holism.

> Nevertheless, I don't see this essay as any kind of rallying point unless you're planning to start your own religion.
> If so, I'm not sure FutureHi is the best place to do it, because there are lots of independent thinkers here (I hope).

If the hyper-holism and holographic libertarianism that I am proposing truly reflect REALITY, then there is no reason why a host of independent thinkers couldn't work together to fully flesh it out, and thence quite easily and independently agree on the result.

> Your essay is filled with "WE MUST DO THIS" (or else). But there is no WE. There are just billions of people doing
> their own thing. And the Internet is causing the WE to diminish in power further and instead encouraging countless
> tribes each promoting their own agenda. I view this continued decentralization as a very hopeful trend.

The lack of a "WE" embracing a higher-order ideology/epistemology is exactly the thing that I claim will lead straight to an apocalyptic scenario — for a coherent, highly focused entity of this nature is the one and only thing that I believe can secure the holistic win-win deals that will be needed to prevent the failure of the banking system. I've spent years looking for an organization that embraces the full, four-fold, hyper-holistic perspective. But so far as I can see there is no voice, entity, organization, etc., anywhere on the planet that even recognizes the four-fold symmetry of REALITY (let alone espouses the principles holographic libertarianism that very naturally follow from this ontological symmetry). But just because such an entity does not yet exist, does not mean that it has not become critically important.

> The stuff about the Jewish faith is rather odd. I find it particularly strange to call the Jewish religion a "goddess" when it was actually
> the Jewish religion that fought hardest against the goddess religions (which are referred to in the Old Testament as Ba'al)

You are mistaken in two ways: a) the Jewish people formally see themselves as the Bride of God, all that's prohibited is the worshiping of other Gods and Goddesses, and b) Baal is not the name of a feminine goddess, but the name given to the "son of Yahweh," and as such, Jesus is himself formally a "Baal." Beyond that, there is no question in my mind that expansive Jewish vision/philosophy is, out of all major world philosophies/religions, by far, the closest to the holistic Extropianism that Paul and I feel so drawn to. Without question, human culture will return to a perspective focused on the Divine Feminine. The only question is whether the archetypal spirit will be that of Kali/Durga, or that of Saraswati.

> Extreme danger of zero point energy? This is a very far-fetched concern
> since we don't even know what's real with zero point energy yet.

First I would point out that many people claim that zero-point energy exists, and that it is being suppressed. Time- symmetric theory unambiguously endorses this basic understanding, and goes on to explain why zero-point energy is being suppressed. Since the health of the economy is utterly dependent on an exponentially growing energy supply, and since paradigm change will inexorably confirm the existence of zero-point energy, it will be necessary for the think- tank that I am proposing to address this issue in detail. In particular, we will have to dispel the idea that zero-point energy is an infinite energy field that permeates every square centimeter of the cosmos — and show that it is in fact just another name the Earth's holistic energy grid. Beyond that we will have to show that physically tapping this energy during the era of planet-bound existence will necessarily increase pain, war, and suffering on the planet, and that large- scale pursuit of this type of energy would, at present, be more dangerous than "children playing with Plutonium." At present, the shadowy figures of the CIA/underworld etc. etc. are doing us a big favor by keeping this stuff suppressed. And if we are hoping to catalyze any kind of true "paradigm change" we had better manifest some real wisdom in this area.

> I'll respond to your seven points:
> >>1. Agree that civilization faces a stark bifurcation of destiny, and further agree that the
> >> acorn and fertility cycle analogies in section III describe this bifurcation in a fairly accurate way.
>
> Maybe, maybe not. There are clear dangers in the world; I guess that greatest danger now is some
> kind of terrorist attack which triggers an economic meltdown.

You are correct that war and terrorism pose a great danger in this regard; however ecological fanaticism/fundamentalism poses an equally great danger due to how it drives people to seek a "sustainable stasis" that would sink the economy, and to fundamentally ignore "cost" in the pursuit of fashionable "solutions." In fact, the logic of time-symmetric hyper-holism posits a perfect symmetry between these two primal economic challenges.

> But there are also many powerful positive trends taking place on the planet. My guess is that the trend
> towards democracy, as evidenced by Ukraine and many other states, and the massive movement
> towards decentralization created by the Internet will dramatically prevail over the regressive forces at work now.
>
> We may well avoid any cataclysm and instead move smoothly into a highly enlightened age.

