The Society of the Third

PROLOGUE

THE SOCIETY OF THE THIRD

MILLENNIUM New Narratives Of A Reimagined Future Synthesized As The Integral Vision Of S3K

“Because of the interconnectedness of all minds, affirming a positive vision may be about the most sophisticated action anyone of us can take.”

—Willis Harmon, Global Mind Change

“A developing brain is a sort of snowballing cognitive leviathan that adapts to everything and anything close to it. Learning is one aspect of extreme plasticity, and creativity another. Any species that can do such things as play with the world, imagine it, remember it, and expand its cir- cles of experience…will ultimately start to experiment.”

—Merlin Donald, A Mind So Rare

“If we can reimagine possibility it can result in an entirely new vision of how to create lasting change in our communities. Not in a dreamy, wish- ful, [naïve] sense, but rather through a bold and courageous commitment to practical and specific measures grounded in the daily experience of what has been proven to work over and over again but has not been tried on a large enough scale.” —Bill Shore, Revolution of the Heart

“We need visions these days. Not the prognostications of cybergeeks and marketers and statisticians and trend-mongers who try to tell us where we’ll end up if we continue in the direction we’re going. Useful as these predictions may be, we’ve got plenty of those kinds of visions. What we need are visions of society the way we want it to be. Creative, seemingly impractical, catalytic visions of human possibility and achievement can inspire and motivate us to change our lives and the world.”

—Eric Utne, Visionaries: People and Ideas to Change Your Life. 1

THE FIRST GREAT AMERICAN TRANSITION

The last time America (and subsequently the entire world) was in a titanic threshold of transformation (as we find ourselves today) was when it was transitioning from an agrarian society to an industrial powerhouse through the “revolutionary improvements in transportation and communications that accelerated the extension of the American empire,” this according to Daniel Howe’s What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848.

Railroads, canals, newspapers, and the telegraph dramatically low- ered travel times and spurred the spread of information. These innovations prompted the emergence of mass political parties and stimulated America’s economic development from an overwhelmingly rural country to a diversified economy in which commerce and industry took their place alongside agriculture. […Not to mention] the rise of Andrew Jack- son and his Democratic party […], John Quincy Adams and other Whigs—advocates of public education and economic integration, de- fenders of the rights of Indians, women, and African Americans—were the true prophets of America’s future. […] The power of religion to shape many aspects of American life during this period, including slavery and antislavery, women’s rights and other reform movements, politics, education, and literature […]. In 1844 […] Ralph Waldo Emer- son [the father of American Transcendentalism] proclaimed that ‘America is the country of the future. It is a country of beginnings, of projects, of vast designs and expectations.’ Emerson spoke a common sentiment in that heady age of what might be called America’s national adolescence […]. The American people, lustily doubling their numbers every two decades, dreamed without embar- rassment of extravagant utopias both spiritual and secular. Their economy, fueled by startling new technologies like the telegraph and the rail- road, was growing robustly. Their churches were rocked by revivalism, even as their political system was giving the world an exhilarating lesson in the possibilities of mass democracy. Yet Emerson’s America was already a country with a past. Its history held peril as well as promise— not least the noxious heritage of chattel slavery, a moral outrage that mocked the Republic’s claim to be a model of social and political enlightenment and eventually menaced the nation’s very survival […].1 2

THE SECOND GREAT TRANSITION A Neo-Convergence Of New Energy & Communication Regimes

“We are approaching the sunset of the oil era in the first half of the 21st century. The price of oil on global markets continues to climb and peak global oil is [near if not here already]. At the same time, the dramatic rise in carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels is raising the earth’s temperature and threatening an unprecedented change in the chemistry of the planet and global climate, with ominous consequences for the future of human civilization and the ecosystems of the earth […]. The need for a new economic vision takes on an even greater urgency […]. “The great pivotal economic changes in world history have occurred when new energy regimes converge with new communication regimes. When that convergence happens, society is restructured in wholly new ways. For example, the first hydraulic agricultural societies—Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, India—invented writing to manage the cultivation, storage, and distribution of grain. Surpluses of stored grain allowed for an expansion of population and the feeding of a slave labor force which, in turn, provided the ‘man power’ to run the economy. The convergence of written communication and stored energy in the form of surplus grain, ushered in the agricultural revolution, and gave rise to civilization itself. “In the early modern era, the coming together of coal powered steam technology and the print press gave birth to the first industrial revolution. It would have been impossible to organize the dramatic increase in the pace, speed, flow, density, and connectivity of economic activity made possible by the coal fired steam engine using the older codex and oral forms of communication. In the late nineteenth century and throughout the first two thirds of the twentieth century, first generation electrical forms of communication—the telegraph, telephone, radio, television, electric typewriters, calcu- lators, etc.—converged with the introduction of oil and the internal combustion engine, becoming the communications command and control mechanism for organizing and marketing the second industrial revolution. “Similarly, today, the same design principles and smart technologies that made possible the internet, and vast ‘distributed’ global communication networks, are just beginning to be used to reconfigure the world’s power grids so that people can produce renewable energy and share it peer-to-peer, just like they now produce and share information, creating a new, decentralized form of energy use. We need to envision a future in which millions of individuals can collect and produce locally generated renewable energy in their homes, offices, factories, and vehicles, store that energy in the form of hy- 3 drogen, and share their power generation with each other across a continent- wide intelligent intergrid. (Hydrogen is a universal storage medium for intermittent renewable energies; just as digital is a universal storage mechanism for text, audio, video, data and other forms of media). “The central question that every nation needs to ask is where they want their country to be in twenty five years from now: In the sunset energies and industries of the second industrial revolution or the sunrise energies and industries of the Third Industrial Revolution. The Third Industrial Revolution is the end-game that takes the world out of the old carbon & uranium-based energies and into a non-polluting, sustainable future for the human race.”2

A New Distributed Social Vision In The 21st Century

“The Third Industrial Revolution makes possible a new Distributed So- cial Vision in the 21st century. Most citizens of the world, when asked what they most hope for, say they envision a good ‘quality of life.’ The dream of quality of life emphasizes individual opportunity, social and human rights, balancing the social and market models, and building bridges of cooperation and peace. Underlying this expansive new 21st century social vision is the commitment that millions of people share to create a just and sustainable society for their children and future generations. “The dream of a good quality of life is now endangered by the dramatic rise of oil and gas prices on the world market, and the real time impacts of climate change on communities and ecosystems across the continent […]. The shift from the Second Industrial Revolution to the Third Industrial Rev- olution is going to require a carefully constructed long term transition plan. The EU understands this, and has committed itself to pursuing a two-track process: Track one, increasing the energy efficiency and reducing the carbon footprint by 20 percent, respectively, by the year 2020, in order to clean up the mature fossil fuel energies of the Second Industrial Revolution; track two, aggressively pursuing a 20 percent renewable energy target and laying down the foundation for a Third Industrial Revolution during the first half of the 21st century. Every nation needs to aggressively pursue both tracks simultaneously if we are to ease the transition to a post-carbon era. “In 2007, the EU Parliament became the first legislature in the world to pass a written declaration in support of the two-track approach to making the transition into a Third Industrial Revolution and a post-carbon energy era. “The story of a Third Industrial Revolution and a new Distributed Social Vision is powerful and provides the narrative we so desperately need at this critical point in history if we are to address climate change and peak oil and re-heal the Biosphere of the planet.”3 4

THE NEW AVANT GARDE OF METAMODERNISM “As public space becomes increasingly saturated by corporate culture, a new generation of artists is emerging. Frustrated by the insulated art world, encouraged by the politicization of art in the 1980s, and desirous of the rupture between high and low art, artists are looking into the space of everyday life to find a new canvas. The cement wall, the basketball court, and the bath- room stall have all been recent galleries for these artists. Public art, as it moves away from its traditional association with the bronze-man-on-horse statue, is rethinking some fundamental questions of the postmodern era: What is art? Who is the audience? Who is the artist? What is the message? Most importantly, artists working in the public realm are attempting to challenge corporate leverage on the production of knowledge and to reclaim public space as the site of political, social and cultural thought.”

—N. Lemmon, The Citizen Artist: The New Era of Public Art, 1998

“We are a loose global network of artists, writers, environmentalists, ecological economists, media-literacy teachers, reborn lefties, ecofeminists, down- shifters, high school shit-disturbers, campus rabble-rousers, incorrigibles, malcontents and green entrepreneurs. We are idealists, anarchists, guerrilla tacticians, pranksters, neo-Luddites, poets, philosophers and punks. We're [...] media activists who see ourselves as the advance shock troops of the most significant social movement of the next twenty years. Our aim is to topple existing power structures and forge major adjustments to the way we will live in the twenty-first century. We believe culture jamming will become to our era what civil rights was to the ‘60s, what feminism was to the ‘70s, what environmental activism was to the ‘80s. It will alter the way we live and think. It will change the way information flows, the way institutions wield power, the way TV stations are run, the way food, fashion, automobile, sports, music and culture industries set their agendas. Above all, it will change the way we interact with the mass media and the way in which meaning is produced in our society […]. “We place ourselves on a revolutionary continuum that includes, moving backward in time, early punk rockers, the ‘60s hippie movement, a group of European intellectuals and conceptual artists called the Situationist International, the Surrealists, Dadaists […] and a host of other social agitators down through the ages […].”

—ADBUSTERS Magazine, Kalle Lasn, 1999 5

GUERRILLA X ARTIVISM ACT I: PROLOGUE—THE BIRTH OF RADICAL INTEGRAL ART

(Art Concept & Design By Z.X.C; Mt. Helix, San Diego, CA, Nov. 20, 1999) THE STRAW MAN PROJECT, 1999-2000 A Change Of Consciousness Guerrilla Art Campaign

On a moonlit Saturday night, November 20, 1999, ten days before the “Battle In Seattle” shook the world by igniting the trigger event of the anti- corporate globalization movement, a small band of Gen-Xers and one Mil- lennial youth, all dressed in dark clothing in San Diego, California, clandes- tinely worked well into the early pre-dawn hours to launch the first salvo of a new Integral Guerrilla Art movement for the 21st century—Metamodern Neo-Transcendentalism. Back then, it was an emerging holistic philosophy 6 that had yet to be fully developed or identified as such. Among many other actions it includes Trans-Genre Recontextualization, Community Co-Creation, Vision Building and Mission-Oriented Strategic Art. This unique, culture jamming campaign began with a series of seven outdoor, site-specific, guerrilla art installations, called THE STRAW MAN PROJECT, 1999-2000: Breaking The Consen- sus Trance of False Consciousness. The mainstream media officially documented project one as a mysterious happening in an article entitled, “Cryptic Signs Left at the Site of Helix Cross: Culprits Bypassed Park’s Locked Gate.” The newspaper article was published in the local section of the Monday, Novem- ber 22, 1999, issue of the Union-Tribune.

LA MESA—The Mount Helix cross was draped with a [black] banner and surrounded with signs bearing cryptic messages early yesterday morning. The [black] banner was wrapped around the 30-foot upright from top to bottom [resembling a black monolith from the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey], said Sheriff’s Deputy Stuart Rea, and had this painted on it: “The Second Coming of Cross Will Arrive in 40 Days.” The time reference apparently is to the beginning of 2000. Eight [black painted wood stands with white painted text, topped with gorilla- face photos and] homemade signs placed around the base of the cross were covered with such phrases as ‘depersonalization of society,’ ‘commodification of news,’ and ‘lack of community.’ “Who knows where they’re coming from or what this means,” Rea said. He said whoever did the deed had to get past a locked gate and get to the top of the cross with a ladder. “They went to a lot of effort,” Rea said. “It had to be more than one person.” There were no hate messages, and there was no damage to the cross or the county park where the cross is located […]. The cross has been the subject of a lengthy legal dispute that challenged the county’s ownership of the cross as taxpayer support of a religious symbol. The county is about to surrender the cross and the land around it to a private foundation to resolve the lawsuit.4

On that momentous night, Zor (not his real name) and his Cultural Crea- tive collective comprised of “Guerrilla X Artivists” (artists and activists) working to create a massive mindshift for comprehensive change were born—the Society of the Third Millennium (S3K). These artivists within S3K are Postmodernists under the leadership of Zor, a Metamodernist, who has made the leap to integral consciousness. S3K also serves both the name of the guerrilla artivist group and the need for a cohesive vision like the one 7 proposed in this book. Such was the scene of S3K’s first guerrilla art project and the only clues (at the time) to their true intentions was a website com- muniqué that would elaborate on the mystery of the project but not reveal the entire epic endeavor (until now). It addressed critical cultural, political and socio-economic issues, one of which was that most activists in nonprofit organizations and most social movements do not possess a good grasp of the root causes of our real problems, thus, squandering their strained efforts and what little resources they have on misguided targets by subscribing to the symptom-oriented-solutions. They are unaware of the intended consequences of our superstructure—the worldview and values of the dominant culture—which is one of the major true sources of our social problems along with its subsequent societal structure that social service organizations may unknowingly serve to preserve by keeping the dysfunction in check, thus, counterproductive to the comprehensive change we all seek out. It is this misdiagnosis of societal ills that is one of the reasons for the misappropriation of precious time, funds and resources within the advocates of social service agencies and the mainstream population that results in disu- nity and ineffectiveness. This stems from the problem of a lack of social self- knowledge of the actual system we live under and how we are deceived into believing the false societal myths the power elites use to remain in power—in essence—“rule by control of reality.” Such an assessment of society’s predicament was unofficially affirmed by similar but autonomous “culture jamming” groups and/or individuals documented in such publications like Kalle Lasn’s Adbusters magazine and popularized by counter-culture movies like Fight Club and The Matrix. Having understood this, S3K decided it was time to take traditional consciousness-raising efforts to a whole new level by playing on a totally different battle field through planning and executing a one-year “mission-oriented strategic art” campaign. They understood that in the most general terms, the categorical causes of our social problems stemmed from two simple sources: one, our prevailing mode of thinking and acting and two, our subsequent way of life and the institutions and industries that enables it. Most of our problems flow from these two basic aspects of human existence (the interior and exterior that manifest itself through the individual and the collective in a self- reinforcing feedback loop) and to begin changing it requires a “revolution of consciousness” as Charles Reich wrote in his classic book The Greening of America. Any efforts at fundamental social change must first challenge the accepted worldview/ mental model of the world and the culture it creates. S3K referred to this as “Dismantling the American Fiction.” On their website (www.S3K.org) they paraphrase Reich’s words as if it were their own.

COMMUNIQUE #1 “BREAKING THE TRANCE” ACT I: THE PROLOGUE—Dismantling The American Fiction

Today, we face not only the dehumanization that the counterculture opposed, but an accelerating economic catastrophe. We confront conditions that no decent society can long tolerate such as homelessness and the destruction of hope in millions of young people. We face the very real danger of human extinction if we do not change. Our problems, however great, are entirely of our own making. What human beings can make, they can remake. Our present attempt to live in defi- ance of the laws of nature and of human nature cannot succeed. The artificial reality that encloses us and prevents us from seeing the possibilities outside our present system cannot be maintained. We, the Society of the Third Mil- lennium (S3K), are more convinced than ever that the conflict and suffering now threatening to engulf us are entirely unnecessary, and a tragic waste of our energy and resources. We can create an economic system that is not at war with human beings or nature, and we can get from here to there by democratic means. It is morally wrong to accept an unsatisfactory reality when the opportunity exists to choose something far better. We are equally convinced that only a mental prison, composed of prevailing beliefs, prevents us from recognizing that we possess the power to regain our sovereign citizenry and determine our own future. It’s the differing views of reality that are at the heart of many social, political, economic and legal problems. Hence, from this moment on, S3K’s guerrilla art projects will expose the “false map of reality” that we live under. Such “false consciousness” perpetuates the great political deception that has long suppressed any profound and effective action for social change. By providing historical background of where and how our social problems originated, raising awareness of our current predicament and presenting a new direction to re-imagine our future through a process of renewal, S3K becomes actively involved in initiating the first stage of societal transformation: A “Change of Consciousness,” more specifically, a realignment of the public’s perceptions with social reality. We are putting the American political system under indictment for its inability to cope with the problems facing the nation. Conventional political thought should be brought into question by all Americans. Our Guerrilla Art projects will focus on the reality, as well as the rhetoric of American democracy. During this Presidential election cycle we will attempt to concentrate on the shortcomings and gaps, where they exist, between American myths, realities and the political system’s promise and its performance. 10

Human beings have the power to question their own assumptions. How- ever, today, most of us lack an intelligible picture of our world. We know that our government and economy no longer fit the models we were taught in school. We know that our efforts to influence the government and the economy as voters, consumers, and workers fail to bring the responses we would expect from a free market democracy. Even those whose careers are headed toward public life cannot map the social structure they plan to enter. As members of society, we assume that we possess an accurate picture of our institutions and how they function. We look to the Constitution, the free market, and the principles of democracy as our guidelines. But without our knowledge, these landmarks have been altered so that our assumption con- cerning them is no longer valid. Our society no longer works the way it is supposed to. We find ourselves in the position of the baffled child in a dysfunctional family. We are burdened with a false map of reality. And like any other inaccurate map, it misleads rather than helps us. A false map of reality is one aspect of a larger malfunction that might be called lack of social self-knowledge. We know that we can all be subject to lack of personal self-knowledge. This condition can and often does mislead and misinform us at every moment of decision or choice. What we need to imagine is a similar lack of knowledge of ourselves as a society, a lack of social self-knowledge. We fail to understand the larger organism or structure of which we are a part. We lack insight into how and why it acts, how and why it treats us as it does, what it cares about, what its rules, if any, are. If the absence of personal self-knowledge may be compared to stumbling in the dark, lack of social self-knowledge means an even more frightening necessity of navigating through life without rules or directions. There are many reasons why we might lose knowledge of our own society. Much of what we know about our world is secondhand, something we are told, rather than something we experience firsthand. We rely on others to tell us how government works, how the economy works. Moreover, the sources of our knowledge are the government and other large institutions, not ob- servers with an outside point of view. But the chief reason for erroneous knowledge of reality is rapid social change that makes existing knowledge, no matter how obtained, obsolete. This is why we must now engage in a paradigm shifting campaign in three phases. ACT I: THE PROLOGUE—Breaking The Consensus Trance To Envision A New Society Through Change of Con- sciousness Campaigns; ACT II: THE INTERLUDE—Empowering The Emerg- ing Ethos Of Evolutionary Transformation Through Integral Cognitive Activ- ism; ACT III: THE EPILOGUE—Enacting The Emerging Edge Of The Future Thru A Self-Fulfilling Narrative Of An Era Of Evolutionary Enlightenment. 11

DARING TO DREAM: Overcoming Obstacles For Envisioning Real Utopias Of Sustainability

The power to reimagine the future is one of our greatest underutilized human asset and societal tool. One of the reasons for this is the lack of critical thinking and creative play due to (among many other reasons) our current education system, which is no fault of our teachers but of the unfunded federal mandates and bureaucratic state requirements that curtail creative cultivation by obligating schools to teach to standardized tests. The creative process is a valuable “problem-solving mechanism unique in its ability to coordinate and integrate both hemispheres of the brain into an optimally functioning state,”5 which is for the most part not being taught in our educational institutions—a shortcoming prevalent even among some progressives today. Therefore, let the following bold synthesis of various visions remove the blinders and light the way out of the dimness of the status-quo shortsighted- ness. Reimaging the future is an effective and coherent means that can be used for inspiration and guide the development of a core ideology for an alternative future designed to build broad-based commitment to a shared vision is one of the most important and fundamental step in galvanizing support for mass action. A significant asset and example of what James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras, authors of the book, Built To Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies, have written repeatedly throughout their book, “…core ideology is an essential component of a visionary company […] it describes the company’s philosophy, values, visions, and ideals.”6 However, the vision is more than the expression of a core ideology; it is also a guiding image of success. “If a mission statement provides a blueprint for an organization’s work—the what, why, and how of what it does—then the vision is the artist’s rendering of the realization of that mission. While a mission statement answers the questions about why the organization exists, what business it is in, and what values guide it, a vision answers the question, ‘What will success look like?’ It is the pursuit of this shared image of success that inspires and motivates people to work together.”7 It’s the essence of visionary endeavors—the organizing framework that works hand in hand with a relentless drive for progress that impels change and forward movement in all that is not part of the core ideology. There exist a dynamic interplay between core ideology and the drive for progress “which arises from a deep human urge—to explore, to create, to discover, to achieve, to change, and to improve.”8

Transcending Utopian Cynicism To Create An Alternative Integral Vision For The Future

But where and how do we begin? “We must reconnect with a set of core values that every one of us can embrace despite our many differences— values like compassion, freedom, equality, justice, sustainability, democracy, community, and tolerance. (No society—especially one as powerful and rapidly changing as ours—survives for very long without a moral compass to guide its evolution and progress.) We have to deliberately build our society to increasingly reflect and nurture the growth of these values in the world,” from The Better World Handbook.

Think about the world that you would like to live in. Let yourself imagine a world that you could be proud to leave for your children—a world where peace, justice, compassion, and tolerance prevail and where each person has more than enough food, shelter, meaningful work, and close friends. What would a more loving, accepting, patient, understanding, and egalitarian world look like? Your vision of a better future will provide you with an inspiring goal to work toward and will keep your passion alive for the journey ahead. As we start out, we must be aware of the many traps that can stop us from making a difference in the world. [Cynicism is one of those traps. So one of the questions should be, how do we overcome it?] Many people point the finger at a culture that breeds apathy. In fact, beneath apathy there lies an even bigger culprit: cynicism. Cynicism is the deeply ingrained belief that human beings are, and have always been, inherently selfish. Cynicism in this form is not just a long-term emotional state or an adopted intellectual philosophy, it is a way of relating to the world. Cynicism fundamentally destroys hope. We begin to see the world as place that will always be filled with social problems, because we are convinced that people look out for their own best interests above all else. The pursuit of happiness becomes little more than an attempt to accumu- late material wealth, increase your social status, and indulge any desire. Helping others, giving something back, and making a difference in the world no longer shows up in popular culture. Indeed, people who decide to seriously pursue such goals are often labeled as odd, naïve, overly sen- timental, unrealistic, or simply irrational. The most you can strive for under this worldview is to come out somewhere nearer the top than the bottom.