I totally agree with everything you said here. My only point in this regard is that we face a specific lethal danger vis a vis the banking system and the lack of an established functioning hyper-holism.

> >> 2. Commit to the cosmic/utopian destiny depicted in section XVI with the whole of our body, heart, mind,
> >> and soul — and further commit to allowing the time-reverse influence of this Holy Destiny to "impregnate"
> >> each one of us at the deepest level of our being.
>
> The reverse-time wave concept makes the future sound almost predetermined since it implies that future realities
> are pulling us towards them. I personally prefer the idea that the future is waiting to be created by us.

There are many futures, both living and dead, pulling us toward them via the basic functioning of time-symmetric causation. Our creative power is not something that exists in an ontological vacuum, but is instead a function of how we, as an incarnation of the Divine Feminine have the free-will to pick and choose among the alternatives that are physically possible. The caveat, is that we have reached a point where all the physically/economically/politically possible alternatives are very sharply grouped around the question of whether or not Mother Earth is pregnant with cosmic life. And just as a woman becoming pregnant can set in motion a nominally predetermined process that leads to a whole new locus of creative free-will vis a vis the embryo in her body — so too can we, as the final evolutionary flowering of Mother Earth, surrender a small portion of our free-will to unambiguously align ourselves to the overall destiny of utopian cosmic life. In this regard, I claim that this choice will slowly but surely activate the infinitely greater "Super Free Will" that Paul has written about, and that our moral decision in this matter is the only fully functioning aspect of "Super Free Will" currently available to humans.

> >> 3. Utterly renounce the logic and politics of scarcity and "limits to growth," and in so doing, commit
> >> wholeheartedly to a destiny in which the total population, macro-economy, and use of energy will grow
> >> at a robust exponential rate for centuries to come.
>
>I fully support this idea, though you'll find many on mushroom-eating progressives who don't.

Likewise I feel that this lack of support from the "many on mushroom-eating progressives" is intimately related to the way conservatives revile entheogens — and that if we want engage the power of these substances for the healing of culture, we had better get serious about the insemination of some utopian pro-growth memes.

> >> 4. Utterly renounce the politics of coercion and the use of centralized political power for achieving even the most
> >> enlightened of goals — and pursuant to this, embrace Holographic Libertarianism as our basic political stance (as
> >> depicted in the attached chart).
>
> I agree with this too. I believe many problems arise from the hierarchical structure of our society. However, because
> of the dominance of the Internet and other networking technologies, hierarchy is now obsolete. We don't have to fight
> against it since it's going the way of vinyl records and typewriters.

Hierarchy is almost obsolete. The caveat is that the conservative aspect of hierarchy has one remaining responsibility and that is to keep the existing economic and industrial systems functioning pending the emergence of hyper-holism and holographic libertarianism. And that they "programed" by cosmic law to do anything and everything (regardless of future cost) to prevent a here and now economic collapse and/or lemming-like move toward deindustrialization — even if it means: a) starting wars, b) martial law, c) running up astronomical debts, d) disinformation, etc., etc., etc.

> >> 5. Embrace the four-fold perspective in its full symmetry (as depicted in the two attached charts) and make it the
> >> basis for a radically new, hyper-holistic meta-religion — and further embrace the political bootstrap of section XII,
> >> and the "visionary jihad" depicted therein.
>
> Religion, in the sense of a formal set of unquestioned beliefs, around which a church of believers is built, is a highly
> centralized, highly regressive form, which totally contradicts your item #4. Religious institutions should be dismantled
> and avoided; we certainly don't need to create new ones.

Check out my response to Paul for my correction on this item. As you can see, I am open to the questioning and revision of what I am proposing, and I have further postulated that independent minds can work together to fully flesh out an accurate depiction of REALITY, and thence independently agree on the result. Beyond this, I would caution that the extant religions of all types have precious gems of wisdom that are as yet unintegrated, and that the community level integration of these gems will prove indispensable to full functional embodiment of hyper-holism, holographic libertarianism, and "Super Free Will." In the end, the acid test of holographic libertarianism is going to be whether greens and conservatives can both agree that local communities are capable of internal self-regulation in each and every regard — and for this, we are indeed going to need some form of hyper-holistic meta-religion.