In a world of constantly increasing complexity, cynicism becomes the safest, most strategic position to adopt. It involves no action and thus no risk. Cynics can portray their inaction as more rational, objective, and even more scientifically founded than people who are trying to change the world. Apathy becomes an acceptable state of being. So what happened? How did we become this cynical? Simply put, our modern society manufactures cynicism. Every day we are bombarded with media reports of crime, disaster, conflict, and scandal, both locally focused and from around the globe. The stories are usually too brief for us to gain any meaningful understanding of the problems and lack any options for us to contribute significantly to their resolution. Waves of negative imagery wash over us relentlessly as we try to keep up with what’s happening in the world around us. Like sponges, we absorb the negativity; it spills over into how we look at the world and affects how we act or fail to act. The Cycle of Cynicism begins when we first find out about society’s problems. When we recognize that others are suffering, we want the suffering to stop. We even wonder if there is anything we could do to help. When no viable avenues for action are presented, and we fail to generate any ourselves, we do nothing. We end up feeling powerless and sad. We may become angry and blame people in positions of power for not doing anything to stop it, either. We feel that we are good people, we see an injustice, but we don’t do anything about it. In the end we reconcile this dissonance by accepting that perhaps nothing can be done. And we initiate a process of slowly numbing ourselves to the suffering. We subtly begin to avoid finding out about the suffering in the first place, since knowing only makes us feel bad. Over time we shut out our awareness of most social problems and retreat further and further into our insular, personal lives. We become apathetic. The Cycle of Cynicism is clearly illustrated in the following: 1) Find- ing out about a problem; 2) Wanting to do something to help; 3) Not seeing how you can help; 4) Not doing anything about it; 5) Feeling sad, powerless, angry; 6) Deciding that nothing can be done; 7) Beginning to shut down; and 8) Wanting to know less about problems. This cycle re- peats until apathy results.

“If you look back through history,” from The Better World Handbook, “you’ll discover that the world has always faced seemingly insurmountable challenges: slavery, hunger, warfare, and intolerance.”

But can you imagine how the world would be different if all people throughout history had resigned themselves to just accepting the troubles of their time? Can you imagine the cynics of the day saying that:

1) America will always be an British colony 2) Slavery will always exist 3) Women will never be allowed to vote 4) Whites and Blacks will never share the same classrooms 5) People in wheelchairs will never have access to public buildings 6) Free public schooling won’t work because the poor don’t want to be educated … so there’s no point trying to change anything.

We must stop blaming others for not doing anything and begin to take personal responsibility for being good people in the world. We need to seek out information that provides us with a basic understanding of our world's problems and a variety of options for action. We have to generate a form of practical idealism based on well-informed actions that actually make a difference in the world. Each of us must decide what we want our life to stand for and how we can uniquely contribute to a better world. By thinking about what we can provide for the next generations rather than about what we can take for ourselves in this lifetime, we can choose to create our own destiny, instead of leaving our children's future up for grabs. Finally, throughout it all, we need to recognize that we can't do everything. For every social problem that has existed there have been people dedicated to solving it and creating positive social change. Every situation that has been created by humans can be changed by humans. A better world is always a possibility. Although current problems may seem over- whelming, to surrender hope only ensures that nothing will change. Em- brace your vision for a better world and you'll find all the hope you will ever need. Once you let yourself envision a better world, you can then consider where you fit into this whole picture. Our culture teaches us that we are each completely responsible for our own well-being that we are independent creatures who should make our own way in life without depending on others. But really we all rely on each other for our daily existence. We eat food that grows in soil nurtured by microscopic organisms. We drink water that has vaporized from the oceans. We breathe oxygen re- spired by the trees and wear clothing made by people across the planet whom we will never meet. We rely on our friends and family for support 15

and create a sense of belonging and meaning within our communities. Our personal well-being is inextricably linked to the well-being of our families, our friends, our communities, and our planet. And the well- being of others, in turn, is shaped by our own well-being. When you truly understand the interconnected nature of the world, you realize that you are both very powerful and yet very small - you influence everything around you, yet there is so much more to life than just you. When you validate the clear connections that bind us all together, you gain awareness of how each of your actions affects other people and the planet around you. The cycle of hope works as follows: 1) Taking personal responsibility for being a good person; 2) Creating a vision of a better world based on your values; 3) Seeking out quality information about the worlds problems; 4) Discovering practical options for action; 5) Acting in line with your values 6) Recognize you can’t do everything.9

However, to many today, this seems optimistically foolish. They “have become immeasurably more cynical about the prospects for… serious alternatives to the prevailing consumerist society,” this according to Russell Jacoby’s article “A Brave Old World” in the December 2000 issue of HAR- PER’s Magazine. He continues by speculating why anti-utopianism continues to suffuse our culture:

Karl Mannheim’s Ideology and Utopia, which appeared in the late 1920’s, articulated a growing distrust of the utopian instinct. For Mann- heim the intellectual was, first and last, a skeptic who cast a suspicious eye on grand social schemes. His argument caught the spirit of a century that was not kind to the utopian ideal; the dystopian 1984 and Brave New World are the novels that come to mind today when the word ‘utopia’ is mentioned. Conventional as well as scholarly opinion posits that utopia spells concentration camps and that utopians secretly dream of being prison guards[…]. Indeed, we now think of utopian idealism as little more than a prelude to totalitarian murder. At best, an expression of utopian convic- tions will call forth a sneer from historians and social scientists. In the nineteenth century the anticipation of a future society of peace and equality was common; now it is almost extinct. Today few imagine that society can be fundamentally improved, and those who do are seen as at best de- luded, at worst threatening. Historically, utopians are as likely to be arrested as to do any arrest- ing. Thomas Moore, who coined the term ‘utopia’ (from the Greek ou 16 topos and eu topos, meaning, respectively, ‘no place’ and ‘good place’) in 1516, was beheaded; Condorcet, the great eighteenth-century utopian, died in the clutches of the French Revolution; and the list continues. But the anti-utopian ethos that surrounds us now draws its strength from the experience of the twentieth century and its legacy of mass death. Con- ventional wisdom is emphatic; it bills most, if not at all, the casualties of recent history to utopians. Distinguished thinkers […] claimed that ‘utopians’ had mangled the world. The abbreviated version goes like this: the major bloodbaths of the twentieth century can be chalked up to Nazism and Soviet Communism, both forms of utopianism. This analysis leads to two conclusions: that we should steer clear of all utopias, in which people are inevitably slaughtered in the name of big ideas; and that we should stick to the piecemeal approach to social problems, since large-scale planning causes misery and destruction. These are among the most popular platitudes of our time. There is undoubtedly some truth to them. But what other realities do they obscure? How, for instance, can even the most expansive definition of utopia encompass Nazi Germany, unless the term become merely a syno- nym for state violence? Blaming utopians for the twentieth century’s violence appeals to dubious scholarship. A dispassionate view of the last century must view World War I as the primal event that both dislocated Russia—leading to the Bolshevik Revolution—and crippled Germany, leading to Nazism. Where are the utopians in World War I? Besides old-fashioned power politics, only nationalism appears as a cause; moreover, the war began in the Balkans. None of this is news, of course; but the obvious, while known, is not always understood. True, a significant part of the violence and mass death in the twentieth century can be attributed to Communist states. Yet on the balance sheet of global violence, nationalistic, ethnic, and religious movements appear well above even quasi-utopian schemes. This is true not simply for the distant past but for yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Ethnic, religious, and national hatreds continue to prove le- thal. The separation of India and Pakistan; the creation of Bangladesh; the strife in Sri Lanka, Rwanda, Israel, Sudan, Indonesia, Northern Ire- land—the list is long and growing—derive solely from religious and ethnic hostilities […]. A recent survey of global violence compiled by the scholar Timothy D. Sisk finds thirty-three armed conflicts, all involving disputes over ‘ethnicity, religion, or language.’ Virtually all were characterized by collapsing states such as Somalia, or national struggles such as that in Chechnya, but none by armed utopians […].

‘A map of the world that does not include utopia,’ wrote Oscar Wilde, ‘is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing.’ Today, these sentiments evoke knowing smiles. With a cheap understanding of history, we dismiss utopian visionaries as dangerous cranks. This has allowed us to adopt a convenient cynicism, a feeling that the best we can do is to feather our nests. Edward Bellamy, [author of Looking Backward: From 2000 to 1887] may still have something to offer: a belief, which constitutes the essence of the utopian spirit, that a more humane society is possible. If that spirit is almost universally derided nowadays, it may be not because we are smarter but because we are narrower—and more resigned. How is it that the necessity of utopia was more obvious in the ‘benighted’ nineteenth century than in our dazzling twenty-first?

Imagine if the great patriots of early colonial America thought and felt the same way that the anti-utopians do today—the United States of America may have never come into existence. Their “utopian version of a free society based on merit and not hereditary” would have never materialized. Accord- ing to Zachary Karabel’s book, A Visionary Nation:

The vision for a new society based on law and the rights of man had come to into focus [soon after Spring 1776]. All that remained was to lock it in place and have it acclaimed by popular will. What had begun as a set of ideas, loose and ill formed, had coalesced into a framework for a society unlike any other. That doesn’t mean that the picture was so clear at the time, nor that there was consensus on anything more than high principle. On that count, there was a wide degree of agreement amongst the leaders of the revolt and among people in general. It’s impossible to know how many of the two and a half million colonists endorsed the general outlines of this new ideology, or how many were loyalists to their core. But it’s fair to say that a substantial majority were in favor of moving toward independence, and for that reason, the provincial legislature instructed their delegates to the Congress in Philadelphia to announce it to the world […]. Within fifty years of its signing on July 4, 1776, the Declaration was popularly understood as the ultimate triumph of a vision. It was celebrated as the foundation of a society based on the ideal that individual human beings have rights that no other human and no government can le- gitimately deny. Placing the individual’s rights as the center of society required a new conception of social and political organization. The United States only became real because of that promise and that hope. 18

That doesn’t mean that the leaders of the Revolution were united. They differed widely over what institutions would replace the crown. Some wanted thirteen independent states, others called for a republic, and a few suggested a federation of autonomous states. There was an an- archic quality to the Revolution. People agreed about what they were fighting against, but rarely about what they were fighting for. Of course, with British armies attacking from the Carolinas to Canada, there was not much room for calm deliberation about the future. Survival was the first priority. The colonies were united only insofar as they shared the basic ideology of rights and the desire to be rid of the crown.10

But today, we, who have much more room for “calm deliberation about the future,” don’t even share a basic ideology among the more than 30,000 citizens’ groups, nongovernmental organizations, and foundations in the United States.11 Worldwide, our number exceeds 100,000 organizations.12 So what factors have prevented us from developing a holistic program for a unified social movement in America and throughout the world.

Recapturing The True Spirit Of The American Legacy

Soon after the September 11th terrorist’s attack, we had a resurgence of “patriotism” all across America. But was merely displaying the American flag and all other nationalistic symbols truly exhibiting what it means to be an American? Was President George W. Bush’s proclamation for Americans to continue “to shop more or else the terrorist win,” the equivalent to Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy’s rallying call for national action and individual sacrifice? In many ways and perhaps ultimately, if we are to protect our constitutional rights along with safeguarding the planet and all life in it from the economic terrorists in the form of domestic and global corporate ty- rants, white supremacy, racism and debt enslavement, we must begin by rec- reating American society, which will require the resurrection and implementation of the true American spirit. Once again, from the book, Organizing for Social Change:

We Americans have an unbroken history of organizing for social, economic, and political justice. The generation following the men and women who had been inspired by the words of Tom Paine, and who had fought alongside George Washington, made up abolitionists and feminist organizations that worked to extend the liberties of the American Revo- lution to the whole population. Often, those two movements were inter- 19

twined and mutually supportive. Feminist leaders such as Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony and abolitionist leaders like Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman, William Lloyd Garrison, James Birney, and Sarah and Angelina Grimke now occupy separate chapters of the history books. But in life they knew each other, worked together, and shared the same platforms, debates, and sense of mission. After the Civil War, the veterans of Gettysburg and newly arrived immigrants worked as long as sixteen hours a day in the country’s factories, mines, and mills. Hundreds of thousands of them joined the 1886 nationwide strike for the eight-hour workday. As their movement rose and faced fierce opposition, Eugene Victor Debs was already organizing and would eventually assume the leadership of growing national trade union and socialist movements. In the Western states the seeds of populism, which influenced Debs, were being sown. Turn-of-the-century populism, socialism, and trade unionism shared a common language of economic democracy, and the movements often connected. Many of the generation that had organized with Debs lived to see the success of the Congress of Industrial Organizations in the 1930s. The CIO strengthened the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt and helped to ensure the passage of legislation for the right to organize, the minimum wage, social security, unemployment compensation, and the eight-hour workday. The stalwarts of the 1930s generation taught and inspired civil rights workers in the 1950s, as well as activists of the movements on the 1960s, and are now part of the senior citizens’ movement. Many of those who first joined the movements for peace and social justice during the turbulent sixties went on to become the leaders of the movements of the next three decades and are now mobilizing women; environmentalists; People of Color; Labor activists; citizen action activists; industrial, social, and agricultural workers; citizens with disabilities; and people struggling for peace, disarmament, social and economic justice, education, health, family issues, and the revitalization of the electoral system. Today, many of the children of the activists of the sixties are leaders of the anti- globalization and anti-sweatshop movements.13

Now, more than ever, we need the same visionary essence that forged a new nation with the most democratic ideals that the world has ever bear- witnessed to and it all began with a minority oppositional culture. True, the early American Patriots were mainly well-off white men of elevated social status, but they comprised the first human population to eliminate monarchy and establish republics that changed not only their society and culture— 20 making over their art, literature, iconography, architecture—but even altered their knowledge, comprehension of history and social reality. How did the construction of a new paradigm that revolved around the words equality, independence, liberty, republic, rights, and freedom slowly developed into making the vision a reality? Once again, according to Zachary Karabel’s book, A Visionary Nation:

It wasn’t enough to talk about rights as Englishmen, or rights as a free people, or liberties that stemmed from the Puritan heritage. In order to rouse the mass of people to action, and in order to make the cause of revolution more than simply an elite dispute between wealthy merchants and landowners on the one hand and Royal authorities on the other, a bridge had to be constructed between high principle and every individual American. That was what Thomas Paine accomplished [with his pamphlet, Common Sense].14

This was no easy feat considering that, “In 1760,” states Gordon Wood, author of The Radicalism of the American Revolution, “America was only a collection of disparate colonies huddled along a narrow strip of the Atlantic coast—economically underdeveloped outposts existing on the very edges of the civilized world.”

The roughly two million monarchial subjects who lived in these thirteen colonies had virtually all the requisites of self-governing states, thus, making the unification of particular grievances and colonial claims against the British crown more difficult. So much so, that the colonists were far from clear about what they were fighting for in 1775. Some saw the hostilities as an attempt to tear away from England and establish a free and independent nation. To others, the purpose of the war was to force parliament to acknowledge the justice of colonial complaints and to redress the long litany of grievances. The best estimates are that no more than a third of the members of the Second Continental Congress assembled at Philadelphia through the winter of late 1775 and early 1776 were in favor of independence. Most Americans, at the time, were confused and am- bivalent due to their ties with England by commerce, culture, kinship and years of loyalty to the British Crown.15

However, what Thomas Paine managed to achieve in Common Sense was to begin the process of defining the emerging identity of America. By writing convincing arguments for independence, Paine began to indirectly create a self-definition for the two million “Inhabitants of America,” who did not see 21 themselves as a common constituency prior to Paine’s written words. He affirmed the birth of a new worldview that was bubbling within the hearts of many colonials and forged a collective self-awareness, not as rebellious colonials, but as the American Patriots of a new democratic society that would forever change western civilization.

THE TRANSFORMATIVE THRESHOLD: From Green Meme “Cul- tural Creatives” To Second Tier “Integral Neo-Transcendentalists”

Today, we stand on the precipice of a similar threshold of transformation that requires reforging of our collective identity. Ken Wilber expounds upon the human evolutionary momentum towards an “Integral Transformation” through a leap of second-tier consciousness by the cultural vanguard of our society.

This integrative attempt points up exactly what I believe is the central issue for spiritual and integral studies at the new millennium; will we remain stuck in the green meme[postmodernists]—with both its wonderful contributions (e.g., pluralistic sensitivity) and its pathologies (e.g., boomeritis)? Or will we make the leap to the hyperspace of second tier consciousness, and thus stand open to even further evolution into the transpersonal waves of our own possibilities? It appears, then, that approximately 1-2 percent of the population [now, almost 20 years later, up to 5 to 10 percent] is at an integral, second-tier stance, but that around 20 percent are at green, poised for that possible integral transformation, for that “momentous leap,” as Clare Graves called it. What are the conditions that can help facilitate that transformation? Developmental theorists have isolated dozens of factors that contribute to vertical transformation (as opposed to horizontal translation). In my own view, catalytic factors from several dimensions need to be present in order for transformation to occur. To begin with, the individual must possess an organic structure (including brain structure) that can support such reorganization. For most people, this is not a problem. At this point in evolution, most individuals are biologically capable of integral consciousness. The cultural background must be ready to support such a transformation, or, at the very least, not dramatically oppose it. Even [50] years ago, this might have been a problem. But numerous factors indicate that there is now a cultural readiness for a more integral embrace. To begin with, we have had [5] decades of the green meme as a substantial percentage of 22

the population, and it has mightily tilled the soil for such a transformation (at least among the green-meme population itself, or among some [80] million Americans; research indicates that approximately the same percentage of the population in Europe is also at green. That, in fact, is what Clare Graves said was the major function of green; namely, to make the entire Spiral sensitive (the sensitive self) and thus ready it for second- tier transformation. But in order for this to happen, consciousness must go post-green. Paraphrasing Graves, “The green meme must break down in order to free energy for the jump into second-tier. This is where the leading edge is today.” Since the major cause of fixation to the green meme boomeritis, then in order for this integral transformation to readily occur, boomeritis must be addressed and remedied, at least to a substantial degree. (Suggestions for doing so are set forth in Boomeritis.) But the fact is, if you see the problem of boomeritis and recognize its dangers, you are already over the hump. As for the concrete social institutions and techno-economic base contributing to transformation, there need to be profound technological advances in one or more areas, advances that impose a pressure on individual consciousness. (This, of course, is an old Marxist argument: when the forces of production run ahead of the relations of production, wrenching cultural transformations ensue. This is a partial truth of Marx- ism that has not been discredited.) We have recently had several such techno-economic shifts, include preeminently the microchip/digital revolution. That this is the “information age,” and that this constitutes one of the half-dozen major social transformations in history (foraging, horticultural, agrarian, industrial, informational)…. [G]lobal communications have made global and integral consciousness a widespread possibility. This global network of technology, this new nervous system for collective consciousness, does not, however, in any way guarantee that individuals will in fact develop to an integral level in their own case. It facilitates, but does not guarantee. Moreover, global or planetary does not necessarily mean integral. After all, red memes can use the Internet, [like President Trump] and so on. The level or stage of consciousness is determined by interior factors and not merely by exterior structures, no matter how planetary or global.16

So what will be the next technological vehicle that will help green meme Cultural Creatives (Postmodernists) make the leap to second-tier thinking, Integral Neo-Transcendentalists (Metamodernists)? Well, to answer that question one needs to first identify and provide a new alternative narrative. 23

“CHANGE THE STORY, CHANGE THE FUTURE” ENLIGHTENED ECONOMICS: A NEW INTEGRAL NAR- RATIVE OF “A LIVING ECONOMY FOR A LIVING EARTH”

“We humans live by stories,” writes David C. Korten in his 2015 book, Change The Story, Change The Future. “A shared story is the basis of the ability of any people to live together as an organized society….”

We have a deep need for meaning, for answers to the ultimate questions. In their pursuit of answers, prophets, sages, and wisdom keepers of all times and traditions have recognized a spiritual order and unity in creation that defies description. Necessarily, they communicated their insights through simple stories and familiar images within the context of their time and place. Such stories shape both individual and collective behavior. Different stories prevail in wondrous variety at different times in different places in a continuously evolving process. As stories and images pass from generation to generation and travel from place to place, critical nuances may be lost or modified. Followers may forget that the original stories and images were metaphorical, not literal. Power holders favor and promote interpretations that serve their interests […]. A society’s ability to organize as a secure and prosperous community depends on the authenticity (validity) of its story. Authentic stories are generally the product of the shared experience of a people and take form through largely unconscious processes extending over generations. There are also inauthentic sacred stories fabricated to serve the interests of a ruling class at the expense of the rest. We currently organize as a global society by such a story, and we bear the tragic consequences […]. These stories shape our values and behaviors and provide sacred meaning to all we do […]. [T]he three dominant stories—the “Distant Patriarch,” [level 4/traditional/amber meme] the “Grand Machine,” [level 5/modern/orange meme] and the “Mystical Unity” [level 6/ postmodern/green meme]—that have guided individuals, institutions, and society for centuries […]. We now have the elements of a new cos-

24 mology with ancient roots that provides a firm foundation for a Sacred Life and Earth Community story—The Living Universe [level 7/ metamodern/teal meme]—It in turn frames our search for a Living Econo- my that works in co-productive partnership with Earth’s community of life. These different cosmologies corresponds to different worldviews. Each of the four contrasting cosmologies convey a very different understanding of relationships, agency, and meaning. Distant Patriarch: My most important relationship is to a distant God who is the source of all agency and meaning. Grand Machine: I exist in a mechanistically interconnected cosmos devoid of agency and possessing no purpose or meaning. Mystical Unity: Relationships, agency, and meaning are all artifacts of the illusion of separation created by ego; I am one with the timeless eternal One. Living Universe: I am an intelligent, self-directing participant in a conscious, interconnected self-organizing cosmos on a journey of self-discovery toward ever greater complexity, beauty, awareness, and possibility. Korten shows how the [three dominating worldviews of] these stories have had devastating consequences for human life, natural systems, our communities, and our social and economic welfare. He explains their many perversions, including valuing life by its market value, viewing nature as a commodity, and looking to a future in which technology will free us from dependence on nature […]. Korten demonstrates that our future depends on a new sacred story that acknowledges and honors the self-evident—but strangely denied – truth that we are living beings whose health and well-being depend on the health and vitality of the generative systems of a self-organizing living Earth community. Korten [as mentioned earlier] then proposes the key elements of this new sacred story, which he calls the “Living Universe” [level 7/metamodern/teal meme]. Korten also spells out the powerful, beautiful implications of this new story for how we organize knowledge and education, how we design our buildings and built environment, how we develop and apply technology, how we prioritize legal rights, how we make a living, and how we create an economic system designed to serve life instead of money […]. We cannot act coherently as a society without a shared framing story. It defines our shared values and priorities, the questions we ask, and the options we consider. It shapes political debates, our institutions, and our interpretation of current events. For this reason, no matter how discred-

ited an established story may be, we cling to it in our public discourse until it is replaced by a more compelling story. Corporate interests repeat and reaffirm the Sacred Money and Markets story at every opportunity. They use it as the frame for every news report and political debate. They make it the basis of their legal arguments. They teach it in our schools and universities. So long as it carries the day, it defines our future. Those of us committed to advancing justice, sustainability, peace, and democratic governance campaign and organize around individual issues—often defined by identity politics. In doing, we concede the framing story and play into the divide-and-conquer strategy of elite politics. Moreover, to the extent that we do argue our case within a larger story frame, it is most always the frame of the Sacred Money and Markets story. Thus, we do more than concede the story that legitimates the institutions responsible for the economic, social, environmental, and governance failures we seek to remedy. We reinforce it. We win occasional temporary victories for life on a particular issue, but we lose the future to money. To win the future for life, we who would live in service to life must organize around the articulation and sharing of a compelling, unifying counter story. We must make the articulation of a Sacred Life and Living Earth story a focal point of discussions in our living rooms, schools, churches, and civic centers. We must make our story the frame of our social media exchanges, community initiatives, and political advocacy. We must introduce it into academic curricula. We must use it in selecting the indicators by which we assess the performance of the economy. We must discipline ourselves to recognize and challenge the fabricated Sacred Money and Markets story wherever we encounter it—in business news, in education, in political debates and advocacy, and in conversations with colleagues. Compel the champions of money to make their case within a Sacred Life and Living Earth frame.17

Let’s begin with Korten’s more in depth description of the dominant three stories in play here and around the world in the chapter called, “Our Quest To Know.” “Generally, the shared sacred story of a people aligns with their underlying cosmology or creation story—their deepest shared beliefs about the origin and nature of the universe.”

That we lack such a shared and currently credible foundational cosmology goes a long way toward explaining why we have been so easily seduced by the Sacred Money and Markets story.

A brief look at three familiar cosmologies—the Distant Patriarch, the Grand Machine, and the Mystical Unity—illustrates a range of answers to our deepest questions about where we come from and why. Each has its own implications for how we live. Each is seeming conflict with the others. For a great many people none of them rings true. Corporate interests slip the fabricated Sacred Money and Markets story into the resulting void. This [section] outlines critical elements of each of the familiar cosmologies and highlights their implications for how we think about agency, relationships, and meaning. It shows how the corporate PR machine draws from each of the familiar cosmologies to lend credibility to the Sa- cred Money and Markets story. Each in itself is incomplete, but they all contribute essential insights to the emerging Living Universe cosmology synthesis…. Some readers will protest that my framing of one or more of the three cosmologies is too limiting and ignores their personally favored interpretation. True enough. Each has many variations, which would take volumes to explore fully. I seek here only to highlight the implications of the simplest, most influential, and most commonly recognized—some might say most caricatured—expression of each.18

Korten continues by describing what Graves and integral philosopher Ken Wilber refers to as “level 4/amber meme/traditional worldview” of the Distant Patriarch.

As recited by the Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Is- lam—the Distant Patriarch cosmology begins with an all-knowing, all powerful god who, over a period of metaphorical days, created all that is—testing, assessing, and building on what he found good. In the Distant Patriarch cosmology, God continues to rule his creation from his home in a separate, sacred dimension called heaven. From time to time, he lends a helping hand to the righteous, while observing and judging our obedience to his commandments handed down through sacred texts interpreted by religious authorities. Since the beginning of empire, somewhere around 3000 BCE, variations of the Distant Patriarch cosmology have inspired billions of people, provided them with moral guidance, and focused attention on the prime importance to our individual relationship with a distant god of male gender. For some believers, the distant patriarch is a loving god; for others he is jealous and vengeful. Either way the emphasis is on a personal relation- 27

ship with a parent figure to whom believers appeal for help and salvation and whose rules set the boundaries of their lives. It holds a powerful at- traction. It also tends to diminish the importance of our human relationships with, and dependence on, one another and nature. Many believers in this cosmology maintains that God wants us to care for his creation; others see Earth only as a way station on the path to paradise. In this latter rendering, God grants humans dominion over nature during our brief Earthly layover. For many fundamentalist believers, the Distant Patriarch cosmology reduces life to a fear-based quest to join the saved in heaven rather than the demand in hell. Life on Earth is a test of faith, a burden to be en- dured until our longed-for-ascent to live with the creator in paradise. The resulting uncertainty and fear provide considerable scope for religious authorities to manipulate and exploit believers. If an all-knowing and all-powerful god rules all that exists, then all that happens is by his will. Christian Calvinists concluded from this that the wealthy and powerful demonstrate thereby that they are God’s chosen. To question their wealth and privilege is to question his judgment and will. The Sacred Money and Markets story picks up on this theme in its assertion that the rich merit special exemptions, tax breaks, and legal protections as the most productive and worth among us.19

This is why women, the white working class, evangelical Christians and poor conservatives voted for a misogynist, old rich white man, who has stated to have never done anything sinful enough to ask for forgiveness, while also being a six-time corporate bankrupted business man like Trump who is known to lie, cheat and exploit people, donors, and investors from organizations, foundations and companies. An even more succinct way to explain why 30% of American conservatives still support him despite his crass character, crude behavior and ineffectual leadership is to quote Theo Anderson’s October 2016 article In These Times: “It’s the Story, Stupid.” In his article, “The Stories We Live By: Why the White Working Class Votes Conserva- tive,” suggest that class analysis is all the rage like in Strangers in Their Own Land, “sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild travels south to study what gives conservative ideology its power.”

[…F]or progressives, the disconnect between the white working class’s economic self-interest and its identification with the GOP was already baffling. Now, Donald Trump’s success has inspired a flurry of in- vestigations into the divides that render our separate tribes mutually in- comprehensible. 28

In 2004, Thomas Frank offered the most influential explanation of the GOP’s appeal to the white working class, arguing in What’s the Matter with Kansas? that Republicans had pulled off a huge con: They used culture-war issues to win votes, then used that political capital to pursue a radical free-market agenda. In Strangers in Their Own Land, Arlie Russell Hochschild, a distinguished sociologist at the University of California-Berkeley, brings the tools of journalism and scholarship to bear on the question of class and political affiliation. She acknowledges a debt to Frank’s work, but she be- lieves it and similar analyses overlook something vital: the lived experience of conservatives in modern America. That is, they don’t capture the “deep stories” about self and society that sustain identity and give conservative ideology its power. Such deep stories are at the heart of Hochschild’s project. The book begins with a vignette of her chewing on a stick of sugarcane and talking with a man who’s remembering the long-gone settlement where he grew up. “You had community” back then, he tells her. “You know what’s un- dercut all that?” His answer: Big Government. The book closes with another friend telling her, as they part during their last visit, that they will meet again someday in heaven. Southern Louisiana has been the site of Hochschild’s research for the past five years. She immersed herself in some of its conservative communities, befriending Tea Party types, getting to know their stories and breaking down the “empathy walls” that separate progressives from conservatives. “Our polarization,” she writes, “and the increasing reality that we simply don’t know one another, makes it too easy to settle for dislike and contempt.” Her premise is that there is value in understanding other people’s deep stories—walking a mile in their shoes—even if there is little hope of affecting their votes. The subtitle of Strangers is “Anger and Mourning on the American Right”—a subtle play on Ronald Reagan’s “Morning in America”—and there is a certain ache that runs through the book. The pain of southern Louisiana isn’t, as in the Rust Belt, about the disappearance of jobs and the decline of an industrial base. Business, especially the oil and petrochemical industry, is, in fact, booming. Industry has moved there because of the state’s natural advantages and because former GOP governor Bobby Jindal and the state legislature pushed through big tax breaks and fostered a culture of lax regulation, so that companies rarely pay for their negligence.

Instead, the ache has to do with the devastation that comes with industry. Many of the people Hochschild got to know have lost their health, their homes, even their towns. Some have lost multiple family members to cancer—a hazard, they speculate, of living too close to the industrial plants. Everyone knows more devastation is coming, and they aren’t duped about its sources. It’s plain for all to see that industry pol- lutes with impunity and Republicans always side with industry. Hochschild calls this the great paradox of Louisiana. Though the people say they want clean air and water, they vote for more tax cuts for business, less regulation, more pollution, more disinvestment in public resources. The state’s pervasive religiosity does play a role. Hochschild notes the town of Lake Charles, with a population of 70,000, supports about 100 churches. More than one person tells her that environmental concerns are pointless, since the second coming of Jesus and subsequent total destruction of the Earth will make it irrelevant. About 40 percent of Americans believe Jesus will return by 2050, according to a 2015 Pew poll, which helps explain why environmental issues are a low priority. But that belief is only one tiny piece of a much more complex picture. Strangers methodically builds the case that there are deep, multi- layered stories at work in the lives of the people whose conservative politics grip the region. Within those stories, religion is less a license to destroy the planet than a grounding force for moral striving and community. As Hochschild writes: “Being Christian and taking Jesus as your savior was... a way of saying, ‘I commit myself to being a moral person. I daily try to be good, to help, to forgive and in fact to work hard at being good.’” Why have the Democrats lost such people? Hochschild shows that in the deep story they live by, industry is the lesser of two evils. For all the havoc it brings, it also creates jobs that provide people with work, meaning and a way to support themselves. Meanwhile, government is perceived as the greater evil, coddling and giving breaks to the people who get ahead without putting in the hard work—the “line cutters,” in the shorthand that Hochschild uses, or the “takers” in the epithet favored by the Tea Party. This makes conservatives’ sense of loss double-barreled: Industry destroys their land and their health, while government and progressivism shatter, they believe, the old moral frameworks and rules of fair play. The result is a vicious cycle of dysfunction. Anti-government anger leads to deregulation of industry, which is then free to inflict more

havoc, which intensifies the sense of loss and anger, which is then directed primarily at the government. Louisiana is a near-worst-case scenario, ranking next to last among the states in an index of human development. But, as Hochschild rightly notes, the state’s story is increasingly relevant “as the multinational companies that roam the globe become more powerful than the political states vying for their favor.” Hochschild devotes an appendix to “fact-checking common impres- sions” that she heard during the course of her fieldwork—for example, the “fact” that black women have more children than white women, and that government employees make up 40 percent of the workforce. These are all greatly exaggerated or flatly untrue. (The fertility rate for white and black women is about even, and workers at all levels of government combined make up less than 17 percent of the workforce, even with the military included.) But the upshot of the book is a reality that Fox News and the rise of Donald Trump have made inescapable: Facts are often impotent, pitched against the deep stories, commitments and (un)truths that people actually live by. In politics as in love, the heart has reasons that reason cannot know […].20

Korten proceeds to call the next narrative as the Grand Machine, which correlates nicely with Graves’ Spiral Dynamics and Wilber’s Integral color code as level 5/orange meme/modernist worldview.

The Grand Machine cosmology is associated with science. The contributions of science to human advancement and well-being, knowledge, and technology give this cosmology considerable authority and respect. In the Grand Machine cosmology, the universe is much like a mechanical clock playing out its predetermined destiny as the tension in its spring winds down. By the reckoning of this cosmology, only the material is real. All physical phenomena are a consequence of some combination of physical mechanism and chance. Within this frame, life is merely an accidental outcome of material complexity and has no larger meaning or purpose. Consciousness is an artifact of physical processes in the brain. Free will and agency are illusions. This limited and badly outdated lens has had serious cultural consequences. Most particularly, it has long limited the biological sciences to explaining life’s extraordinary capacity for cooperative, intelligent self- direction as solely the consequence of an individualistic competition for survival, territory, and reproductive advantage. Sometimes referred to as social Darwinism, this frame has provided a pseudoscientific justification 31 for colonial imperialism, racial domination, rapacious capitalism, and market fundamentalism. Economists embraced this outdated social Darwinist frame to support the simplistic assumption that we humans are by nature individualistic competitors and that unrestrained competition drives human progress and prosperity to maximize the well-being of all. Particularly pernicious is the idea that human will (agency) is an illusion. The underlying intellectual frame of the Grand Machine cosmology strips our existence of meaning and purpose and undermines our sense of moral responsibility for one another and nature. The related and still widely embraced social Darwinist frame suggests that we either dominate nature and other humans or become victims of their domination over us. We are left in a state of existential despair searching for sources of distraction from the terrifying loneliness of a meaningless existence in a hostile universe. Propagandists in the employ of corporate interests step in with their Sacred Money and Markets story to assure us that shopping and competition for money, financial status, and material status symbols can fill our need for meaning, purposed, and relationships. These pursuits become addictive distractions. They do not—and cannot—provide true fulfillment no matter how obsessively we pursue them. Organizationally the social Darwinist lens, denies the possibility of democratic communities that self-organize around caring relationships. This leaves only two options: centralized public authority or the market. Both are subject to control by money-seeking corporate robots relieved of responsibility for their morally corrupt behavior by an economic ideology posing as a science. We do not lack for examples of the human capacity for greed and ruthless competition in disregard for the well-being of others. Such behavior, however, is a mark of psychopathic and sociopathic dysfunction. Emotionally healthy humans are characteristically caring and sharing— traits essential to healthy social function. Although the Grand Machine and Distant Patriarch cosmologies present sharply contrasting perspectives, they both support, in subtle and not so subtle ways, three self-destructive characteristics of contemporary society: First, a concentration of institutional power in global corporations and financial markets. Second, a divisive individualism that creates the illusion of freedom in the midst of corporate tyranny. Third, a utilitarian view of life that drives moral decline and strips our existence of meaning.

The most compelling challenge to the mechanistic lens of a the Grand Machine cosmology comes from within science itself. The findings of quantum physics describe a decidedly non-mechanist reality in which seemingly solid objects are mostly empty space sparsely populated by oddly entangled particles—some of which, depending on the observer, may act like waves. By this reckoning, what we experience as solid matter is largely an illusion generated by self-organizing relationships among particles difficult to explain solely in terms of mechanism and chance. Such findings are so at odds with our perceptual experience as to have real meaning only to the most advanced scientists and mathemati- cians. For most of us, they have no implications—moral or otherwise. We therefore enclose them in a separate mental space reserved for curi- ous but largely irrelevant facts.21

Since the Sacred Money and Markets story is the dominant paradigm of our current economic system, it warrants describing in more detail of how this narrative creates the capitalist consensus trance.

Time is money. Money is wealth. Material consumption is the path to happiness. Making money creates wealth, drives consumption to increase happiness, and is the defining purpose of individuals, business, and the economy. Those who make money are society’s wealth creators. Affluent lifestyles are their fair, just reward for their contribution. Poverty is a consequence of laziness. Humans are by nature individualistic competitors. That is a blessing, because freed from distorting regulation, the invisible hand of the free market channels the individual and corporate drive for profit to choices that maximize economic growth and thereby the wealth and well-being of all. Just as a person’s income is a measure of their worth & contribution to society, so too the profit of the corporation is the measure of its worth & contribution. As a legal entity that aggregates talents & interests to increase the economic efficiency of the individuals within it, the corporation is properly considered to be a person in its own right & entitled to the same rights as any other person. As corporations create wealth, governments consume it. The functions of government should be limited to assuring the common defense, securing property rights, and enforcing contracts. Economic inequality and environmental damage are a regrettable but necessary and unavoidable cost of growing the GDP. GDP growth in turn eliminates porverty, drives technological innovation to free us from our dependence on 33

nature & brings universal & perpetual prosperity for all. There is no viable alternative to a profit-driven free market economy.22

Korten goes on to describe how this predominantly for-profit paradigm of infinite growth on a finite planet is disseminated in our society and subsequently assume cultural dominance.

Economics courses in our most prestigious institutions teach this story as settled science. The corporate media constantly repeat it. Over time, money has become contemporary society’s object of worship. Making money has been life’s purpose, shopping a civic duty, markets our moral compass, institutions of finance our temples, and economists the priests who provide absolution for our personal and collective sins against life. Pope Francis correctly named it idolatry—idol worship. Thoughtful readers will readily recognize—or at least suspect—that every assertion of this Sacred Money and Markets story is false or grossly misleading. The story is based on bad ethics, bad science, and bad economics. We now see the environmental devastation, economic desperation, social alienation, and moral and political corruption this fatally flawed story leaves everywhere in its path. Profit itself is not the problem. A modest profit is essential to the health and survival of any private enterprise. Managing the economy to maximize profit for the benefit of a financial oligarchy is, however, a rec- ipe for economic, social, and environment disaster—as America’s experiment with unrestrained greed dramatically demonstrates.23

Korten goes on to briefly describe the third and final dominant story the Mystical Unity or as Graves and Wilber describe it as level 6/green meme / Cultural Creatives/postmodernist worldview.

The Mystical Unity cosmology has ancient roots in the world’s spiritual traditions. It is most commonly and explicitly associated with Bud- dhism. In the classic expression of this cosmology, what we experience as material beings—is an illusion generated by the human ego that separates us from the reality of the eternal oneness from which we manifest. Buddhists use the relationship between the ocean and the wave as a metaphor for our personal relationship to the eternal. The wave has its own temporary identity, seemingly distinct from the ocean from which it manifests. It exists, however, only as an expression of the ocean.

Teachers in the Mystical Unity tradition generally focus on a first- person experience of awakening through meditation to the infinite love and peace that lie beyond the perceived and often violent world or our daily experience. The Mystical Unity cosmology is consonant with the deepest human spiritual experience and fulfills our deep need for belonging. Quantum physics in large measure affirms its assertion that all being is interconnected and that matter is an illusion. There are profound insights in the tradition’s recognition that all beings are inextricably connected and co- emergent; that the harm we do to others, we do as well to ourselves; and that the veil of illusion is a source of suffering and violence. Typically, practitioners of Mystical Unity teach that the path to ending violence is to suppress and transcend the ego through meditative practice and thereby to experience and meld our individualized awareness with the eternal oneness. For some followers, the commitment to radical nonviolence leads to non-engagement. They do not hold dominator institutions accountable for the violence inflicted against life. Instead, they say that those who attempt to hold them accountable are “othering” the persons who serve those institutions. Othering, they explain, is an expression of the ego, a denial of the oneness of being, a denial of the essential goodness of those persons, and therefore a disruptive act of violence. This illuminates a paradox. The quest of an individual to deny or es- cape the ego in search of personal peace and tranquility while studiously denying personal responsibility for addressing the institutions that inflict unconscionable suffering on others is itself an act of ego. Change is afoot. As described by Kurt Johnson and David Ord in The Coming Interspiritual Age, there is a growing sentiment among followers of the Mystical Unity tradition that the call is not to “wake up and detach.” Rather it is to “wake up and engage” in order to create a global civilization that recognized the unity of our being and common purpose.(1) The international Buddhist leader and activist think Sulak Sivaraksa advocates an explicit recognition within Buddhist spiritual and social teaching of the ways in which major institutions, most notably transnational corporations, encourage and reward violence against life.(2) From the perspective of the challenges of daily life, discussions and debates about cosmology can seem abstract and pointless. Only rarely do we notice the powerful political implications of our deepest beliefs— even of our denial of belief. Contesting cosmologies have gone hand in hand with contesting power structures throughout human history. A brief overview of the his-

tory of story politics will highlight the central significance of our current story politics.24

In the section titled, “Global Awakening,” Korten writes about the growing gap “between the Money Economy story and the Living Economy reality of people and nature is growing so extreme and obvious that the Sacred Money and Markets story is losing its grip on the public mind.”

People are reawakening to our nature as living beings born of a Liv- ing Earth born of a Living Universe. As we reawaken to our true nature, we see more easily that the Money Economy is a numbers game driven by self-directing corporate robots for which life is nothing more than a tradable commodity. That game would be irrelevant except for the resulting increase in unearned financial assets—and thereby the economic and political power of winning robots. We are eroding Earth’s capacity to support human life. Growth in human population and individual consumption intensifies competition for what remains of Earth’s declining real wealth. The corporations with excess financial assets buy up the remaining capacity in order to extract monopoly profits from the humans whose lives depend on access to that capacity. The greater the financial returns to the corporate robots and the few they favor, the greater their ability to expand their monopoly control to extract more profits and further increase their relative share of economic and political power. Earth dies. Human suffering spreads. Public and private institutions lose their credibility, the social fabric frays, and the global system becomes increasingly unstable. To many of us, these consequences come as no surprise. The spiral- ing system of collapse is playing out much as forecast by the computer models described in The Limits to Growth, the highly controversial study by the MIT Systems Dynamic Lab published in 1972 as a report to the Club of Rome.(2) The future is here. Guided by a Sacred Money and Markets story, we have created a global suicide economy designed to make money with no concern for the consequences for life. If our goal is short-term growth of the financial assets of a tiny financial oligarchy, then the system is a brilliant success. Most efforts to avoid further collapse focus on treating the symptoms of a system failure with marginal adjustments: a new regulation, a tax on bad behavior, a subsidy incentive for good behavior. Such adjustments might be appropriated if we were dealing with a broken system. When dealing with a self-destructive system supported by a false story, the only solution is a different system grounded in a different story. 36

Fortunately, the elements of a new story are emerging. These elements are the cultural equivalents of the imaginal discs that guide the cat- erpillar’s transformation from larva to butterfly. The more quickly and clearly we give expression to the new story, the more rapidly we may find our way to a just and sustainable human future. The emerging synthesis draws from the Distant Patriarch cosmology the insight that there is agency and purpose in creation. It draws from the Grand Machine cosmology the insight that there is order and chance in creation. It draws from the Mystical Unity cosmology the insight that matter is a mental construct, consciousness it the unifying ground of creation, we are all connected, and ego can be a barrier to enlightenment without a disciplined alignment with cosmic purpose.25 […I]ndigenous Living Earth cosmologies to more adequately capture the grandeur, complexity, and mystery of creation than any of those more familiar cosmologies reveals by itself. The Living Universe cosmology describes a universe that bears far more resemblance to a seed bursting forth to express itself as a magnifi- cent tree than to a mechanical clock running down as its spring unwinds. It provides the foundational frame for a Sacred Life and Living Earth story in turn frames a Living Economy for a Living Earth.26

The Conscious Evolution Of The Cosmos: The Sacred Life & Living Earth Narrative

“Here are some defining elements,” writes David Korten in his book, Change the Story, Change the Future, “of the emerging story of Sacred Life and Living Earth.”