> >>6. Suspend judgment against the conservative elites (and the socio-economic leviathan that they have created in the corporate/
> >> banking/ political world), and instead view them as puppets dancing to the tune of archetypal forces — and beyond that, see if
> >> we can we find the courage to walk up to the "devil himself" and say, "hey we've got a win-win deal for you."
>
> These guys are losing power fast to decentralization. However, if you listen to the old mass media you still get the
> idea that they're becoming even more powerful. The death of the record industry is just the tip of the iceberg, all
> corporations and governments are losing power to the decentralized networks.
>
> I agree that we should suspend judgment about them. I don't think that large corporations are evil; they just follow
> their own logic, and usually try to conform to their own conceptions about being "good citizens". For example,
> concern about the environment is standard within all large corporations now, although of course sometimes their core
> businesses may be older technologies that will have to give way to cleaner ones.

I agree that they are losing power, and am glad that we are in agreement about suspending judgement. The caveat is that "dinosaurs" can be exceedingly dangerous creatures in the early stages of death, especially if the universe has programmed them to stay alive and in power at all cost. And since God has indeed arranged win-win deals that we can offer them, and given us the hyper-holistic information that can eventually coax their surrender to us — why should we not seek relationship? So please reconsider my basic point of relating to them, and pursuing holistic win-win deals.

> >> 7. Agree to wade into the morass of counter-cultural thought without preconceptions pro or con — and by exploring the
> >> issues in depth, disentangle the "bramble" in which political, ecological, technical, and economic issues are routinely
> >> confused with each other, and/or desperately embraced as pretexts for underlying agendas of a wholly different nature.
>
> I don't feel as though your work has disentangled the issues. In fact you've mixed stuff
> together in an almost unbelievable way, reminiscent of schizophrenic prose.
>
> In my opinion, combining Judiasm, Quantum Computing, Zero Point Energy, The International Banking system,
> DMT, the Daime Church and so many other subjects together into a "unified synthesis" just adds to the confusion.

Please note that the seventh item was about the morass of entangled confused ideas at the heart of counter- cultural thought, and not about the obviously embryonic state of hyper-holism. I addressed the preliminary status of hyper-holism earlier. But to clarify item seven, I will give an example based on the most blatant area of counter-cultural confusion and hidden/subconscious agendas that I know of, i.e. the carbon emissions issue.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that global-warming and ocean-acidification are both worst case scenarios, and that "we've got to do something about it." Unfortunately, the entire ICPP analysis of this issue extrapolated legitimate scenarios for energy growth without balancing them by equally legitimate scenarios for the growth of human intelligence and technological power (as per classic green/counter-cultural thought). As a result it was assumed without any good reason that:

1. The problem will be solved mainly through emissions controls (i.e. the single most expensive "solution" possible).
2. We need to implement a draconian system of coercive centralized controls to enforce these emissions controls.

Thence the Kyoto protocol adds its own mischief to these very dubious starting premises by not counting any carbon emission reductions that happen via the substitution of nuclear power for fossil power. (And regardless of whether nuclear is ultimately viable or not, this utterly irrelevant prohibition is the sure sign of a hidden agenda.) Worse yet, it create a system of ecologically perverse incentives encouraging biofuel production in the developing countries. But these incentives will necessarily increase demand for overall land use, and will almost assuredly come at the expense of forests (especially tropical forests). By contrast, what was completely overlooked in the entire discussion and implementation of the Kyoto protocol was that:

1. We could: a) cool the Earth far more effectively by reflecting away sunlight coming in at an average of 685 watts/meter2, than by trying to control the industrial gases that insulate the Earth by a mere 2.5 watts/meter2, b) use this principle to easily compensate for a worst case global warming scenario at trivial cost, via the generation of low-level mid-ocean fog-banks, and c) easily tame hurricanes as a side effect of this effort.

2. We could generate biofuels by farming the immense nutrient starved mid-ocean deserts at net ecological benefit — and by using a combination of reasonably anticipated technologies, we could easily and profitably generate bio-gasoline and bio-diesel in gigaton quantities in less than 20 years. Indeed, we could emulate Mother nature by turning the totality of industrial carbon emissions into a closed loop.

In the end, the Kyoto protocol has almost nothing to do with truly resolving the carbon emissions issue. And whether consciously intended or not, its net result is a centralized political regime for: a) coercively enforcing the green counter- cultural ideal of "sustainable stasis," and b) coercively transferring wealth from the industrial nations to the third world biofuel producing nations. Indeed, ecological fundamentalism is fully the equal of war and terrorism in its baneful socio-economic impact. And if there is any one thing that has been inspiring me to wage "ideological jihad" it is this piece of regressive, coercive, counter-cultural flapdoodle.