We humans are living beings born of and nurtured by a Living Earth. Re- al wealth is living wealth. Time is life. Money is just a number useful as a medium of exchange in well-regulated markets. Life exists only in community. We humans are creatures of conscience who survive and prosper only as members of a Living Earth community. The prime task of any living community is to maintain the conditions essential to the life of its members. We all do best when we all do well in a world that works for all. A connection to nature and community is essential to our physical and mental health and well-being. It is our nature to care and share for the benefit of all. Individualistic violence, greed, and ruthless competition are indicators of individual and social dysfunction. Environmental damage and extreme inequality are indicators of serious system failure. 37

The purpose of human institutions—whether business, government, or civil society—is to provide all people with the opportunity to make a healthy, meaningful living in a balanced co-productive relationship with Earth’s community of life. Institutions designed to concentrate their decision-making power in the pursuit of purely financial ends unburdened by the exercise of human conscience— as is the case for most publicly traded limited-liability corporations—have no place in a healthy society. Human institutions are human creations. That which humans create, humans can change. Environmental sustainability, economic justice, and a living democracy are inseparable. We have all of them, or we have none of them.”27

“[…T]his story draws from the breadth of human knowledge,” writes Korten to describe this new narrative, “honors our interdependence with one another and with nature, recognizes the responsibilities that go with our human agency (the exercise of willful choice), gives our lives meaning, and guides our path to a just, sustainable, and democratic human future.”28 It provides a framing vision for a Living Economy that:

1) maintains a co-productive balance between humans and nature;

2) provides a healthy, meaningful livelihood for all based on a just and equitable sharing of real wealth; and

3) gives every person a voice in decisions on which their well-being and that of the whole depend.

I believe that the critical elements of this Sacred Life and Living Earth story live in the human heart. Largely unspoken, however, it has little public presence. To guide our path to a viable and prosperous human future, it must become our shared public story. This is our opportunity to make it so.29

The Living Universe Narrative is a more all-encompassing way to describe this mythos. Korten continues, “In this story, I am an intelligent, self- directing participant in a conscious, interconnected self-organizing cosmos on a journey of self-discovery toward ever-greater complexity, beauty, awareness, and possibility.”30

Deep Intention: The idea that this miracle is solely the outcome of a combination of mechanics and purposeless chance defies logic, common sense, and the foundational principles of Newtonian mechanics. Scientific observation, indigenous wisdom, and the revelations of religious and contemplative practice each add to our understanding of the wonder and genius of creation. Put it all together and we begin to discern a Living Universe cosmology that evokes a radical vision of deep inten- tionality and purpose. For humans it evokes a possibility of radical democracy. Individual interpretations of the data will vary. As the elements of the emerging cosmology come together for me, what humans experience as a physical universe is the product of a spiritual consciousness seeking to know itself by manifesting in an unfolding creative journey of self- discovery. The spirit, possessed of an insatiable drive, burst forth as the vast energy cloud described by astrophysicists. The same drive to become, and to know and express our possibilities, is a defining quality of our species. In The Science of Oneness Malcolm Hollick draws from teachings of the Gnostics, who believed that consciousness, not matter, is the fundamental essence of reality. “Without the conscious experience of living, we would be unaware of existence; nothing would exist for us, and we would not exist for ourselves… I, the subject, am only conscious when there is something, an object, of which I am aware…. Consciousness only came into being when the primal Mystery divided into two—Consciousness and its object…. The unknowable became aware of itself as both knower and known, observer and observed, witness and experience.” (4) The material manifestation is in an illusion, but a purposeful one. By the reckoning of the Living Universe cosmology, all things—all beings—including stars, planets, humans, animals, plants, rocks, and rivers—are both expression and agent of the spirit, each with its place and purpose in an epic journey. Earth and the material universe of human experience are more than the spirit’s creation; they are its manifestation. The spirit is in the world, and the world is in the spirit. Religious scholars would say the spirit is both immanent and trans- cendent, a concept they call panentheism. In his expression of his Jewish faith, Jesus taught, “The kingdom is within.” Muhammad taught, “Wher- ever you turn, there is the face of Allay.” Within this frame, the ego and the illusion of separation by which we experience our individual identity are essential to our ability to contribute to the quest of the spirit to know itself.

Among all the species known to us, we humans are clearly distinctive in our capacity for agency and thereby our ability to shape with conscious intention both our own future and that of Earth’s community of life. Used with a sense of creative responsibility, our distinctive human talents can be a blessing for all. Used as a license for individual excess, they became a deadly threat to all, as we now so dramatically demonstrate. The cause of this misdirection is not an inherent flaw in our nature; it is a flaw in our story. Distributed Agency: Agency is the power to choose. In the classic Distant Patriarch cosmology, agency is exclusive to a god external to the universe. In the classic Grand Machine and Mystical Unity cosmologies, agency is an illusion. In the Living Universe cosmology, agency is intrinsic, distributed, and pervasive and essential to the creative learning that expresses itself as the universe unfolds. It is a well-established finding in the field of group dynamics that team decision making is more creative and effective in dealing with complex problems that an individual decision maker. The theory of distributed intelligence suggests that multiple interlinked minds have capabilities inherently greater than a single mind. For a great many tasks, an interlinked cluster of personal computers can be more efficient and more powerful than a single supercomputer. This same creative potential of interconnected agents acting as inter- connecting self-directing systems expresses itself throughout the universe. Living Earth is an extraordinary example. So too is the individual human body. My body, like yours, is a complex living community; it is my most intimate example of the potential of a distributed intelligence for creative self-organization. It comprises tens of trillions of individual choice- making cells, each engaged in managing its own health and integrity under changing and often stressful circumstances. In addition to the tens of trillions of cells that form its vital organs and physical structure, the body hosts an even greater number of nonhuman microorganisms that provide an endless variety of services essential to its health in return for their own sustenance. Each cell functions as a member of a self-regulating community that maintains to the best of its ability the health and integrity of the living being that expresses itself as our conscious, thinking, choice-making body. Even under conditions of extreme stress and deprivation, these cells self- organize to fight off a vast variety of invasive viruses, cancer cells, and pathogenic bacteria that pose threats to the health of the whole.

They adapt to changing temperatures and to variations in the body’s intake of food and water. They heal damaged tissues and collect and provide essential sensory data to the body’s conscious mind. They mobilize instantly to respond to external threats, in some instances even before the conscious mind recognizes them. All the while, these trillions of cells continuously replace themselves, with no loss of the integrity of the body and its function. The cells lining the human stomach replace themselves every 5 days. The surface of the skin regenerates every 14 days. Red blood cells renew approximately every 120 days(5) The result is a constantly regenerating physical being with a capacity for extraordinary feats of physical grace and intellectual acuity far beyond the capability—and presumably the imagination—of any individual cell or microorganism. The wonder and implications of this process are breathtaking. Visual- ize your body continuously re-creating itself in a constant exchange of energy, nutrients, water, and information with Earth, in which Earth’s microorganisms serve as intermediaries. It is the ultimate intimacy. Like a flowing river, my body maintains its distinctive individual form, abilities, and memories without loss or disruption even though its matter and energy are in constant flow and exchange within and beyond self. Furthermore, these miraculous self-directing processes mostly occur far below the level of my conscious awareness. So long as I provide the essentials of nutrition, hydration, rest, and exercise, my cells fulfill their responsibilities to maintain my body’s healthy function without specific instructions from any central decision-making authority that we know of. Cells can and do go rogue and become a threat to the whole. Cancer is an example. The healthy cells self-organize to eliminate them. If they fail, the body dies and the rogue cells thus self-eliminate. We might take this as a warning. We humans are behaving as rogue cells in the body of Living Earth and have activated Earth’s defenses, notably climate change and deadly infectious diseases. To achieve our individual and species potential and secure our common future, we must align with the wisdom and intention of the spirit that manifests through us. In the most mature expression of our human consciousness, we develop a capacity to recognize and honor simultaneously both our oneness and our individuality. It helps us achieve spiritual understanding, accept responsibility for the consequences of our personal choices, and create an economy that meets the needs of all members of Earth’s self-sustaining community of life.

Levels Of Consciousness: So what is the relationship between our individual human consciousness and the meta-consciousness of the whole? The relationship between the individual cells of my body and my conscious mind suggests as answer. Through the findings of science, I know my body’s cells exist. I consciously care about their health, because I know that my own health depends on their health. Even if I had the capacity to consciously discern and care for a single cell, however, I could not possibly track and care for each of the tens of trillions of cells that make up my body. Think of the distraction. My body’s capacity for intelligent choice resides at the cellular level far below my conscious awareness for good reason. My body’s meta- consciousness thus establishes the context of the self-managed choice making of the individual cells. The cells take it from there, allowing my conscious mind the freedom to engage in creative inquiry and expression. Scale this logic up to the cosmic level. If we assume a Living Uni- verse meta-consciousness, it is unlikely it could attend individually to each of the trillions of celestial entities that constitute it—just as I cannot attend to each of the cells of my body. This is not to suggest that meta-consciousness is indifferent to our human existence. The meta-consciousness may care for us with the love that some believe to be the binding force of the universe. In the deepest sense, it likely does possess an awareness and concern for our individual well-being—but not in the way suggested by the traditional Distant Patri- arch cosmology. If each human is a choice-making manifestation of the spirit, we are each an instrument of the spirit’s awareness and agency. This suggests that the voice that may reply to my conscious mind in the course of meditation or prayer is both my voice and the voice of the meta-consciousness that expresses itself through me. My appeal to God for guidance or for relief from my suffering is thus in effect an appeal to myself to act with wisdom and self-awareness while remaining mindful of my responsibility to and for the larger evolving community to which I belong. Similarly, as I step back to view with awe and wonder the creative magnificence of the universe unfolding, perhaps I serve as an instrument by which the meta-consciousness steps back to view and reflect on itself. A Dream In The Human Heart: In private conversations, I find the Living Universe cosmology is largely consistent with private—if rarely spoken—cosmology of many scientists, practicing members of varied

42 faiths, and people who define themselves as spiritual but not necessarily religious. I have some to suspect that some version of this story lives in every human heart—no matter how suppressed it may be. Traditional indigenous wisdom keepers speak of the creator’s Origi- nal Instructions to humans to get along with one another and nature.(6) Science now affirms that the human brain evolved to reward cooperation, service, and compassion. Our brains are wired to connect.(7) Devel- opmental psychologists who study the maturing of the human consciousness find that at our most mature, it is our nature to feel a deep connection with and caring for all being. Systems biologists find that the healthy function of any living system depends on collaboration. Most of all living organisms exist, thrive, and co-evolve only within living communities engaged in a continuous synergistic sharing and exchange that form a big-picture perspective is fundamentally cooperative.[8] The Original Instructions are integral to our human nature, and they manifest through the whole of life. This comes as no surprise to anyone who is paying attention. It is evident from our daily experience that caring relationships are an essential foundation of the healthy human families and communities that are in turn essential to our individual health and happiness. Extreme individualism, greed, and violence are pathologi- cal; their expression indicates physical, developmental, cultural, and /or institutional system failure. We are creatures born of an evolving Living Universe on a quest. To guide us to our place of contribution to that quest, it seems we are born with a dream in our heart of a world beyond individualism, greed, and violence. It is a dream to which countless generations have aspired. It is a dream long deferred by our missteps as we explored all the possibilities of our nature for both good (that which serves life) and evil (that which destroys life). It is a dream of peace and creative prosperity for all. It is the dream of living democracies, self-governing communities in which we together envision and shape our common future. It is the vision of self-organizing local markets in which we provision ourselves through fair and equal exchange. It is a dream that aligns with the evolutionary trajectory of a Liv- ing Universe toward ever-greater complexity, beauty, awareness, and possibility. It was the dream of a young Jewish teacher named Jesus who long ago threw the moneychangers from the temple of life. It was the dream

43 of Martin Luther King Jr. and the freedom riders of the civil rights movement, of Gandhi, and of Nelson Mandela. Science is now confirming what we feel in our heart and daily experience. People who organize their lives around money and consumption to the exclusion of living relationships are prone to depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem compensated for by obscene displays of extravagance. We experience the fullness of life through the caring relationships of close friends and healthy caring families and communities and the positive rush we experience when helping a neighbor, volunteering, and giving. A connection with nature is essential to our health and happiness. We thrive in jobs that allow us to express creativity, exercise initiative, and be of service to others. In their book, The Spirit Level, the British epidemiologists Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett provide an exhaustive review of research on the relationship between wealth equality and indicators of physical, mental, and social health and happiness. On virtually every indicator, societies that are more equitable enjoy more positive outcomes than those that are less equitable. The healthiest societies are not those that have more income, more money—or even more education. They are those that are most giving and loving, societies that share what they have most equitably.[9] From a Living Earth perspective, our human birth was no accident. It involved a great deal of preparation. That we are born of Earth with a dream in our heart of caring and sharing to the benefit of all strongly suggests that the Living Universe did not birth Earth to serve us. Rather Living Earth birthed us to serve its continued evolutionary unfolding.”31 It Takes A Living Community: The wonder of organic (carbon- based) life is that each and every living organism, from the individual cell to Living Earth, maintains itself in an internal state of active, adaptive, resilient, creative thermodynamic disequilibrium in seeming violation of the basic principle of entropy—the loss of ordered structure. It takes a community of organic life to maintain the conditions required by carbon- based life. Maintaining the conditions of its own existence is the prime task of every living community and each of its members. Science has only the sketchiest idea of how it works beyond a recognition that organic life depends on a continuous flow of energy, water, nutrients, and information. To maintain these flows, life self-organizes everywhere as a system of bioregional communities that scale upward like nested Russian dolls from the micro to the global. Some systems theo-

44 rists refer to this as a holonic structure—a system of nested whole parts. It is a critical though seldom noted insight that individual cells and organisms can no more exist outside a larger community of living organisms than the community of life can exist without the self-directing agency of the individuals that constitute it. The more complex, diverse, and coherent are the relationships internal to teach community, the greater the community’s resilience and creative potential. As individual organisms and species evolve in community, they learn to meet their own needs in ways that ultimately contribute to the generative capacities of the whole. As each individual and species has a responsibility to contribute, so too does each have the right to share in the community’s product. Although the competitive aspect of life’s evolution has dominated Western attention since the studies of Darwin, shared spaces create shared destinies and interests that reward the formation of synergistic relationships among individuals and species.[3] In the frame of the life- centered ‘new biology,’ the species that succeed and thrive over the long term are those that find their place of service to the whole. Whether this is a conscious process for any other species, we may never know. For humans, given the combination of our dominance and our extraordinary capacity for agency, it is essential that he process be conscious and intentional.”32 From Abuser To Healer: A growing body of evidence suggests that humans are now the dominant force shaping the generative systemes that sustain Earth as a living being. Thus, some refer to our geologic time as the Anthropocene—the epoch of the human. Environmentalists point to our need to learn to live within the limits of Earth’s capacity to sustain our consumption. Discussion of these limits, however, is generally within a mechanistic frame, as if we were dealing with a machine with an unvarying capacity to pump water, produce food, or stabilize the climate. Earth, however, is not a machine. She is a living organism. Her abundance and ability to support human life depends on the health of her complex and interdependent living systems. The more we abuse her, the poorer her health, and the less abundant her soils, rivers, aquifers, forests, fisheries, and grasslands. Her wells and rivers go dry. Her deserts spread. Her distress plays out in increasingly violent weather patterns. Tempera- tures rise. Icecaps melt. Oceans acidify. Winds and surf become more violent. Wet places become wetter. Dry places become dryer. Hillsides

45 erode. Forest and prairie fires rages out of control. Coastlands flood. Hillsides become unstable. Her capacity to support life—including human life—declines. It is not sufficient merely to moderate our reckless behavior to limit the burden we impose on her. We must learn to work with all the members of Earth’s community of life to restore her to full health. We must navigate our passage to what Thomas Berry, the cosmologist Brian Swimme, and the spiritual ecologist Mary Evelyn Tucker call the Ecozoic. The Ecozoic Era: Berry outlined the underlying frame and implications of an Ecozoic era in an October 1991 lecture sponsored by the E.F. Schumacher Society.[4] These are five critical understandings from that lecture foundational to navigating the turning to a Living Economy for Living Earth.”33 a) “The universe is a communion of subjects, not a collection of objects. Every being has its own inner form, its own spontaneity, its own voice, its ability to declare itself and to be present to other components of the universe in a subject-to-subject relationship. b) “The Earth exists, and can survive, only in its integral functioning. It cannot survive in fragments any more than any organism can survive in fragments. c) “The Earth is a one-time endowment…. We must reasonably sup- pose that the Earth is subject to irreversible damage in the major patterns of its functioning and even to distortions in its possibilities of development. d) “The Earth is primary and humans are derivative…. The Earth economy can survive the loss of its human component, but there is no way for the human economy to survive or prosper apart from the Earth economy…. The absurdity has been to seek a rising Gross Na- tional Product in the face of a declining Gross Earth Product….

“It should be especially clear in medicine that we cannot have well humans on a sick planet…. So in jurisprudence, to poise the entire administration of justice on the rights of humans and their limitless freedom to exploit the natural world is to open the natural world to the worst predatory instincts of humans. The prior rights of the entire Earth community need to be assured first; then the rights and freedoms of humans can have their field of expression.

46 e) “There is no such thing as a human community in any manner separate from the Earth community.’34

Taking these self-evident truths seriously changes everything.35

Local Self-Reliance: Scientists debate whether Earth conforms to all the elements of the scientific definition of a living organism. I honor their intellectual rigor and their invaluable contribution to our ever deepening understanding of how life organizes. I am not inclined, however, to wait for science to come to terms with the need to update its definitions. To participate as productive members of Earth’s community of life, we must understand and honor that community’s organizing principles and organize our economies accordingly. The principles are universal; the specifics are everywhere unique. The biosphere self-organizes as a global system. The locus of intelligent agency, however, is everywhere local and involves trillions of individual choice makers—none of whom is in a position to dominate the rest. This makes possible life’s finely tuned micro adaptation to constantly changing local conditions through unimaginably complex processes. The consequences of local choice making ripple outward and upward to create global dynamics that ripple back to shape local conditions to which the local community in turn adapts. Yet all the while, Earth as a living superorganism continuously seeks dynamic stability through self- regulating processes we have barely begun to identity, let alone understand—all without evidence of a central decision maker or control mechanism. The dynamics of climate are the most obvious example of this interaction. Though the system is global, the basic means of sustenance for individual organisms is always local. The imperative is clear. Each community learns to adapt to the distinctive conditions of its place to meet its own needs while engaging in a balanced and mutually beneficial exchange with its neighbors. Each individual species learns to adjust its breeding and consumption accordingly. So long as the local is in balance, so too is the global. It is a brilliant design with clear and unforgiving incentives. Get it right and thrive for the long term. Get it wrong and die. For so long as the organisms that make up lower-system-level living communities meet their needs in a balanced relationship within the limits of locally available energy, nutrients, and water, so too the higher-level communities up to and including the biosphere are in balance. Natural systems accomplish this coordination without the intervention of a central authority. 47

Managed Permeable Boundaries: At each level of organization— from the individual cell to the multicell organism, to the local eco- community, to the biosphere—the living organism must define and maintain itself within a managed membrane. This boundary is essential to its ability to maintain its internal flows of energy, nutrients, matter, water, and information in thermodynamic disequilibrium. Breach the cell wall and the cell’s resources dissipate into its environment, resulting in instant death. Death also follows if the exchange between the cell and its environment is blocked. The cell must also have the ability to resist intrusion by toxic substances and by parasites that come to expropriate without corresponding contribution. The same principle applies at every level of organization. Multicell organism must have a skin or other protective covering. Oceans, moun- tains, and climatic zones bound major bioregional communities. Earth’s atmosphere serves as a protective membrane within which Living Earth maintains the environmental conditions essential to carbon-based life. Time Is Life: Life in its natural state self-organizes to make a living in community with joyful exuberance. Premonetization human societies (few of which remain) do the same. When they get it right, there is a natural joy and beauty in life’s natural flow as each human member contributes to the cycles of life by which the community sustains itself. Life is both its joys and its sorrows is a continuous flow. There is little distinction between leisure, play, ritual, the work of production, and consumption, and between human and nature. Time is life; life is time. In societies in a state of advanced monetization, money and global supply chains mediate human access to most all the essentials of living. The system imposes a mandatory sequence of money before life. It seg- ments our lives into disconnected commutes enclosed in steel boxes with wheels between home, work, shopping, school, church, and places of recreation. Our relationships become fragmented, isolated, impersonal, and mediated by money. Dehumanized and dependent on money to live, we offer ourselves in servitude to money-seeking corporate robots doing work that has no meaning in competition with our co-workers for the favor of a boss who values us only for our contribution to the corporation’s bottom line. There is no depth, no flow, and no time to care. Time is money; money is time. The joy and beauty of making a living and engaging as a contributing member of a living community of life are stripped away. Stripped of our humanity, we increasingly resemble the money-seeking

corporate robots we now serve and that mainstream economic theory as- sumes us to be. We are in the midst of a deep shift in human consciousness. The elements of its framing story are emerging. They have yet to find coherent, unifying expression.”36 The transition calls for a new economics grounded in a Sacred Life and Living Earth story.”37

Korten proceeds to describe the purpose and principles of a “New Economics for a New Economy” based on a new holistic paradigm of a “Living Universe.”

Begin With The Household: The only valid purpose of an economy is to serve life. To align the human economy with this purpose, we must learn to live as nature lives, organize as nature organizers, and learn as nature learns guided by a reality-based, life-centered, intellectually sound economics that embraces the values and insights of the Sacred Life and Living Earth story. The quest for a new economics begins with a simple question for which the answer should be obvious: Is the purpose of the economy to maximize the profits of money-seeking corporate robots or the health and well-being of living households? … Whether we take the Sacred Money and Markets perspective of a money-seeking global corporation or the Sacred Life and Living Earth perspective of a life-seeking local household. The distinction between firm and household becomes most salient when the dominant firms are placeless money-seeking corporate robots captive to the demands of global financial markets that value only money. The distinction is less consequential in an economy organized around locally owned family or cooperatively owned businesses that function as extensions of the local households that own and staff them. Vest Power In Living People: If we choose an economy that favors the interests of living households and communities, we will structure its institutions to:

a) Root power in local households and communities through local ownership and local decision making.

b) Foster local diversity and self-reliance in securing a means of living for all the community’s members using local energy, nutrients, water, and material resources.

49 c) Cultivate and reward civic engagement, responsibility, the sharing of work and resources (including a free exchange of ideas, knowledge, and information), and honest dealing in the interest of the well-being of all. d) Encourage everyone to contribute according to their ability, and recognize the right of each to meet their reasonable needs with due consideration for the needs of others. e) Maintain permeable managed boundaries as necessary to the integrity of the community, support fair and balanced trade of local surplus with neighbors, and secure the community’s resources against theft by intruding predators.

Such measures root economic power in living households and communities and help focus the attention of both households and firms on the creation of real living wealth rather than phantom financial wealth. From Wall St. Phantom-Wealth to Main St. Real Living Wealth: We are conditioned by the Sacred Money and Markets story to equate money with wealth and the making of money with wealth creation. As previously noted, money is only a number, an accounting chit, a potential claim against things of real value. Money itself has value. Money itself has value only because by social convention we accept it for things of real value. Money created through the manipulation of financial markets unre- lated to creating anything of real value is phantom wealth—a baseless and generally unjust claim against society’s real wealth. Wall Street daily demonstrates its ability to create phantom financial wealth in massive sums. Mainstream Sacred Money and Markets economics is a phantom- wealth economics for which money is the defining value and making money by any means is the defining purpose. Phantom-wealth economics values people and nature (living wealth) only as commodified resources based on their market price. Thus, it assigns breathable air no value, though we can live without it for only a few minutes. It assigns diamonds a very high value, though we easily live without them. Picture yourself alone on a desert island with nothing to sustain you. As your ship sank, you had to choose between two trunks. One trunk is filled with emergency supplies and rations—market value maybe a couple hundred dollars. The other is full of hundred-dollar bills totaling maybe a

50 million dollars. Schooled in the Sacred Money and Markets story, you went for the million dollars. Oops. Acting on the advice of economists suffering from physics envy, we manage our affairs to maximize stocks (financial assets) flows (GDP) of money (accounting units). We neglect the care of living systems oh which our existence and well-being depend because by the logic of phantom- wealth economics, it isn’t profitable. The language of phantom-wealth economics actively hides the critical distinction between phantom (money) wealth and real (living) wealth. Within the Sacred Money and Markets frame, most conversations about the economy feature constant references to assets, capital, resources, and wealth. None of these terms distinguishes phantom financial wealth from real living wealth.[2] By the logic of Sacred Money and Market economics, there is no need to distinguish between phantom financial wealth and real living wealth because all forms of capital ultimately translate into money equivalents on a balance sheet. Since, in theory, any asset with a market value can be exchanged for any other of equivalent market value, the specific form of the capital, resource, asset, or wealth is of no particular importance. For profit-maximizing corporations, this logic has some validity. For a society, it leads to significant distortion. For example, the world’s total financial assets significantly exceed the market value of the world’s real wealth. This creates expectations of enti- tlement by those who hold these financial assets that can never be realized and leads financial commentators to confuse stock and housing price bubbles with wealth creation. This confusion is a particular issue for the US Federal Reserve, for which a rising wage is inflationary and a rising asset price is wealth creation. It thus manages the money supply to hold down wages and inflate asset prices—a certain formula for growing inequality and driving financial boom and bust. For years, I puzzled when I heard commentators speak solemnly of “international capital movements.” I imagined huge ships transporting machine tools, construction equipment, and other instruments of production from one country to another. Eventually, I learned that international capital movements that sometime throw national economies into wild gyrations mostly involve nothing more than a bank transferring numbers from one account to another—quite possibly within the same computer—in response to financial speculators.

Focused on caring for money, we neglect everything that is essential to our well-being. Using conventional economic analysis, we manage the economy to maximize financial returns to money, as if money were the primary resource constraint—rather than, say, water, fertile land, or skilled workers. Consequently, we believe we are getting richer as a society when every living system essential to our well-being is in distress from our abuse and neglect. In fact, money is the most easily created of all the many forms of what we call capital. Any central bank can create it in an instant in any needed amount with little more than a computer keystroke. For a country with a central bank, unmet needs, and underutilized real resources, money should never be the defining constraint. Money, markets, and corporations can all be useful servants. They are terrible masters. We are in desperate need of a living-wealth economics to guide our way to restoring money, markets, and corporations to their proper servant role. Living-Wealth Economics: Within the frame of a living-wealth economics, nature is our source of live and is therefore precious beyond price. The ultimate measure of the economy’s performance is the health and vitality of Earth’s living systems and the living beings (including humans) they comprise. The healthier and more productive Living Earth’s generative systems, the greater her ability to meet our human needs and those of all of Earth’s community’s countless other living beings in per- petuity. A living-wealth economics will therefore give top priority to assuring that we allocate our life energy in ways that optimize the health of Living Earth’s generative systems. Embracing the Sacred Life and Living Earth story frame, a living- wealth economic will recognize that we belong to Earth; Earth does not belong to us. It will guide us to an economy in which we meet our human needs through our active participation in, and positive contribution to, the eco-system processes by which the microbes, plants, animals, and geological structures of Living Earth maintain and renew freshwater supplies, the chemical composition of sea and air, air pressure, surface temperature, climate stability, soil fertility, fisheries, forests, and grasslands to sustain the conditions essential to Earth life. A living-wealth economics will focus not on how best to allocate money to maximize financial returns, but rather how best to allocate our life energy—essentially human time and talent—to maximize living returns to people and nature. It will honor life’s inherent wisdom as ex- pressed through Earth’s natural living systems. It will guide us in learning

from, working with, facilitating, and assisting and augmenting Earth’s natural processes. A living-wealth economics will give particular priority to guiding our management of human, social, intellectual, and physical infrastructure capital. These are all of distinctive human origin and represent our human capacity to enhance the quality of living for all people and contribute to maintaining the living systems essential to all Earth like and to advancing life’s creative evolutionary unfolding. Each form of human-created capital requires a continuing investment of our life energy in their maintenance and renewal. A living community stands to reap major living returns from such investments. Rarely is there a financial incentive for an individual for-profit firm to make such investments in the absence of government intervention to require or subsi- dize it. To create and maintain human capital requires us to invest human time and talent in educating ourselves, developing job skills, and meeting the requirements of healthy living, including exercise and continuous flows of nutritious food, clean air and water, and health care. To create and maintain social capital requires us to invest human time and talent in social interactions, ritual, and artistic expression to build and maintain trust and a sense of common purpose and identity. To create and maintain intellectual capital requires us to invest human time and talent in research, documentation, sharing, and updating. To create and maintain physical infrastructure capital requires us to invest human time and talent in design, construction, and maintenance. All these forms of human-created capital are interrelated. Each involves constant interaction with the living systems of nature.”38

In the chapter designated as “A Living Economy for a Living Earth,” Korten articulates concrete indicators, rights and responsibilities, to mention a few of the components of the next economic system.

If we get our story right, we can get our institutions right. If we get our institutions right, we get our future right. Institutions based on the design principles of the Sacred Money and Markets story empower computer-driven financial markets and corporate robots to base society’s major resource-allocation decisions solely on the logic of short-term financial returns. Institutions based on the design principles of a Sacred Life and Liv- ing Earth story empower living people to make these decisions as re-

sponsible members of living households and communities based on long- term living returns.39

The following are some examples of critical institutional design choices that Korten describes.

1. Performance Indicators: When we organize by the Sacred Money and Markets story, we use growth in financial metrics like the gross domestic product (GDP), corporate profits, and stock prices as the basis for assessing economic performance and making policy decisions. We thus focus on optimizing the economy’s service to money.

GDP counts everything exchanged for money as an economic benefit, even if it results in the destruction of fisheries and forests, and the poisoning of rivers and aquifers. Expenditures related to divorce, tox- ics cleanup, and the treatment of cancer and mental illness—along with financial-sector income from activities that produce no real value and much else that may generate short-term profits for business at great cost to society—all count as a positive economic benefit.

By the Sacred Money and Markets story reckoning, population growth is an economic benefit because it grows consumption, business profits, the demand for jobs, and GDP even as it creates ever more intolerable pressure on Earth’s living systems. Replacing the home production of food and childcare with purchased food and childcare grows GDP.

GDP is a decidedly mixed bag. The faster we monetize relationships, breed, increase our dependence on the financial oligarchy, and advance toward social and environmental collapse, the faster the GDP and share price indexes grow. Benefits are short-term and illusory. Cost are long-term—and for our species, potential terminal.

When we organize by the Sacred Life and Living Earth story, we focus on improving the health of people, community, and Living Earth. This requires more than different metrics; it requires a different mindset […].

To assess how well the economy is serving living people, we properly look to indicators of life satisfaction, nutritional health, creative expression, freedom from chronic disease and psychological dysfunction, the frequency and quality of interactions with people and nature,

the sense of contribution, and the allocation of time between activities that bring intrinsic satisfaction versus those we simply endure to make money. The most powerful indicators of healthy community function are indicators of the health and well-being of our children. For Living Earth, we look at indicators of biodiversity, climate stability, the health of rivers and aquifers, and the health of bee, frog, and fish populations […].

To continue the medical analogy, a living-wealth economist will act in the manner of a naturopathic physician who looks at many indicators of bodily function for clues to the source of systemic failures in the body’s self-managed healing and health maintenance processes. Ra- ther than directly treat the symptoms of system failure, he or she will recommend actions to address the cause of the symptoms.

For example, in the United States, one of our most telling indicators of profound social and economic system failure is the proportion of our adult population in prison. We could immediately move the indicator in a positive direction simply by releasing large numbers of the incarcerated back to the general population. That, however, would do nothing to resolve the variety of economic system failures that create the extreme inequality and critical shortage of living-wage jobs that in turn result in broken overstressed homes and push excluded people into drug consumption, drug dealing, and other crimes[1]

The ecological economist Joshua Farley suggest we view GDP as indicator of the economic cost of producing a given level of well-being. We might then manage the economy to minimize, rather than maximize, cost.

Perhaps our best indication that we are making meaningful progress in the turning to a living future will be when our national accounts report a simultaneous improvement in the well-being of life (economic benefit) and a decline in GDP (economic cost).

2. Legal Rights & Responsibilities: Modern nations profess a nearly universal commitment to democracy and human rights, including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Yet legal practice directly contradicts this commitment in troubling ways. It prioritizes the rights of private for-profit corporations over the human rights of living persons and holds corporations to a lower 55

standard of accountability than living persons for harms against society. It gives nature no rights at all.

Money Economy advocates push aggressively for US Supreme Court decisions and multilateral trade agreements that strengthen the rights of corporate robots, weaken the rights living people and communities, and strip nature of any protection whatever. Such measures, they argue, are essential to maintain and accelerate economic growth. By the values and understanding of the Sacred Money and Markets story, this makes sense.

By the values and understanding of the Sacred Life and Living Earth story, prioritizing the rights of corporate robots over the rights of living people and nature to accelerate the monetization of relationships and grow the financial assets of the already rich is not only illogical but actively and insanely suicidal.

Without nature, there are no people. Without people, there are no corporations, there is no property, and there is no money. The rights of nature logically take priority. Indeed, there is a strong argument that the most foundational of human rights is the right to a healthy environment. By extension we have both the right and the responsibility to secure and defend the rights of nature. Our existence and well-being depend on her.

A corporation is created when the government issues a charter. There is no reason for any corporation to exist other than to serve a democratically determined public interest. It is odd, indeed, when the law grants a rogue corporate robot rights the trump the rights of the living community that created it.

Essential political action will establish in law that:

 Natural rights are exclusive to living beings, including Living Earth.

 Because the health and integrity of Living Earth is essential to the right of current and future human generations to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the right to protect her health and integrity is the most basic of human rights.

 Exercise of the right to protect Living Earth’s health and integrity is the most basic of human responsibilities.

3. Ownership, Work, & Livelihoods: Ownership is power. When that power resides in global financial markets and corporations, it supports making money. When distributed among living people in living communities, it supports making a living.

Here we confront another consequence of a legal system that gives the right of corporations to make a profit priority over the right of people to make a living. By current legal practice, there is no practical limit to the right of a corporation to monopolize the ownership of land, water, seeds, energy, health care facilities, educational facilities, and other essentials of life to extract unearned monopoly profits. The greater their profits, the greater their ability to consolidate monopoly control of the means of living to extort ever larger monopoly rents.

When ownership secures a person’s right to a basic means of living, it secures that person against the tyranny of dependence on money and those who control money’s creation and allocation. When ownership secures the right of a person or corporation to monopolize the means of living and then to profit from the desperation of those deprived, it becomes an instrument of tyranny rather than a defense against it.

Living Earth is the creation and common heritage of all of Earth’s living beings. The idea that it is the right of a few humans to own it to the exclusion of all others is a moral travesty. The idea that it is the right of nonliving money-seeking robots to own it to the exclusion of humans—and even to destroy, contaminate, or otherwise render it useless or hazardous to future generations—is a logical, as well as a moral, travesty.

A living economy is composed of and served by living enterprises owned by living people who depend on them for their livelihood. Known to the other members of the community in which they live, these owners have a strong incentive to act with conscience and moral sensibility.[2] It is for good reason that Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson favored economies based on small firms and farms owned by individuals and families with a sense of loyalty to their place and their neighbors.

Private ownership by individuals or households of the means of creating their living consistent with their reasonable needs aligns households and enterprise interests. It is an essential foundation of both democracy and socially efficient markets. It provides a bulwark 57

against the tyranny of a monopolization of property rights whether by individuals, corporations, or states.

Many economic functions in modern society do require larger enterprise units, even within a Living Economy framework. We can meet this need in ways consistent with broad, equitable, stable, and locally rooted participation in ownership through cooperative ownership structures, of which we have many examples.[3]

The worker-owned Mondragon cooperatives in Spain are a leading example of the application of the principles of cooperative worker ownership in a large, complex enterprise.

4. Financial Services: The power to create and allocated money is the ultimate power in any society in which access to a basic means of living depends on money. When money-seeking corporate robots exercise this power in secret, free from democratic accountability, it becomes the ultimate instrument of tyranny.

The tyranny will prevail for so long as we accept the story that money is wealth, making money is the economy’s defining purpose, and the profits of a business define its value to society. Within this story frame, the mega-scale financial institutions that reap outsize profits from speculation and the sophisticated manipulation of financial markets merit respect and deference as society’s most productive wealth creators—even though they produce nothing of value, create financial instability, and drive increasingly unjust inequality.

The reality-based Sacred Life and Living Earth story exposes the essential truth: Money is an accounting token. Money and a modest monetary profit are means, not ends. Institutions, including financial services institutions, are properly valued for their contribution to the health and vitality of the communities they serve. By this standard, Wall Street financial institutions are a net societal liability.

The United States created a decentralized, community-rooted banking system in response to the financial crash of 1929. This well- proven financial services system model financed the United States’ victory in World War II, produced an unprecedented period of economic stability and prosperity, made America the world’s leading industrial power, financed major national investments in infrastructure, created the American middle-class, made America the world’s leading 58

creditor nation, and put a man on the moon. Then Wall Street stepped in, dismantled it, and put it in place a system devoted largely to speculation and the gaming of global financial markets.

Beginning in the 1970s, Wall Street used its political power to push through financial deregulation and consolidate the financial sector under control of its megabanks, hedge funds, and private equity funds. The resulting Wall Street system acted like a vacuum cleaner, sucking money out of local communities where it might have supported productive exchange and investment. It flowed instead to Wall Street financial institutions engaged in financial gaming to generate management bonuses and unearned profits for the most wealthy.

We bear the devastating consequences. The United States is now neither an industrial power nor a middle-class nation. We have become the world’s leading debtor nation, suffered a major financial collapse in 2008 followed by continuing economic stagnation and high unemployment, and now face the near certainty of an even more devastating financial collapse in the near future.

In a Living Economy, banks and other financial sector institutions are creations of the living communities they serve. Human-scale, cooperatively owned, locally rooted, and accountable, they give living communities the ability to create credit in official currency in response to local needs and opportunities through processes that are transparent and democratically accountable. Money—including profits and interest—circulate locally.[4] Individuals rotate between roles as owners and workers, borrowers and lenders. Some may have a bit more, some a bit less—but without clear class divisions. Money is servant. Life is master.

We have the right and the means as democratic societies to restore sensible financial rules and create a financial system based on these same principles.

5. Governance: By the reckoning of the Sacred Money and Markets story, the primary—if not sole—legitimate purpose of government is to maintain essential order, enforce contracts, and secure property rights, all of which serve money-seeking corporate robots. Beyond these functions, corporate interests expect government to leave the free market to its own devices. 59

This ignores an inherent paradox. In a free (unregulated) market, successful corporations grow. The bigger they get, the greater their monopoly power and their ability and temptation to abuse that power. The greater the abuse, the greater the need for big government to re- strain the abuse, come to the aid of the abused, and clean up the environmental mess. The best way to reduce the size of government is to reduce the size of corporations.

The bigger the corporation, however, the greater its political power and thereby its ability to resist regulation and avoid paying the taxes required to enforce the regulations and to fund the social and environmental programs that corporate abuse makes necessary. In the worst-case scenario—as we now experience—big corporations co- opt big government to extract subsidies, protect monopolies, and shift the tax burden from the rich to the poor.

Within the Sacred Life and Living Earth story frame, we make public policy based on what helps people and nature self-organize locally as healthy living communities within an essential framework of appropriate rules, government fiscal policy, and public facilities. Appropri- ate rules include restrictions on the size of individual firms in order to maintain market discipline and prevent the concentration of monopoly power.

There is no place in a Living Economy for unregulated money- seeking publicly traded limited-liability corporate robots. They must be broken up and restructured to function as human-scale, cooperatively owned, community-rooted enterprises.

Democratic governments of we the people have an essential role: to create and maintain a framework of rules and institutions that keep markets fair and support our self-organization as responsible contributing members of the local eco-communities that are the source of our living. This governmental responsibility is equivalent to my responsibility to my body to maintain the conditions essential to the processes of its constituent cells to self-organize to maintain my living function.

The proper governmental regulatory, public finance, and fiscal policy priorities in a Living Economy society seek to:

 Secure the access of all households to a means of creating their own living through some combination of paid employment, self- production, and community labor sharing.

 Shift employment away from activities that harm society to activities that benefit society.

 Assure that the benefits of productivity gains are shared by owners and workers and distributed between increased income and increased free time to improve the work-home balance.

 Support equitable and democratic participation in ownership and fair market exchange.

 Make unproductive financial speculation unprofitable.

 Create economic incentives that favor locally rooted and accountable businesses over footloose corporate robots.

6. Academia: Shaped by the pressures of the Money Economy, our academic institutions have become factories for producing compliant debt-burdened workers for indentured service to corporate robots. The values and assumptions of the Sacred Money and Markets story permeate their structures, cultures, and curricula. Their economics departments and schools of business and public policy are well fund- ed and staffed to promote the morally and intellectually corrupt story as science.

Rare is the university that has a single course, even in departments of philosophy or schools of theology, devoted to exploring the power of the stories by which we define ourselves, the stories that shaped our historical past, the need for a new story for our time, and the sources from which such a story might draw.

We have an urgent need for leaders with skills and understanding required to advance our turning to a Living Economy. Rather than in- doctrination in the fallacies of the Sacred Money and Markets story, they need schooling in the values and understanding of the Sacred Life and Living Earth story. They need skills in observing, understanding, and adapting human institutions to the living systems of Living Earth within the frame of a living-wealth economics.

Academic institutions organized by narrowly defined siloed disciplines that organize knowledge within the limited frame of the Grand Machine cosmology are poorly suited to this need.

One can learn a great deal about the inner workings of a machine by carefully disassembling it, studying the parts individually, and then re- assembling them to restore the mechanism to its original state.

To disassemble a living being is to kill it and thereby destroy its essence. To fragment knowledge is to suppress our natural ability to perceive and relate to Earth as a living being.

The complex, active, and interdependent processes by which life maintains the conditions of its own existence involve a combination of mechanism, chance, and conscious agency. To live consciously as contributing members of Earth’s community of life, we must understand the nature and interplay of all three. Most science education ignores, even denies, the existence of the third and most important— conscious agency.

Schools of business, public policy, engineering, architecture, and urban planning face a particular challenge. We need decision makers in all these fields skilled in creating and managing the institutional and physical infrastructure of a society in which life is the goal, money and markets are means, and the built environment reconnects us with one another and nature.

The physical walls that isolate learning from life worsen the problem of the intellectual walls that isolate disciplines from one another. We come to truly understand life only through active, disciplined, observant engagement in living.

Most of the learning relevant to our turning from a Money Economy to a Living Economy is taking place outside the walls of academia. Those who lead the way exhibit a deep love of life and possess the wisdom of the heart. Some may have advanced academic credentials; most do not.

They share their learning through blogs, web publications, workshops, and conferences. Learning accumulates in the cultural and social DNA of the communities in which it occurs. There is a great need for systematic documentation to facilitate sharing and thereby accelerate humanity’s global learning process. 62

The continued relevance of today’s educational institutions depends on their willingness and ability to rethink, retool, and restructure as they learn to connect with and serve the grassroots social-learning initiatives taking place all around them. They need to:

 Strip away the intellectual walls that isolate academic disciplines from one another and the physical walls that isolate formal learning from the living world.