Worse yet, this kind of ecological fundamentalism is exactly what fuels the desperation of George Bush and the conservative juggernaut. We should be thankful that this desperation has not driven them to overtly implement martial law. And unless we get very serious the insemination of expansive hyper-holistic ideas, we will have every reason to expect the danger of this cabal to increase.

So I ask, what is your basic choice? What is our basic choice? Is it the chaotic mixture of truth and superstition found within counter-cultural ideals, or is it the expansive hyper-holism that we could very profitably develop pursuant to the evolutionary leap that is at hand.

And again I ask, can we agree on the seven points of coherency?

Sincerely
Reverend Tom

Posted by: Reverend Tom at March 26, 2006 04:43 PM

Hi Rev T,

Thanks for you comments about the Tribal Oasis project. We have bought a beautiful piece of land and will have a community of about 25 when it’s all built up. By actually attempting to live by our principles, we can very rapidly determine which theoretical ideas work and which don’t and we certainly have experienced both already. The act of DOING is so much more powerful than just dreaming and theorizing…

I don’t mean to in any way disrespect your work, and I see lots in it that I agree with. If you haven’t read the Skeptical Environmentalist, you’d probably find it very encouraging; it echoes some of your message. But I feel you’re overstating the danger of an economic collapse caused by society following the Kyoto protocol. This is just as unlikely as the opposite collapses predicted by proponents of the Global Warming or Peak Oil memes.

The main disagreement I have with your beliefs is that idea that we must save the world with a “hyper-holism”.

1> First of all, this is an unrealistic fantasy. Whatever memes we dream up will be out there in the marketplace of ideas, competing with many others. We should be happy if our ideas take off and self-replicate. The dream that they will form the UMBRELLA TRUTH that everyone accepts and thereby saving humanity is absurd and portrays an intellectual arrogance or inflation in your thinking.

2> The idea of a hyper-holism reveals your deep commitment to monotheism. You assume that there is one set of meta-beliefs that we all must adhere to or the human race will self-destruct. This is the same claim that all monotheist religions make.

The concepts of monotheism and hierarchy are strongly related. Monotheism presents a giant pyramid scheme with “god” at the top. This is the reason that your item #5 is in direct conflict with your item #4. The desire for a meta-religion is precisely a call for a coercive centralized control, since this is the only way that such a religion could be imposed on the masses.

What you fear---the unbridled forces of decentralization running free without a single guiding principle, is precisely what I celebrate and is what is really happening in the world now.

A political form of your fantasy is that:

“The future must be brought under control, managed, and planned - preferably by "experts." It cannot simply evolve. The future must be predictable and uniform: We will go from point A to point B with no deviations…….Our political discussions simply assume that every new development - cultural, technological, or economic - requires some sort of program to make it turn out "right."

The author disputes this concept in her essay: Technocracy RIP

http://www.wired.com/wired/6.01/postrel.html

The growth of the Internet has shown that something amazing and beautiful and of incomparable wisdom and power can evolve from nothing more than lots of people expressing themselves and indulging their passions. This is a kind of anarchy that works fabulously well with no government control, no guiding meme, no right and wrong.

It shows that we no longer need “god”, no longer need a single “truth”, no longer need authority figures telling us what is right and what is wrong. Maybe we don’t even need Rev Tom to set us straight.

But keep on trucking Rev T, there’s value in your work. I would just recommend that you get over the idea that everyone else in the world needs to learn and agree with your highly complex synthesis.

As far as everyone on FutureHi agreeing to a set of ideas, I would think these principles would need to be much more general and straightforward, simply serving as a springboard for discussion.

A community defined vision and mission statement for FutureHi might be a great idea to help discover what common ground we do have. A vision statement from each of us would be a description of the fantasy of what this community could become if we had the power to form it in any way we’d like. Rev T. has created his fantasy. I’d love to see everyone elses. It would be particularly interesting to see the ideal vision of FutureHi from some of the “naysayers” like Event Horizon, since it puts them in the position of saying what they want from the site, rather than what they don’t want.

When we have everyone’s ideal, then perhaps we can craft a common vision statement.

Cheers,
Dlight

Posted by: dlight at March 27, 2006 12:15 AM

Dear Dlight,

I love your idea of crafting a common and colloborative vision. Would you be willing to start this proces with a short and sweet post on the main page?