 Organize faculty and students into interdisciplinary learning teams that reach out to, engage, support, and learn from nearby community-based social-learning initiatives.

 Shift their focus from specialized pre-employment degree programs to facilitation of lifelong learning.

 Replace the metaphor of the machine with the metaphor of the living organism as the defining intellectual frame.

 Staff departments of biology and ecology with biologists and ecologists who view life through a living-systems lens.

 Feature history courses that examine through a holistic system lens how large-scale social transformation has occurred in human societies and draw out relevant lessons for contemporary change agents.

 Replace economics departments with departments of living- household ecology and management that are staffed by applied ecologists. Confine the teaching of neoclassical economics to courses seeking lessons from a variety of historical examples of self- destructive intellectual misadventures.

 Replace a business and public policy curriculum designed around the values and logic of phantom-wealth economic with one designed around the values and logic of living-wealth economics.

 Replace engineering, architecture, and urban planning curricula centered on creating an auto-oriented infrastructure that suppresses nature and walls us off from life with curricula that support creating a life-oriented built infrastructure that connects us with one another and nature as living members of a living community.

Introduce law school courses exploring the nature, structure, and doctrines of an Earth law/rights of nature legal system. 63

7. From Politically Infeasible To Politically Inevitable: Navigating a turning from the story and institutions of a Money Economy to those of a Living Economy presents a daunting challenge. Given the accelerating rates of environmental and social collapse, time is short.

No compromise is possible between the values and power structures of Money Economy and Living Economy systems. Their differences are irreconcilable. There is no way to produce outsize financial returns to the assets of billionaires, allow the few to monopolized the control of and disrupt Earth’s living systems for a quick profit, and simultaneously maintain the conditions essential to Earth life and meet the needs of all.

We cannot get to a just, sustainable, and peaceful world with reforms that tweak the existing system at its margins. Each of the system changes outlined above is essential.

The politically pragmatic observer will point out that these may be good ideas, but given the power of the pro-growth, pro-trade, relationship-monetizing, monopoly-creating, money-seeking, corporate- robot-serving establishment, they are not politically feasible. True.

If, however, we limit ourselves to what is politically feasible, we in effect declare that human survival is politically infeasible. That creates a self-fulfilling prophecy and assures we will end up where we are going.

The only intelligent course is to define together what is necessary. Then together we’ll figure out how we will make it politically inevitable. Transformation can—and does—occur even in the face of determined repression by powerful interests that control mass media, education, and state power.

I have witnessed in my lifetime a number of politically infeasible transformations. These include the collapse of British rule in India, the transformation of race relations and gender roles, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the end of apartheid in South Africa, and the ouster of the Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines. Each seemed impossible—until it happened. Then suddenly it seemed inevitable. Each helped to prepare the way for the work now at hand. When a moment of readiness arises, a break-

through can occur with surprising speed as a new public consensus forms.

The key is the story. We will not achieve the system changes outlined above through direct political confrontation with the institutions of the Money Economy. Far better are our prospects for changing the story that legitimates their power. Everything else then follows.40

To summarize, it bears repeating the three major narratives described by Korten in his book before we go to the next section of my book that intro- duces the three synthesized and stratified visions that embodies most, if not all of the values, principles and purposes of these emerging narratives.

Narrative 1: The Living Universe. The Living Universe narrative recognizes and celebrates the unity of all being. It connects the domains of science and religion and draws from the breadth and depth of human experience and knowledge. It reveals the wonder and complexity of the creative, self-organizing processes by which the universe unfolds toward ever greater complexity, beauty, awareness, and possibility. Respected scientists write popular books about consciousness, intelligence, and the need to move beyond material reductionism in science. Leading spiritual thinkers write books and articles on sacred activism connecting the insights of spiritual and scientific inquiry. Interfaith conversations move beyond seeking mutual religious tolerance to acknowledge, honor, and synthesize the contributions of diverse spiritual traditions with the contributions of science. The emerging synthesis draws from the Distant Patriarch cosmology the insight that there is agency and purpose in creation. It draws from the Grand Machine cosmology the insight that there is order and chance in creation. It draws from the Mystical Unity cosmology the insight that matter is a mental construct, consciousness it the unifying ground of creation, we are all connected, and ego can be a barrier to enlightenment without a disciplined alignment with cosmic purpose.41 The Living Universe cosmology describes a universe that bears far more resemblance to a seed bursting forth to express itself as a magnifi- cent tree than to a mechanical clock running down as its spring unwinds. It provides the foundational frame for a Sacred Life and Living Earth story in turn frames a Living Economy for a Living Earth.42 Narrative 2: The Living Earth. This not simply a poetic turn of phrase. It is a pragmatic, evidence-based statement of truth with profound implications.43 Indigenous Living Earth cosmologies to more ade- 65 quately capture the grandeur, complexity, and mystery of creation than any of those more familiar cosmologies reveals by itself. 44 The Living Earth narrative honors Earth as a creative, adapting, resilient, evolving, self-organizing community of life and the birth mother of our species. It acknowledges our dependence on and responsibility to contribute to the adaptive, resilient processes, and shares energy, nutrients, water, and information to maintain and enhance the conditions of Earth life. Elements of the Living Earth narrative are finding their way into international and local forums. With leadership from indigenous communities, civil society groups produced a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth at the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in Cochabamba, Bolivia, in 2010. It includes an eloquent statement affirming Earth as a living being. (See “Universal Declaration of Rights of Mother Earth.”) These groups brought the Living Earth/Earth Mother frame and language into the debates of Rio+20 as a counter to those who would put a price on Mother Earth and offer her up for sale. Communities across the United States are passing resolutions that affirm that nature has natural rights and that corporations do not.45 Narrative 3: The Living Economy: This narrative frames the culture and institutions of a new economy that works in co-productive partnership with nature to maintain the conditions essential to all life. It supports and enhances Earth’s living systems. It provides livelihood opportunities for all people. It is radically democratic. And it advances Living Earth’s evolutionary journey. The Living Economy narrative is integral to the fast-growing New Economy movement. Business people speak of the responsibility of business to serve the common good. Investors speak of a living return the combines a modest financial return with the benefits of living in a healthy community with a healthy ecosystem. The homilies on economic justice of Pope Francis reach a vast audience with foundational moral truths. Multiracial leadership groups like Movement Generation are advancing a generative Earth frame among grassroots groups on our connection to nature and a caring community in which wealth is equitably distributed. We are learning that committing acts of kindness brings joy. Thoughtful economists propose new indexes for economic performance that acknowledge the detrimental impacts of economic growth on people and nature. Local communities are coming together in na-

66 tional and global alliances like the American Independent Business Alliance, the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies, the New Economy Coalition, and Transition Towns to rebuild local economies based on locally owned socially and environmentally conscious business. Media outlets like YES! Magazine share the stories of possibility from such initiatives with an expanding global audience. A widening public conversation melds these many insights into a grand synthesis story that reveals the inseparable interconnection of all being, the presence and creative power of distributed intelligent agency, and a profound cosmic purpose. The emerging story gives our human lives deep meaning, presents a compelling vision of human possibility, and invites our active participation in making that vision a reality. All the while, the Sacred Money and Markets story continues to lose credibility. The Money Economy’s corporate robots are far more vulnerable than they—or we—realize.46 Living The Future: Ever larger numbers of thoughtful people are walking away from the idolatrous money story and the institutions it serves. They organize to live in co-productive community with one another and nature in ways that support their won and nature’s self- healing. The leadership, learning, and decision making for this work are— and must be—in the hands of local people motivated by a concern for the health, resilience, and sustained will-being of the communities in which they live. They share lessons, experience, and inspiration freely via the Internet. They build communities of place that reduce dependence on money, increase local control and self-determination, and advance democracy as a way of life. Voluntary simplicity, small houses, backyard and community gardens, and urban agriculture area all growing in popularity. The Liv- ing Building Challenge, which is driving the leading edge of the green building movement, shifts the building-industry frame from walling us off from one another and nature. The New Economy movement, devoted to rebuilding local economies grounded in living-system principles and committed to creating an economy that works for all people and nature, is attracting rapidly expanding support—including support from local governments. In each such initiative, participants redirect their life energy from the institutions of the dying extractive Money Economy to the institutions of the emerging generative Living Economy. As the Living Economy

67 gains in scale and visibility, it provides a growing range of attractive opportunities for employment, shopping, and investment for others inclined to join in the cause of life. They establish family farms and farmers’ market and promote urban agriculture to rebuild local food systems. They revive rites of passage that reconnect generations to one another and to forces of life seen and unseen. They establish and patronize locally owned human-scale businesses that rebuild local ownership, self-reliance, and self-determination. They work with local governments to create bicycle-friendly streets, incorporate living-building standards into building codes, create zero-waste local recycling systems, install wind- and solar-energy generation, create and move their money to local banks and credit unions. They promote cooperative ownership and introduce indicator systems by which people can assess local economic performance against indicators of the health of people, community, and nature. Architects, builders, and urban planners create living buildings, neighborhoods, communities, and cites. Young and old come together to create eco-villages that bear resemblance to traditional extended family households and organize to produce a portion of their own sub- stance to reduce their dependence on money and markets. Social entrepreneurs organize car and bicycle sharing. Communities organize to manage nearby forest ecosystems to restore and maintain forest health and provide livelihood opportunities for local people. Young people return to the land and learn to live from farming and ranching using methods that support the regeneration of soils and aquifers. The physical encampments of the Occupy movement served as social laboratories in which a new generation explored the processes and possibilities of radical self-organization in community without money or centralizing governance structures. Many initiatives involve local businesses, nonprofits, associations, or cooperatives. Some involve only informal arrangements among friends and neighbors. There may be monetary exchange, but profit is rarely the driver. The more sophisticated organizations are asking, “Does our work merely provide temporary relief for a few victims of a failed system, or does it make an incremental contribution to shifting power from Money Economy values and institutions to Living Economy values and institutions?” National People’s Action is a leading example.[2]

Rather than provide temporary shelter for the homeless, such organizations work with local governments to exercise eminent domain and re- cover homes illegally foreclosed by Wall Street banks and return them to their proper owners or get them into the hands of the otherwise homeless to turn the homeless into homeowners. Rather than establish a new soup kitchen, they create cooperative community gardens on rooftops and vacant lots for the jobless and underpaid to grow their own food with pride and dignity and reconnect with one another and nature. Each time an otherwise dependent and excluded person begins to gain control over their means of basic living there is a modest but incremental shift in power that contributes to a new frame of possibility. Individually, most such actions fall short of actual system change, but they contribute to a new frame for system-scale initiatives with the potential to create supportive system-level rule changes. All the system level, rather than see marginal regulatory restraints on the destructive practices of predatory megabanks, such organizations campaign to break them up and convert them into community banks cooperatively owned by the people who depend on them for financial services—an example of deep power-shifting system transformation.47 A Movement Of Movements: Close up, these individual efforts seem scattered, marginal, even naïve in the face of the corporate power they dare to challenge. Step back, however, and we discern the outlines of an emerging inter- racial, intercultural global-scale social movements—converging on a trajectory toward a Living Earth future. Lacking a name and a unifying story, this movement of movements remains invisible to the broader public, the institutional robots of the Money Economy it seeks to displace, and even to itself. Yet at every hand, this movement challenges the power and legitimacy of the Money Economy’s corporate robots as it surrounds them and occasionally infiltrates them to recruit allies from the ranks of the merce- naries and indentured servants in their employ. Imperial rulers, whether king or corporate robot, depend on the obedience of the ruled. Their seemingly invincible power is an illusion. They hold only the power that the people yield to them. When people walk away from their corporate masters to rebuild their lives and communities, they reclaim for themselves & their communities, they reclaim for themselves and their community their labor, ingenuity, resources, & vision.

When the people of the original thirteen British colonies of North America chose to walk away from the British king, they did not seek a more benevolent king. They sought an end to monarchy in favor of democracy. Those who walk away from servitude to corporate robots seek an end to corporate rule in favor of living self-governing democracies of people and nature. We already have enormous momentum in the many millions of people who at some level recognize the failure of the old story. These people are mobilizing to resist further corporate destruction of life as they live into being the culture and institutions of a living future. Each initiative contributes to a growing momentum for change. To become a truly transformative force, however, the emerging movement needs a shared public story—one that connects and frames the movement’s varied elements and the vision of possibility that together we have the potential to make real. A compelling and broadly inclusive story of possibility is the key to building the movement’s visibility and coherence.48 Imagine A World... in which we organize ourselves as members of living communities of place. Human-made structures are adapted to their natural settings, support natural setting, support natural processes, and connect people with one another and nature. People meet their needs for energy, nutrients, materials, and information in co-productive partnership with the natural living systems of the place they live. There are no concrete jungles, food deserts, strip malls, or sprawling suburbs. There are gardens everywhere, growing a profuse diversity of beautiful fruits, vegetables, and flowers. Human settlements organize as self-reliant bioregional food, energy, and water sheds. Major settlements feature a high-population-density car- free urban core designed around public parks, walkways, bicycle paths, and urban gardens. The boundaries of local government jurisdictions co- incide with their primary food, energy, and water sheds. Most people are housed in multifamily, cooperatively owned living units of diverse designs that blend with their landscape clustered around shared facilities: laundries, guest and meeting rooms, composting facilities, solar and geothermal energy heating systems, and office workspaces and support facilities. Neighbors share tools and implements and look out for one another’s children at play in car-free commons areas. Eco-village-style neighborhoods and districts share facilities for the management of nutrients, water, and energy. Many neighborhood and district eco-villages organize as locally owned, self-sustaining economic

units offering a variety of locally owned, self-sustaining economic units offering a variety of locally owned commercial and recreational facilities and investment or employment opportunities reflective of the distinctive tastes, interests, skills, and personal preferences of their residents. An urban core serves as the bioregion’s cultural, educational, and economic hub, providing it with excellent cultural, educational, scientific, and manufacturing facilities. Each of the region’s distinctive eco-villages makes its unique contribution to the diverse, resilient, self-reliant life of the whole. For eco-villages located in intentionally sparsely populated rural areas, economic activities center on the restoration and sustainable management of soils, forests, and fisheries. Rural eco-villages offer urban visitors opportunities for nature education, recreation, and spiritual practice. Various forms of public transportation—including car-and-ride-share facilities—connect eco-villages to one another and the urban core. Every person has a direct connection to every other person in the world by high-speed Internet and seamless videoconferencing, and entertainment facilities. Most people on most days have no need to venture from the boundaries of the urban core or eco-village in which they live. They meet most mobility needs by walking and biking. Young people are encouraged to take a year to explore the world by foot, train, and ship—connecting to its varied geographies and cultures and building diverse friendships they will maintain throughout their lives through digital communication. Hang-gliding is a favorite sport. Jet air travel is mainly a distant memory. Money, markets, businesses, and governments are all part of this picture, but they are structure to support balanced and mutually beneficial exchanges within and among communities. People read about the money-seeking corporate robots that once ruled the world and wonder how and why their ancestors tolerated such insanity.49

Such new narratives are needed more than ever. For “the power of the institutions of economic and political domination depends on their ability to perpetuate a falsified and inauthentic cultural trance based on beliefs and values at odds with reality, break the trance, replace the values of an inauthentic culture with the values of an authentic culture grounded in a love of life rather than a love of money, and people will realign their life energy and bring forth the life-serving institutions of a new era. The key is to change the stories by which we define ourselves.”50 After all, for another world to be possible, another narrative is necessary. Envisioning then comes.

THE GRAND SOCIETY REIMAGINING THE FUTURE BEYOND A BETTER DEAL & THE GREAT SOCIETY THRU A GLOBAL MARSHAL PLAN, TEAL NEW DEAL & APOLLO ALLIANCE OF S3K

The narrative creating and vision-building efforts of the recent past has been part of the long view of a grand continuum of human evolution based on what Bill Moyer, co-author of Doing Democracy, described as “an alternative ‘people’s globalization’s worldview [that] encompasses a shared commitment to building a peaceful, environmentally sustainable and socially just global society.” He elaborates:

[A society where progress] would instead be measured by ecological health, the advancement of human rights, and community-defined quality of life. This vision celebrates diversity and will most likely be made up of self-sustaining, regional and local economies. Trade in goods and services would be done in a way that raises living standards when workers and farmers are fairly compensated. As this movement history shows, grassroots globalization and fair trade have already begun to promote the cooperation and compassion needed to create an ecologically sane society in which everyone has dignified work, housing, education, healthcare, nutritious food and a healthy community.51

Such a vision is seconded by Mary Clark's book Ariadne’s Thread where she also offers a similar view, “the beginnings of an alternative vision, one that seems to me provide the surest path to survival.”

It is a path of decentralization, of local self-sufficiency, of cultural diversity, yet one where a global vision is shared by all. It is a path emphasizing cooperation rather than competition, diversity rather than uni- formity, social bondedness rather than self-centered-ness, sacred meaning rather than material consumption. It is, thus, a path that requires the substantially new ways of thinking that Einstein told us we must find if we are to survive. Yet it is also a path that draws upon the best of the past. It is this visionary aspect [...] I hope, will make it of interest not only to college students, but to all concerned citizens—the ‘activists’ in environmentalism, in the peace movement, in international affairs, in social work and feminism and minority rights: in short, for all those who care about the future of humankind as a whole.52

And according to David Korten, he writes of his experiences with the In- ternational NGO Forum “that met in parallel with the official UN Confer- ence on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.”

The NGO forum brought together some eighteen thousand private citizens representing virtually all the world’s nationalities, races, religions, and social classes to engage in drafting citizen “treaties” spelling out shared values and common goals. I had the privilege of participating in the NGO forum in Rio and in drafting its final declaration. […For] all their profound diversity, the people who came together for the forum shared similar values, and a similar vision for the just, sustainable, inclusive, and democratic world they were committed to creating. The consensus building was carried forward subsequently under the auspices of a private international commission that organized consultations involving thousands of individuals and hundreds of organizations from all regions of the world. That process produced a document called the Earth Charter. Often referred to as a people’s Declaration of Inter- dependence, the Earth Charter elaborates four overarching principles of Earth Community: 1) respect and care for the community of life; 2) ecological integrity; 3) social and economic justice; and 4) democracy, nonviolence, and peace.(6) It is also a declaration of universal responsibility to and for one another and living Earth […].53

Artists, activists, community leaders, spiritual progressives and socially conscious businesses people have been bringing about this positive change at a small and incremental pace. It’s being done quietly and locally through social innovations that are subtly changing the culture—creating new communities that model a new way of life, all who have contributed, perhaps sub- consciously, to the integrative vision that the Society Of Third Millennium (S3K) encompasses.

Groups are putting forth solution-oriented proposals. Public Citizen is working on an alternative to Fast Track that will ensure that trade policies are developed in a democratic, balanced way. Civil society organizations and trade unions united under the umbrella of the Hemispheric So- cial Alliance have drafted a “people’s globalization” initiative called the Alternatives for the Americas. This document contains specific policy recommendations on issues ranging from food security to immigration. It will be used to educate various sectors of society including the media and 73

decision makers about a positive alternative to the Free Trade Area of the Americas, a corporate globalization pact that is currently being negotiated in secret by all the governments in the western hemisphere except Cuba. Human centered economic alternatives to the corporate controlled global economy, such as community supported agriculture, fair trade, community banking and local currencies are being successfully implemented in piecemeal fashion by groups working within the alternatives sub-movement. These ecologically sane and socially just alternatives should be coalesced and expanded as part of a clearly defined strategy.54

In the past, the aforementioned “visions,” were too diffused to make any profound impact and did not automatically add up to a coherent framework. Such efforts, as commendable as they may be, fell short to provide us with a cohesive vision to generate a single overriding objective that would act as a National Unifying Purpose (NUP), and mobilize all the different factions of activism under one Unified Mega-Movement Campaign (UMC), which would encapsulate the extraordinary integration of all of the above alternatives into a clearly defined plan and holistic view of a positive future. An essay written by Jan Lundberg in the January 2005 Culture Change column echoes the same sentiments regarding the fragmentation of today’s activism.

Leaders of the mini-movements today, such as the anti-war movement, appear to have severely limited vision as a matter of policy or narrow mindedness. The fact that some protests have large turnouts is not proof of effectiveness that could make history. These days the protests are shrinking and are too seldom to indicate a rising tide. Socioeco- nomic conditions that people are subjected to already, without seeing many body bags coming back from Iraq, are sufficiently dire to warrant wide interest and mass action […]. There exists today almost no social movement of a kind that leads human industrial society into a new, safe direction. This may be because (1) the anti-war movement, for example, offers little to the public in terms of a vision of sustainable living, and (2) the likely participants and leaders of a vanguard have no territory. The missing ingredient for the nascent movement, or diffuse base of activists and culture changers, is cohesion. Enough cohesion can create Virtual Territory as a physical network for the Cultural Revolution. Such a movement could make headway in replacing the systematic destruction of our biosphere by the mushrooming population of people, cars, etc. Just waiting for the effects of peak oil is counter-indicated [...].

[…The] movement to create a new culture of sustainability [is not] making clear headway [...]. [But] help may be on the way. Social movements may not have appreciable impact prior to the likely crash in petroleum consumption [...]. A market-aggravated, historic crisis of supply will probably help bring about and hasten the crash. Perhaps a more cohesive movement could start now to do such things as use energy sensibly and restructure social relations toward rediscovered mutual aid and cooperation. [The “Transition (Town) Movement” would emerge a year later in Europe and in the United States by 2008 that spread more quickly than overseas initially]. If we acknowledge that we are too separated and alienated to do enough good or do well enough for ourselves, even though we have much knowledge and historical perspective, then what is the problem? It may be simply one of strategy [...] that transcends and remedies the overstressed, time-constrained and often wacked out aspect of the activist population. There are enough smart and informed people, but they don’t use the right combination of power, tools and resources—all of which are at hand.55

It’s true; the traditional activist community has failed to move forward in strategic collaboration that could maximize our transformative impact on society. The first key step to unlocking our collective social potential is through a coalescence of common values, principles and goals among libertarians, tea partiers, progressives and radicals through a cohesive vision like The Society of the Third Millennium (S3K) consisting of ecological sustainability, integral culture, direct democratic governance and enlightened economy composed of various vision fragments of the past, while incorporating newer and more coherent versions synthesized through multiple mega-phases that I call the “Three Transformative Thresholds” for the Society of the Third Mil- lennium. This is an integral vision that has already been in the processing of implementation for the past ten years, whether activists know it or not.

THE SOCIETY OF THE THIRD MILLENNIUM: A Holistic Vision By The Integral Neo-Transcendentalists Through The S3K Synthesis

It’s 2040, three decades after “THE DYNAMIC DECALOGUE,” was conceived in 2010 and a year later unfurled as the Guerrilla X Art of “The Monolithic Milestones Project” at the Georgia Guidestones that “broadcast- ed” the blueprint for our evolutionary transformation with the foresight of the forthcoming “apocalyptic” ailments that accelerated in 2020 when oil hit

75 an all-time high due to the drastic decline of petroleum production, geopolitical conflict in the Middle East and the catastrophic consequences of climate chaos, which exacerbated the economic tribulations of “The Greatest Depression.” In such a scenario emerged The Integral Neo-Transcendentalists— Metamodernists—the vanguard among the 80 Million Cultural Creatives in the United States and 300 million worldwide. The Integral Neo-Transcen- dentalists became the leaders of the Cultural Creatives and the New Progres- sives through their leap to “second tier consciousness” by becoming aware of the Integral Operating System (IOS) and adopting the Integral Life Practice (ILP) as pioneered by post-metaphysical philosopher Ken Wilber. It galvanized the multitudes to transform and transition from the converging crises of civiliza- tional collapse of “The Great Unraveling” to “The Great Turning” of an integral worldview and culture, where all basic human needs are met like non- toxic water, nutritious food, adequate housing and social health of the community, abundance of technology and renewable energy, free access to goods, services and recreation without the external restrictions of ownership. Maxi- mization of freedom and happiness would evolve by reclaiming our childlike curiosity and zeal for life in a post carbon society focused on relocalization, self-fulfillment, social awareness, art and creativity, new forms of intellectual exploration, optimization of production methods through the application of machine automation and computer technology in a “Cybernated Industrial System” with no use for money, credit, debt, barter, servitude of any kind. The abolishment of central banking, social stratification, labor for income, poverty, hunger, police, prisons, war, the military, politics, laws, advertise- ments, the mechanism of cyclical consumption ending the various aberrant behaviors like crime, violence and addictions, while achieving the radical reduction of waste and pollution. A new “Emancipation Proclamation” was executed that finally freed humanity from the repetitive, mundane and arbitrary occupational roles that kill the human spirit—all as a result of the “Community Resilience of Relocalization” that formed a new bottom-up foundation from the “Four Pillars of the Post Carbon Third Industrial Revo- lution (TIR)” that ushered in the new ecologically sustainable “Era of the Empathetic Civilization” as a result of the construction of the “Hydrogen Energy Web (HEW)” leading to the eventual establishment of a “Resource- Based Economy (RBE).” Once again, it is a vision already in the making for over a decade by the Cultural Creatives in the social and consciousness movements like the fundamental social change strands of the Integral Move- ment, Evolutionary Enlightenment, Transition US, and The Zeitgeist Movement.

S3K IN THREE TRANSFORMATIVE THRESHOLDS: The Purpose Of The Vision & The Three-Decade Master Plan

The following scaffold vision is composed of past and present fragments from change agents like libertarians of We The People’s “Continental Congress 2009,” and progressives from “The Continental Congress 2.0” of the 99- Declaration Work Group inspired by OWS, and radicals from the “2012 Occu- py National Gathering,” the relocalization efforts of the new greens from the Transition Network and Ron Paul Libertarians, while also incorporating other more coherent versions and synthesized through multiple mega-phases to be implemented in a “wartime mobilization” manner once it becomes publicly proclaimed in a national rallying call. S3K 1.0—The Transition Movement’s “Community Resilience through Post Carbon Relocalization” in ten years (2010 to 2020); S3K 2.0—“The Decentralization of Renewable Energy Pro- duction and Distribution through The Post-Carbon Third Industrial Revolution of the Hydrogen Economy” in 10 years (2020-2030); S3K 3.0—“The Resource- Based Economy” of The Venus Project as advocated by The Zeitgeist Movement and envisioned by social engineer and structural architect Jacques Fresco to be completed in 10 years (2030-2040). Each transformative threshold is a vision from different activist groups, collectives, organizations, movements, philosophies and liberation theories from anarchism to libertarianism. The S3K synthesis of these three transformative visions is made possible due to the similarity of alternative worldviews, values and culture that advocates a different social, economic and political system as a result of the end of the fossil fuels era. There will be some overlap and even concurrent development for a few years before the next phase dominate the previous one through inclusion and transcendence, continuity and transformation to create a truly integral culture. You will notice that within each of the three transformative thresholds of S3K there will be gaps or underdeveloped sectors that will get filled in by the other phases. For example, there isn’t much of a description in “Governance” within the S3K 1.0 version of The Transition Movement due to the need to cooperate with existing local governments to decentralize, whereas you will find a more radical notion of government that eliminates politics through cybernation in The Resource-Based Economy version of S3K 3.0. How much time we have before climate chaos catastrophically tips and the drastic decline of oil enters its terminal arc of decline leading to the probable extinction of humanity, no one knows, so the three thresholds serve as multiple mitigating levels of progression towards higher levels of holism, community, conservation, efficiency and ecological sustainability. Finally, the ultimate end goal of all three transformative thresholds of the “S3K Synthesis Vision” is the “Emergence of Earth Community” and “The 77

Eradication of Empire.” It integrates the best ideas available to us and ends the oppressive social control of the economic and power elites through debt enslavement by the monetary market systems of capitalism, socialism and communism. This “Integral Metamodern Manifesto,” is the unifying theme we’ve been seeking for decades if not centuries. It is time to see the unimaginable and be awe-inspired with the passion to pursue the path co-created by those in the past to provide a foundation to build upon and yet adaptable to new social innovations of the present and future, in order to avert the apocalyptic scenarios scientifically predicted and religiously prophesized by converting our Age of Anxiety into an Epic Era of Evolutionary Transformation. A process of progressive cultural development based on the biological evolution that has been in the making for millions of millenniums.

S3K 1.0: THE TRANSITION U.S. MOVEMENT For Community Resiliency Thru Post Carbon Relocalization

The Transition Movement is an alternative building network that originated in 2005 by Bob Hopkins in England. Come 2019 it will be ten years in existence inside the United States. S3K 1.0 (The Community Resiliency of Post Carbon Relocalization) is really a suggested acceleration of the past 10 years of relocalization but on a massive mobilization scale equal to that of a National Unifying Purpose (NUP) by Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) to strategically collaborate with counter-institutional resistance movements that provide the necessary sense of urgency so badly needed in alternative building efforts. Not to mention, defend and safeguard the gains of creating a post-carbon society against corporate threats and fossil fuel industry encroachments like the natural gas companies plundering local towns and rural communities’ very existence by poisoning their water, polluting the surrounding environment and destroying their local sovereignty and economic livelihood through high-energy intensive hydro-fracking by the fossil fuel industry and done by drilling wells that force methane gas out of trapped soil, rocks and granite with wasteful use of high pressure water and toxic chemi- cals. Transition U.S. offers such a new possibility and the following excepts from their manual, The Transition Handbook, provides the process and principles of “visioning,” needed to reimagine a new future of a post carbon society. “The concept of resilience is central to this [movement].”

In ecology, the term resilience refers to an ecosystem’s ability to roll with external shocks and attempted enforced changes. Brian Walker defines it thus:

“Resilience is the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and re- organise while undergoing change, so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity and feedbacks.”(7) In the context of communities and settlements, it refers to their ability to not collapse at first sight of oil or food shortages, and to their ability to respond with adaptability to disturbance. The UK truck drivers’ dispute of 2000 offers a valuable lesson here. Within the space of three days the UK economy was brought to the brink. So it became clear that the country was about a day away from food rationing and civil unrest. Shortly before the dispute was resolved, Sir Peter Davis, Chairman of Sainsbury's, sent a letter to Tony Blair saying that food shortages would appear in ‘days rather than weeks’. The fragility of the illusion that, as DEFRA said in a 2003 statement, ‘national food security is neither necessary nor is it desirable,' became glaringly obvious. It became clear that we no longer have any resilience left to fall back on, and are in reality, three days away from hunger at a moment, evoking the old saying that ‘civilisa- tion’ is only three completely reliant on the utterly unreliable, and we have no Plan B. The concept of resilience goes far beyond the better-known concept of sustainability, A community might, for example, campaign for plastics recycling, where all of its industrial and domestic plastic waste is collected for recycling. While almost certainly being better for the environment as a whole, it adds almost no resilience to the community. Perhaps a better solution (alongside the obvious one of producing less plastic waste), would be to develop other uses for waste plastics requiring minimal processing, perhaps producing tightly compressed building blocks or an insulating product for local use. Simply collecting it and sending it away doesn’t leave the community in a stronger position, nor is it more able to respond creatively to change and shock. The same is true of some of the strategies put forward by climate change campaigns that don't take peak oil into consideration. Planting trees to create community woodlands may lock up carbon (though the science is still divided on this) and be good for biodiversity, but does little to build resilience; whereas the planting of well-designed agroforestry /food forest plantings does. The Millennium Forests initiative missed a huge opportunity to put in place a key resource: we could by now have food forests up and down the country starting to bear fruit (both metaphorically and literally). Economist David Fleming argues that the benefits for a community with enhanced resilience will be that: “1) If one part is destroyed, the shock will not ripple through the whole system. 2) There is wide diversity

79 of character and solutions developed creatively in response to local circumstances. 3) It can meet its needs despite the substantial absence of travel and transport. 4) The other big infrastructures and bureaucracies of the intermediate economy are replaced by fit-for-purpose local alternatives at drastically reduced cost . “Increased resilience and a stronger local economy do not mean that we put a fence up around our towns and cities and refuse to allow anything in or out. It is not a rejection of commerce or somehow a return to a rose-tinted version of some imagined past. What it does mean is being more prepared for a leaner future, more self-reliant, and prioritizing the local over the imported.”56 “A resilient system is adaptable and diverse. It has some redundancy built in. A resilient perspective acknowledges that change is constant and prediction difficult in a world that is complex and dynamic. It understands that when you manipulate the individual pieces of a system, you change that system in unintended ways. Resilience thinking is a new lens for looking at the natural world we are embedded in and the man-made world we have imposed upon it,” Ward C. In a resilient system, individual nodes—like people, companies, communities—are able to draw on support and resources from else- where, but they’re also self-sufficient enough to provide for their essential needs in an emergency. Yet in our drive to hyperconnect and global- ize all the world’s economic and technological networks, we’ve forgotten the last half of this injunction,” Thomas Homer-Dixon, The Upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity and the Renewal of Civilization, Souvenir Press, 2007. Three Factors Determine The Degree Of A Community’s Resili- ence:

1) “The first revolves around the extent to which communities can direct and shape decisions that affect them. As Adger puts it, ‘resilience also requires communities and societies to have the ability to self-organize and to manage resources and make decisions in a manner that promotes sustainability.’(3) Increased local democracy and engagement are key.

2) “The second is the ability of communities to learn and adapt. Being a resilient community means having the necessary skills, which may well not be skills taught in schools today. New skills and flexibility in education are key.

3) “The third is the need for resilient communities to be planned. This intentional aspect, of building resilience being a collective design project, is central to transition.”57

The Three Ingredients Of A Resilient System: “According to studies of what makes ecosystems resilient,”(5) there are three features that are central to a system’s ability to reorganize itself following shocks. They are: Diversity, Modularity and Tightness of Feedbacks.

1) Diversity relates to the number of elements that comprise a particular system, be they people, species, businesses, institutions or sources of food. The resilience of a system comes not only from the number of the species that make up that diversity, but also from the number of connections between them. Diversity also refers to the diversity of functions in our settlements (rather than just relying on one—say, tourism or mining) and a diversity of potential responses to challengers, leading to a greater flexibility. Diversity of land use—farms, market gardens, aquaculture, forest gardens, nut tree plantings, and so on—are key to the resilience of the settlement, and their erosion in recent years has paralleled the rise of monocultures, which are by definition an absence of diversity.”(6)

“Another meaning of diversity is that of diversity between systems. The exact set of solutions that will work in one place will not necessarily work in other places: each community will assemble its own solutions, responses and tools. This matters for two reasons. Firstly because it makes top-down approaches almost redundant, as those at the top lack the knowledge of local conditions and how to respond to them. Secondly, because resilience-building is about working on small changes to lots of niches in the place, making lots of small interventions rather than a few large ones.”(7)

2) The term modularity, according to ecologists Brian Walker and David Salt, relates to ‘the manner in which the components that make up a system are linked’. Towards the end of 2007, the Northern Rock bank crisis led to major problems and uncertainty in the British banking system. It was caused by over-lending to high-risk house-buyers in the us thousands of miles away, but within a short period of time one system had knocked on to another and then another, showing how the globalized networks, often trumpeted as one of globalization’s great strengths, can in fact also 81

be one of its great weaknesses. The over-networked nature of modern, highly connected systems allow shock to travel rapidly through them, with potentially disastrous effects.

A more modular structure means that the parts of a system can more effectively self-organize in the event of shock. For example, as a result of the globalization of the food industry, animals and animal parts are moved around the world, leading to increased occur- rences of diseases such as bird flu and foot-and-mouth disease. Re- ducing animal transportation and reintroducing local abattoirs and processing would lead to a more modular system, with local breeds for local markets and a much reduced risk of disease spreading with the rapidity that we have seen in recent outbreaks.

When designing energy descent pathways for Transition Initiatives, the concept of modularity is key: maximizing modularity with more internal connections reduces vulnerability to any disruptions of wider networks. Local food systems, local investment models, and so on, all add to this modularity, meaning that we engage with the wider world but from an ethic of net- working and information sharing rather than of mutual dependence.

3) Tightness of Feedbacks refers to how quickly and strongly the consequences of a change in one part of the system are felt and responded to in other parts. Walker and Salt write: “Centralized governance and globalization can weaken feedbacks. As feedbacks lengthen, there is an increased chance of crossing a threshold without detecting it in a timely fashion.”? In a more localized system, the results of our actions are more obvious. We don’t want excessive use of pesticides or other pollutants in our area, but seem happier to be oblivious to their use in other parts of the world. In a globalized system, the feedbacks about the impacts of soil erosion, low pay and pesticide use provide weak feedback signals. Tighten- ing feedback loops will have beneficial results, allowing us to bring the consequences of our actions closer to home, rather than their being so far from our awareness that they don’t even register. When people live off the grid in terms of energy, they are more mindful about their consumption because they are closer to its generation – the feedback loop is smaller.58

Transition As A Fresh Take On Resilience: Charlie Edwards, in “Re- silient Nation,” a report about resilience written for the think tank De- 82 mos, came up with a description of resilience which is probably the most useful I have found: “the capacity of an individual, community or system to adapt in order to sustain an acceptable level of function, structure and identity”. This stresses how adaptability is at the heart of resilience. What would this explanation of resilience look like if we saw the need to be more adaptable not as a challenge but as an opportunity? In Transition, we take Edwards’ definition of resilience a few steps further. We look at resilience as more than ‘sustaining’ current models and practices. Rather, in the light of ‘energetic precariousness’, it becomes a rethink of assumptions about infrastructure and systems that should lead to a more sustainable, resilient and enriching low-carbon economy. Making a community more resilient, if viewed as an opportunity for an economic and social renaissance for a new culture of enterprise and re-skilling, should lead to a healthier and happier community while reducing its vulnerability to risk and uncertainty. In practice, a more adaptable community trains its young people in a wide range of skills, more decisions are taken at the local level, the community owns and manages more of its own assets and has access to some of the land adjoining it […]. Be- coming more resilient is a positive and enriching step forward; resilience is reframed as a historic opportunity for a far-reaching rethink. One of the key questions posed about resilience is “Resilient to what?” Are we building resilience in the face of peak oil and climate change, or of terrorism and pandemics? To weather-related disruption or interruptions to key supplies? What we see as the greatest potential disruptions will shape our actions. While it is clearly not an either/or situation, I would argue strongly that peak oil, climate change and the precari- ous economic situation are so far-reaching and destabilizing that we really must give them precedence; the solutions that arise being markedly different from responses to the disruption of terrorism or pandemics. And, while solutions designed to boost resilience to peak oil (for example) might worsen climate change, being mindful of these three issues should enable a suitable response.59 Building Resilience Plus Cutting Carbon Emissions: a) Planned Relo- calization (building local resilience); b) Tradable Energy Quotas; c) De- centralized Energy Infrastructure; d) The Great Re-skilling; e) Localized Food Production (food feet); f) Energy Descent Planning; g) Local Cur- rencies; h) Local Medicinal Capacity; i) Local Composting; j) Productive Tree Plantings; k) Local Procurement Specifying Materials (Cob, Hemp

83 etc.); l) The Local PassivHaus; m) Local Community Investment Mecha- nisms; and n) Reciprocity. Relocalization (Why Small Is Inevitable), which is that a growing number of writers and thinkers now argue that the decline in availability of liquid fuels and their rising price will inevitably lead to the local scale becoming more important. As David Fleming writes, “Localization stands, at best, at the limits of practical possibility, but it has the decisive argument in its favor that there will be no alternative.” A recent report exploring the potential relocalization of the Bay Area in California, US defines relocalization thus: “The process by which a region, county, city or even neighborhood frees itself from an overdepend- ence on the global economy and invests its own resources to produce a significant portion of the goods, services, food and energy it consumes from its local endowment of financial, natural and human capital.”(2) I would argue that we need to be building the capability to produce locally those things that we can produce locally. It is, of course, easy to attack this idea by pointing out that some things, such as computers and frying-pans, can’t be made at a local level. However, there are a lot of things we could produce locally: a wide range of seasonal fruit and vegetables, fresh fish, timber, mushrooms, dyes, many medicines, furniture, ceramics, insulation materials, soap, bread, glass, dairy products, wool and leather products, paper, building materials, perfumes and fresh flowers—to name but a few. We aren’t looking to create a “nothing in, nothing out” economy, but rather to close economic loops where possible and to produce locally what we can. This raises enormous questions as to what a more localized manufacturing sector would look like, and the practicalities and economics of rebuilding a zero-carbon (or ideally carbon-negative) localized manufacturing sector—a sector that has been, over the past two decades, largely dismantled and outsourced to China. In our current society, everything is working against the kind of local resilience-building […]. We had a very clear example of this in Totnes when we asked the Regional Development Agency if they would fund our Local Food Directory: we were told that they couldn’t, because under the rules of the World Trade Organization they are unable to fund anything that promotes the idea that local produce is in any way superior to internationally sourced produce. There will always be trade between nations but we will be increasingly moving towards a situation where more of our core needs are locally sourced rather than imported, and the distances from which we import

84 goods will be contracting. There is a far stronger case for importing computers and electronics apples and chicken. Food is the most sensible place to begin rebuilding community resilience, but building materials, fabrics, timber, energy and currencies follow soon after. [W]e are not talking about complete localization, but rather about the building of resilience in both worlds, North and South—two processes running in parallel and in a mutually supportive way. For Vandana Shiva, the strengthening of local economies in the developing world can only happen if agriculture relocalizes in the West too. They are mutually intertwined. As she told the 2007 Soil Association conference: “The future of the world in farming is to produce more food in diversity, locally. And that can’t be done without substituting fossil fuels for renewable energy, including human energy. Then for the first time in the last 500 years since colonialism split us into the North and South, the colonized and the colonizer, we actually have the opportunity to be one family practicing a one-planet agriculture.”(7) For years people have argued over the economic advantages and dis- advantages of localisation. Peak oil puts an end to that debate. As David Korten puts it in his recent book The Great Turning: “People will say that Korten wants to change everything’. They miss the point. Everything is going to change. The question is whether we let the changes play out in increasingly destructive ways or embrace the deepening crisis as our time of opportunity…. It is the greatest creative challenge the species has ever faced.”(8) What Localization Doesn’t Mean: a) Self-sufficiency; b) Complete energy independence (off-the- grid settlements); c) Insular communities; d) Socially regressive slide back towards subsistence and poverty; e) Driv- ing out of multinational businesses and other employers; f) Harking back to some imagined “golden age”; g) Dominance by a few powerful local families and land-owners; h) A population forced to toil in the fields; i) A rejection of modern medicine and healthcare; j) Everybody hand-weaving their own underpants. What Localization Means: a) Increased meeting of local needs through local production where possible (especially for food, energy and construction). Import substitution. b) Mixture of micro-renewables, greatly increased energy-efficiency and community ownership of grid- connected large-scale renewables. c) A global network of communities localizing their economies but sharing their experiences and advice. A global process of resilience—building in a range of settings. d) Trading still happens but on a lesser scale. Where international trade happens, it is

85 done fairly and in the lowest-carbon ways possible. “The essence of localization is to enable communities around the world to diversify their economies so as to provide for as many of their needs as possible from relatively dose to home ... this does not mean eliminating trade altogether, as some critics like to suggest. It is about finding a more secure and sustainable balance between trade and local production,” Helena Norb- erg-Hodge. e) Localization offers greater economic security and resilience than relying on more oil-vulnerable national and multinational businesses and an increasingly far-fetched “return to growth.” f) The development, in parallel to existing businesses, of a more diverse, more robust local economy, promoting social enterprise and community ownership of key assets and businesses. Localization does not start from an adversarial position, and indeed there may well be situations where collaboration with existing multinationals may be a skillful approach. g) The past was more resilient than today in some ways and less so in others. Localization is about combining the best of the old and the best of the new to design a response most appropriate to present-day challenges. h) Localization is designed with social justice and collaboration from the outset. Finding new models of land access will be key to its success. i) More localized communities will have a wider diversity of skills and more people will have more than one livelihood. Intensive food production, commercially or for personal consumption, will be a much more common skill and will be commonplace. Farming will regain the dignity and status it once enjoyed and become a much more respected career choice. j) Localization is not about a rejection of progress and science. The challenge is to see how modern medicine can continue to do what it does best in a markedly lower-energy context. k) This is not essential, but each to their own. If using nettles, remember they need processing first. How Local Is “Local?”: So what degree of localization might be possible? We are most likely not talking, as McInnes suggests, about each settlement “producing [its] own steel.” Different things clearly work better (and worse) on, and are economic at, different scales (although, as we have seen, these economies of scale will change). It is not practical, for example, for every place to manufacture its own computers or its own frying oars. Different things work best at different scales, as the table overleaf, from the new economics foundation (nef), showing the minimum size units for adequate economies of scale, suggests. This gives a useful sense of the kinds of scales we can be effective at, and where it is most practical to start. It leads to the question of what degree of localization is possible in a city—the model of growing food as