Paul

Posted by: Paul at March 27, 2006 01:52 AM

Dlight, thanks for your post.

I wanted to point out some of my own concerns regarding some kind of spiritual unity being an integral part for the drive towards change and freedom, and overcoming problems.

Mainly that I dont see it happening regardless of the strength of arguement in the world of today and the near future.

It is also entireally likely that whatever forms our civilisation takes in the future, that ideologies will never be totally united, and these differences will have to be accepted and integrated into how we live.

If spiritual unity, or like you say 'UMBRELLA TRUTH', which may or may not actually be something attainable, is required for progress and to avoid regression, then the almost absolutely gaurenteed opposition and fraction and even in some cases explosive anger and condemnation of others views means what exactly?

And this leads me to the point you closed your post with. Ideal vision.

I'm not sure how to approach this point, I have views, but this kind of 'question' requires work and effort in my opinion like that displayed by Rev. Tom, and the end result of my desire and questioning has not come together in any kind of way approaching that sort of unity and depth.

Having said that, for all the lack of depth I have delved into in regards to solutions to the points I myself have concluded, I still have those views and ideas regarding principles and basics.

Simply, I see things somewhat linearly.

I see where we are now today, and I see perhaps 'the fantasy' of some day having an eternal existance, free from all kinds of requirements, apart from 'somewhere' we can exist.

Complete equality except for the fact we are still indivduals in some form, still able to be persue dreams of what must be currently an unimaginable nature, still able to find others, still able to find the unique.

Im not sure how realistic a view this is, but thats not really the point. The point is that this view, of equals, is the founding point for my entire philosophy.

Regardless of what occurs, if we are to remain individuals, we will always require basic ethics for interaction.

I see the society of our farthest future in this Universe, as being a time where our complexity of interaction returns to almost primeval roots. We answer to no one and nothing apart from the values and principles of all people as a whole. We can never rule out individuals overstepping boundaries, we cant simply say that when we are almost Godlike we will never inflict suffering upon one another, or upon other things.

My view anyway is that continuation of life, adherance to a code of interaction, a code of morality, and equality of choice, are the fundamental principles our species must always be based upon.

I see the possible solution, as put forward by Rev. Tom, to our future problems being the massive and directed development of our current world into an economic and technological juggernaut that can overcome all future problems by unleashing growth as being deeply unsettling.

I do not particularly wish to see side effects of atmospheric contamination and subtle alteration being negated by technological solutions that can pay the future generations of our species so they can enjoy a more advanced level of our current society.

I dont wish to see vast tracts of land given over to roads for now emmissionless vehicles.

But I am naysaying, and if it ensures our survival so we can back to our roots of being alive and existing not in a human amusment arcade, but a vast gallery of majesty and splendour and awe, then I do not wish to criticise it too deeply.

My view is the restucturing, the metamorphosis, the reconstruction of our entire civilisation, slowly, in spite of all challenges, all setbacks, all hurdles and opposition, not into the technological and economic roots of a vast and powerful species, but into the roots of a just and fair and visionary race of explorers, watchers and builders.

We will require systems, systems to ensure our equality, systems to spread the benefits of our collective existance throughout all people, systems to police, as policing will be required, systems of justice.

We will need systems to enable us to overcome our problems, and we will require systems that ensure our civilisation develops equally, harmoniously, justly. Anarchy is something we individually and collectivly cannot handle at this time. People governing themselves will always be a requirment untill we attain technological levels to no longer need it.

My view is that we are withdrawing more into our human society, as it expands and becomes more firmly entrenched. We are giving up hunting the Bison, in favour of planting the crops, because it gaurentees an easier life, but we are not farmers. We are giving up hardship in favour of amusement and comfort, but we do not wish to be amused nor pampered.

My view is that we should make as little impact as possible on this planet, but the little impact we do make is a hall of pristine art,beauty, happiness, health and laughter.

We should have the timeless march of evolution and change, the adventure of wilderness and the marvel and beauty of the Earth, and the other side of the door we should have all the magnificence of intelligent creation and thought. A basic run soceity of simple rules, the driving factor behind all efforts behind these doors being the construction of the most gloriously unimaginable cities, the legacy of leaving behind the inspiration and majesty of human existance for other generation, for our expanding race.

Paul wrote a post about space exploration.

We humans should live in a world and society where we can build everything we want to see, live how we could ever dream of living, and explore everything we could never imagine stepping foot upon.

I do not wish to see human civilisation as it is sprawling out even more across the Earth, gouging and killing and flattening and changing. I want to see our species take what we have and it turn it into something approaching perfection.

No more expansion, lets improve by laying true foundations, equality, sustainment, sharing, justice, fairness, simplicity, health, and perhaps
instead of expanding, we can make more efficeint use of what we currently use.

By the time we turn our cities and towns from sprawling nests, into glittering sculptures, by the time we turn our reckless systems into something worthy to live by and under, well the world as we know it will have altered and evolved and grown back, and we can go explore it once again.

I dont see the collapse, if it is likely, of our current way of life as a disaster, regardless of what happens in my life time, I wish to see this kind of artistic way of approaching existance to happen very soon.

Im not much of a realist on certain topics, others sure. It all depends on how hard people are willing to work, what struggles and sacrifices we are willing to make, if we are to create our magical technological cities as islands in a gloriously untouched expanse called 'Our Universe'.

Posted by: eventhorizen at March 27, 2006 05:31 AM

Your paper bears witness to many of my thoughts and intentions over the last 6 years. Here's another interesting example of the birfurcation, using the Mayan calendrics field (2012 new world or another y2k hype):

On the visionary intuition, and contradictory to the logical mind, we find, in this case study, John Major Jenkins discovery of once-per-precisional-cycle-alignment or the Ecliptic with the Center of the Milky Way:
http://www.levity.com/eschaton/Why2012.html

On the academic, and equally rooted in contradiction to the ancient wisdom passed down through thousands of years of oral tradition and world indigenous peoples prophecy, we find, in this case study, Vincent H. Malstom's bitter rebutal:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~izapa/M-32.pdf

Just an example of the degree of polarization. I see truth in both sides of the argument. My heart/mind resonates with JMJ's hunch. My rational mind applauds Malstroms emotionless skepticism. It seems like everyday I encounter new tears in the fabric and have the choice of choosing sides or trying to imagine a way to mend. Perhaps the attempts to mend the temporary division are hindering the larger healing that needs to take place. As a physician might rebreak a partially healed bone fracture to adjust the alignment with foresight into the long-term.

peace,
core

Posted by: core at March 27, 2006 10:59 AM

"A vision statement from each of us would be a description of the fantasy of what this community could become if we had the power to form it in any way we’d like. Rev T. has created his fantasy. I’d love to see everyone elses."

I don't have a complete vision, in any case I like many of the ideas expressed on this site. Also providing a precise blue-print seems counter productive to me if we are relying on 'emergence'.

Boosting the ability of individuals to get used to their emerging capabilities would be good start as far as I am concerned. Demonstrating what's possible by "living the dream" looks like an effective way of demonstrating what we're on about.

Sharing information about what we have tried and how the experience relates to ideas in our heads is an attractive proposition. My hope is that we somehow manage to work with the fuzzy, complementary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarity_%28physics%29) ideas involved and not get stuck arguing as if only extreme positions represented reality.

Trying to use what I know (or think I know) has certainly helped me to test and understand things better.

I hope Future Hi develops further as an environment in which the conventional and the spiritual are seen as part of the whole.

Sunface

Posted by: Sunface at March 27, 2006 10:29 PM

Dear Dlight,

You are a delightful challenge, and I suspect we may be more aligned than first appears to be the case.

> Thanks for you comments about the Tribal Oasis project. We have bought a beautiful piece of land and will have a community of about
> 25 when it's all built up. By actually attempting to live by our principles, we can very rapidly determine which theoretical ideas work and
> which don't and we certainly have experienced both already. The act of DOING is so much more powerful than just dreaming and theorizing…

I agree that doing is generally more powerful than just dreaming and theorizing. In fact, I'm pursuing local community building too, although I'm not so far along as you are. (And if you don't mind, I may borrow large portions of your business plan). My only suggestion here is that an integrated combination of doing, dreaming, and theorizing may occasionally be even more powerful, in that it can sometimes trigger a major evolutionary leap.

> What you fear---the unbridled forces of decentralization running free....
> ....without a single guiding principle, is precisely what I celebrate and is what is really happening in the world now.

I can't say that I've conquered all fear like an enlightened guru, but my primary motivation is to communicate the symmetries that I have discovered, a