86 close as possible to where we live becomes far more complex when you live in the middle of Manchester. Later in this book we’ll look at how some people are starting to envisage how this might work. For now, the nef table gives us a good idea of the best areas for a Transition localization initiative, and which aspects are most likely to be economically viable first. Localization also doesn’t mean turning your back on the rest of the world in an insular retreat, as McInnes suggests. In an interview I did with Michael Shuman, he reasoned that the opposite is far more likely to be the case: “the wealth and the time and the resources that localization provides to a community enables it to be a more powerful and effective participant in international affairs.” This Is Not Just About Romanticizing Past: “The essence of localization is to enable communities around the world to diversify their economies so as to provide for as many of their needs as possible from relatively close to home… this does not mean eliminating trade altogether, as some critics like to suggest. It is about finding a more secure and sustainable balance between trade and local production,” Helena Norb- erg-Hodge.(12) Sometimes the accusation is thrown at those promoting Transition or localization that what they are suggesting is about a romanticized version of a past that never existed, where everyone grew carrots, had roses growing over their front door and policemen stood on street corners laughing uproariously. As McInnes puts it, Transition’s “vision of local production is a sustainable society filled with Saturday farmers’ markets, forever. For some, this would be a welcome retreat from the uncertain- ties of modernity to a mythical golden era which never actually existed.”(14) […Instead] what emerged was that there were some ways in which [previous time period before petroleum] seemed more resilient than today, and other ways in which it didn’t. In these respects it could have been argued to be more resilient: 1) There was a greater range of shops, trades and crafts, employment opportunities and land uses, in and around the town. 2) There was little need for cars, as most things were within walking distance, and public transport was good for longer jour- neys. 3) There was far more local food production, in back gardens, on allotments and in commercial market gardens, which were part of the town. 4) There were much stronger social networks and a higher level of people supporting and being dependent on each other. 5) Local government was more representative, the town having its own borough council. There were also some ways in which it was less resilient than at present:

87 a) There was much less diversity of race, culture, sexual expression and orientation, faith and religion, or political allegiance. I was told “You were either Protestant or Catholic, Labour or Conservative.” b) There was much less awareness that our actions had ecological consequences. c) It was a far more conservative community. d) Innovation and creative thinking were frowned on. I was told: “Anything innovative was suppressed ...” You’ve got an idea? “Well keep it to yourself.” The education system promoted learning facts and information rather than enquiry and creative thinking. So, rather than romanticizing the past, this exercise is very helpful in identifying what we might be able to learn from it. Of course, the period in question was one with much less money around, less expectation of owning material goods, much less cheap credit and personal indebtedness, a shared experience of austerity and a collective abhorrence of waste. It was also one far less bombarded by advertising, so people didn't know they “lacked” certain goods or experiences. Yet, with Mervyn King of the Bank of England warning in March 2011 of “a big long-run loss of living standards for all people in this country,” a new age of austerity may well be able to learn lessons from the previous one. We learn, for example, that people in a more resilient society can live happy lives with fewer consumer goods than most of us do today, that food production can be central to our lives, that a local economy can be more robust. diverse and equitably owned than most of those in Western countries today, and that a far wider range of livelihoods and businesses is possible. When people criticize such a perspective as being about ‘going back’, they assume that such a thing would even be possible. What we are really looking at here is designing the best way forward, based on asking the right questions and keeping the best of what we already have, while also learning lessons from the past.60 The Hierarchy Of Responses: Given the scale of the challenge presented by peak oil and climate change, am I suggesting that local responses will be sufficient? Is localization all we need? Not at all. Transi- tion is one of many responses emerging around the world on a wide range of scales in response to the unprecedented scale of the challenges we face. It is what Paul Hawken refers to as the Earth’s “immune system” kicking into action. Any successful response needs to operate on a range of scales…. While communities can inspire and lead by example, truly effective localization and resilience-building will also need government support in different ways. Transition is not about a retreat from our need for en-

88 gaged and visionary government; rather, it is designed to inspire that leadership. At the same time, change on the scale needed will struggle if enthusiastic communities do not seize the initiative. It will require brave legislation, the support of inspired and visionary people in planning, education, business and local government, and pio- neers to take risks and the first steps. Most of all, it will need us to realize that many of the obstacles to making this a reality lie with us, and that our willingness to change is central to success. Many of the challenges lie in our willingness to think big enough, to do things differently and to organize ourselves. Politically, Transition is increasingly creating a culture where currently unelectable policies can become electable. This is a hugely important role.61 Self-Reliance Community: “It’s easy to dismiss the principle of self-reliance by pointing to many complex products that communities cannot manufacture on their own. The goal of a self-reliant community, however, is not to create a Robinson Crusoe economy in which no resources, people or goods enter or leave. A self-reliant community simply should seek to increase control over its own economy as far as is practical,” Michael Shuman, Going Local, 2000. “The political economy of the future will be lean, flexible, locally self-reliant, ingenious, robust, intelligent and very different from our own,” David Fleming, Lean Logic: A Dic- tionary of Environmental Manners, 2007. Top-Down & Bottom Up: All of this reinforces why it is so important that we weave peak oil and climate change altogether in our decision making, and see them as being intrinsically linked. They are not separate issues […] it is only by considering them together that our solutions will have any hope of being effective. Transition Initiatives will function best in the context of a combination of top-down and bottom-up responses, none of which can address the challenge in isolation. The reality is that many of these responses are on their way, and are moving faster than we would have thought even a year ago. Serious thought appears to be being given at governmental level to the introduction of carbon rationing. After all, as David Fleming (the “inventor” of Tradable Energy Quotas ) observes, as oil and gas production start to deplete, their rationing will be inevitable: either an equitable rationing system will be introduced, or energy win be rationed by price, which is socially divisive. It is not a question of if, but when rationing begins, and the sooner we do it, the gentler it will be. There is increasing pressure and international diplomacy around the need for strong international action

89 on climate change, way beyond the woefully inadequate Kyoto Protocol. On an individual level, we should offer our support to any campaigns that drives forward any of the above, and direct our spending power when we go shopping to support businesses with a genuine commitment to lower energy use and sustainable business practice, in particular those whose practices build local resilience. However, the important point is that we don't need to wait for the above. Indeed, successful national and international responses are all more likely in an environment where community responses are abundant and vibrant. We can’t wait for governments to take the lead here. The UK Government’s position on peak oil (i.e. complete denial) is proof of this. The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DE- FRA), put it succinctly in 2002 when they wrote: Sustainable development cannot be imposed from above. It will not take root unless people across the country are actively engaged. The Hierarchy Of Responses: a) International: Strong international climate change protocols, Contraction and Convergence, a morato- rium on biodiesel production, Oil Depletion Protocol, rethinking economic growth, biodiversity protection. b) National: Strong climate change legislation, Tradeable Energy Quotas, a National Food Security Strategy, Devolution of Powers to Local Communities. c) Local: Transi- tion Initiatives, Energy Descent Plans, Climate-Friendly Communities, Community-Supported Agriculture, Land Trusts, Credit Unions, Locally- owned Energy Supply Companies (ESCOs), localism. Governance—Where Does Government Fit In?: It appears to me that there is a fracture in politics. The UK Government looks to the public and sees them as disengaged, apathetic and uninterested in the democratic process. The public often sees politicians as uncaring careerists who don’t have any interest in them or what is actually happening in their communities, apart from once every four years when an election comes round. Local planning consultation processes generate a lukewarm response at best. All this is happening at a time when, as we have seen, we need to be generating a response on a previously unseen scale: mobilizing individuals, communities, businesses, organizations and government institutions to work as effectively together as possible in order to maximize the chances of a smooth transition. Governments generally don’t lead, they respond. They are reactive, not proactive. It is essential that we remember that many of the decisions they will inevitably have to make as part of preparing for Powerdown are perceived to be pretty much inconceivable from an electoral perspective.

Take carbon rationing, for instance: few people would be brave enough at this stage to run for government on a ticket which promises people less every year—less car use and less energy availability. However, I see no reason why these ideas could not be made attractive to the electorate by the right candidates. If, through the creation of an Energy Descent Plan which has engaged the community and which offers a positive vision of a lower energy future, communities have set out where they want to go, then a very dynamic interface is created between communities, local and national government. Communities could set the agenda, saying to government, “here is our plan: it addresses all of the issue raised by the coming challenges of climate change and energy security, and it also will revitalize our local economy and our agricultural hinter-land, but it will work far better if carbon rationing is in place, and if the true costs of fossil fuels are reflected in goods and services.” The fear of change is removed for government, and they become swept along in a huge movement for change. Previously non-vote-winning policies become the norm. Recently, corporations have begun saying to the British Government, “We want you to start taking strong action on climate change, because we need to be able to start planning for this, and we need to know the framework within which we are operating.” Communities should be doing this too. We have to remember that we can do a huge amount without government, but we can also do a great deal more with them. Visioning (Harnessing The Power Of A Positive Vision): Also important […T]he concept of visioning, and the power that a vision of the future can have [is very important]. Too often environmentalist try to engage people in action by painting apocalyptic visions of the future as a way of scaring them into action. The question this part of the book asks is what would happen if we came at this other way round, painting a picture of the future so enticing that people instinctively feel drawn towards it. It is best to think of this as a revolution, not a guns, but of consciousness, which will be won by seizing the key myths, archetypes, es- chatologies and ecstasies so that life won’t seem worth living unless one is on the transforming energy’s side,” Gary Snyder.(1) “To save the planet, we do not need miraculous technical breakthroughs, or vast amounts of capital. Essentially we need a radical change in our thinking and behavior,” Ted Trainer.(2) “The uncertainty of our times is no reason to be certain about hopelessness,” Vandana Shiva.(3) “It is one thing to campaign against climate change and quite another to paint a compelling and engaging vision of a post-carbon world in such a way as to enthuse others

91 to embark on a journey towards it. We are only just beginning to scratch the surface of the power of a positive vision of an abundant future: one which is energy-lean, time-rich, less stressful, healthier and happier. Being able to associate images and a clear vision with how a powered-down future might be is essential.” Why Visions Work: “[…C]reating a vision works in many interrelated ways. Tom Atlee writes of creating what he calls an ‘alternative story field.’(1) This in essence is creating new myths and stories that begin to formulate what a desirable sustainable world might look like. He talks of the potential power of bringing together activists, creative writers and journalists to form 'think tanks' that create new stories for our times. When we start doing Energy Descent work, we should be looking to draw in the novelists, poets, artists, and storytellers. The telling of new stories is central. In Totnes we have started to do this with our Transition Tales initiative, which aims to get people writing stories from different points during Totnes’s transition, as newspaper articles, stories, or agony aunt columns. Some of these appear later in this chapter. Such stories can come in all sorts of forms. The pilot Totnes Pound that Transition Town Totnes [TTT] ran until June 2007 was also an example of this. People were able to hold in their hands a tangible, beautiful and spendable banknote. It told a new story about money, about its possibilities and about their community. The concept of telling new stories was also raised at the Official Unleashing of TTT in September 2006 […]. The tool of visioning offers a powerful new approach for environmental campaigners. We have become so accustomed to campaigning against things that we have lost sight of where it is we want to go. One of the best examples of this recently was provided by Transition Town Lewes, which when confronted by a local developer who wanted to develop a key part of the town, responded not with protests and petitions, but with a vision […]. Peter Russell, the physicist and writer, describes a collective vision in terms of a Strange Attractor, as described in chaos theory. In effect it is like throwing a whirlpool in front of you which then draws you towards it. It has an energy, it is dynamic. He adds:

“There’s something deeper which I can't really explain, but when there is a vision, it's somehow not just a motivation, but somehow the psyche gets involved in a way that seems to interact with the world in a way that makes it easier for things to actually happen, things seem to fall in place. I can't explain that rationally, but it's something that people no- 92 tice time and time again. If you’ve got a strong vision of where you’re going—it’s as if the world seems to want to support that vision. It just seems to do it.”

Visioning in this way has the added benefit of counteracting despondency. Climate change and peak oil can be terrifying, bewildering or seen as inevitably catastrophic. James Lovelock’s recent book The Revenge of Gaia, with its paperback edition featuring a cover like a 1950S B-Movie horror film, and websites (such as dieoff.org) set out scenarios so grim that most people simply switch off; they don’t want to engage with them. I am aware that being one of those people who can read a desperately depressing book about peak oil and societal collapse and draw from it the inspiration and motivation to do something practical puts me in an extremely small minority. As a species with the creativity, adaptability and opposable thumbs that enabled us to create an Oil Age in the first place, we can be pretty certain that there will be life beyond it. Similarly, we may be able to prevent the worst excesses of climate change, and indeed the measures needed would almost certainly make the world a far better place. Howev- er, the point is that the world and our lifestyles will look very different from the present. It is worth remembering that it takes a lot of cheap energy to maintain the levels of social inequality we see today, the levels of obesity, the record levels of indebtedness, the high levels of car use and alienating urban landscapes. Only a culture awash with cheap oil could become de-skilled on the monumental scale that we have, to the extent that some young people I have met are lucky to emerge from cutting a slice of bread with all their fingers intact. It is no exaggeration to say that we in the West are the single most useless generation (in term of practical skills) to which this planet has ever played host. However, the first step to the creation of a localized, low-energy-abundant future is actually visioning its possibility. […] Throughout history, humankind has always created visions of how the future might be—living in space stations, flying to work in our own flying saucer, going on holiday to the moon, for example. They rarely ever come to pass, though, usually owning to our not taking into account, among other things, the amount of energy that sustaining such visions would require. Visions Of Abundance: “If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost, that is where they should be. Now put foundations under them,” Henry David Thoreau.

Systems thinker Fritjof Capra’s vision of 2030 is one where the ecological principle of community has become the central organizing factor for society. Taking nature as the model, he told me, would mean that “we would have patterned our communities after… natural communities, which means that we would use solar energy as our main energy source, augmenting it with wind, biomass, and so on. We would have arranged our industries and our systems of production in such a way that matter cycles continuously, that all materials cycle between producers and consumers. We would grow our food organically, and we would shorten the distance between the farm and the table, producing food mainly locally. “All of this would combine to create a world that has dramatically reduced pollution, where climate change has been brought under control, where there would be plenty of jobs, because these various designs are labor-intensive, and as an overall effect there will be no waste, and the quality of life would increase dramatically.”(24) For Meg Wheatley, author of Leadership and the New Science, this kind of visioning is not hard, as she recognizes the qualities of this future and the relationships we would have with those around us, in existing communities she has already spent time in. She identifies these as being communities “where you recognize that you’re all working for the same values, for a shared vision, for similar goals, and you’re not working at odds. You don’t feel polarized, you don’t feel afraid of truthful conversations, and you don’t retreat from each other, whether it’s because of conflict, or just because I have no patience for what you think and contrasting it with what’s so prevalent right now.”(25) For Tony Juniper, former executive director of Friends of the Earth, the principal noticeable difference would be that it would be quieter, and people would be in less of a rush. “There would be more sounds of people and less sounds of machines,” he told me, “because communities would have been rebuilt and there would be people back in the streets once more, meeting each other rather than exchanging abuse through their car windscreens!” According to Juniper’s vision, the improved quality of life would be tangible. “It would smell fresher, there would be less pollution, less noise as well.... There would be more bicycles, more birdsong because the pollution that has been associated with industrial agriculture would have de- clined, there would be more organic methods, so there would be more wildlife back in the countryside and the cities.”(26) Whatever happens, it is clear that what will happen over the next twenty years is almost unimaginable. When I asked Dennis Meadows,

94 one of the co-authors of the Limits to Growth series of books, he said: “If you think about the degree of change you saw in the last 100 years— social, technical, cultural, political, environmental, an those changes—it’s less than what you’ll see in the next twenty years.”(27) These are extraordinary times.62 The Optimism/Pessimism Trap: I’ve started viewing both optimism and pessimism as spectator sports, as forms of disengagement masquerading as involvement. Both optimism and pessimism trick me in- to judging life and betting on the odds, rather than diving into life with my whole self, with my full co-creative energy. I think the emerging crises call us to transcend such false and end-games like optimism and pessimism. I think they call us to act like a spiritually healthy person who has just learned they have heart disease: We can use each dire prognosis as a stimulant for reaching more deeply into life and co-creating positive change. And so I’ve come to conclude that all the predictions—both good and bad—tell us absolutely nothing about what is possible. Trends and events only relate to what is probable. Probabilities are abstractions. Pos- sibilities are the stuff of life, visions to act upon, doors to walk through. Pessimism and optimism are both distractions from living life fully,” Tom Atlee, Crisis Fatigue and the Co-Creation of Positive Possibilities, from the Co-Intelligence Institute (www.co-intelligence.org) The Transition Concept: So what actually is a “Transition Initia- tive?” The initial term used to describe this concept was “Transition Towns,” but this has since become largely irrelevant, given that we are now talking about Transition cities, boroughs, valleys, peninsulas, post- codes, villages, hamlets and islands ... So although none of these allit- erates quite as nicely as Transition Towns, Transition Initiatives seems to be the best overall term. Transition Initiatives are an emerging and evolving approach to community-level sustainability, which is starting to appear in communities up and down the country. They are, to use a term coined by Jeremy Leggett, “scalable microcosms of hope.” The idea began […] with the Kinsale Energy Descent Action Plan in Ireland, and has since spread to communities around the UK and beyond. Transition Initiatives are based on four key assumptions: 1) That life with dramatically lower energy consumption is inevitable, and that it’s better to plan for it than to be taken by surprise. 2) That our settlements and communities presently lack the resilience to enable them to weather the severe energy shocks that will accompany peak oil. 3) That we have to act collectively, and we have to act now. 4) That by unleashing the collective genius of those around us

95 to creatively and proactively design our energy descent, we can build ways of living that are more connected, more enriching and that recognize the biological limits of our planet. The future with less oil could, if enough thinking and design is applied sufficiently in advance, be preferable to the present. There is no reason why a lower-energy, more resilient future needs to have a lower quality of life than the present. Indeed a future with a revitalized local economy would have many advantages over the present, including a happier and less stressed population, an improved environment and increased stability. How this is explored and developed in practice will be different in each settlement: rather than offering prescriptive solutions, Transition In- itiatives aim to act as catalysts for a community to explore and come up with its own answers. Given that oil and gas are depleting resources, and that we urgently need extreme cuts in C02 emissions, even to the extent that our daily lives sequester more carbon than they produce, Transition Initiatives ask what would such a world actually look like? How would we live? Where would our food come from? What would we hear when we opened the window in the morning? The Transition process offers a positive, solutions-focused approach that draws together the various elements of a community to address this common challenge and sees much of the solution as coming from within, through a process of unlocking what is already there, rather than from experts and consultants coming in from the outside.63 Transition Can Be Thought Of As Many Things: […] The starting point for Transition is that the future with less oil, and producing less carbon emissions, could be preferable to today. Its aim is to act as a catalyst, a pulse, an invitation; to galvanize the shift towards a more localized and resilient community. Transition can be thought of as many things. Different people and different initiatives may focus more on one of these things than others, but in reality, Transition is all of these:

a) Transition as… an inner process: Is the change we need to make external (new technologies, infrastructure, etc.) or internal? Is the root of our problems in our physical systems for living or in the choices we make and the worldview and assumptions that underlie them? In Transition we have taken a whole-systems approach, seeing that these two dimensions of human existence cannot be separated. Put simply, we shape our physical world in response to what

we value and believe, and our values and beliefs are in turn shaped by the world around us.

In the environmental movement, the idea that the work we are doing might affect us on an inner level is often seen as something we don't have time for, something “fluffy” that would distract from the real work of getting on with saving the Earth. Transition takes a different approach. I am always amazed when meet climate scientists whose knowledge about climate change makes no difference to how they live their daily lives. There is a professional ability to compartmentalize different aspects of life that can't be entirely healthy. For most of us, encountering the reality of climate change and peak oil, or experiencing at first hand the impacts of the recession, are insights and impacts that affect us directly.

Transition cannot be just about material change, such as putting up solar panels and planting trees. Doing Transition, whether in our own lives or as a community process, can be exhilarating, stressful, terrifying, life-affirming. enraging ... all human emotion comes into play. Being one of the people suggesting there is another way to go, trying to remind a community of its potential genius, is wonderful, but it can also leave you feeling that you are carrying the hope of the place on your shoulders.

Transition gives people the tools and the support they need to be effective. Many Transition initiatives have “Heart and Soul” groups, working to support the wider process, offering support and counselling to those central to the process. This can be one-to-one support, facilitating processes such as Fishbowls or Appreciative In- quiry, conflict mediation or creating a space for safely exploring the distress and upset that peak oil and climate change can create. b) Transition as ... leading by practical example: Transition initiatives are about making change happen, rolling up sleeves and taking the first steps towards the relocalization of communities, towards more resilience and happiness. There is huge power in starting things, in making practical projects a reality. It changes the atmosphere of a place, shows what is possible, invites engagement and starts to help people get a tangible sense of what a more sustainable world would feel like.

97 c) Transition as… an approach rooted in place and circum- stance: […] Transition is not a one-size-fits-all approach; people make it their own, embodying the “open source” approach upon which the concept is founded. Transition is also culturally specific, being adapted into the culture of whichever place it happens to emerge from. So Transition in Brazil, emerging with a distinctly Brazilian flavour, will look very different from Transition in Edin- burgh or in New Zealand, yet there will be enough in common for it to be distinctly Transition.

The concept of “home” is alien to many people who have spent their lives on the move. Transition can offer a way to root in a place and to feel a part of it. Transition Barcelona’s caminatas are guided walks around the city to visit people, projects, crafts, people and places that add to the place’s resilience, offering a useful model for how to help people feel more at home and more connected to their place. Observing this sense of ownership of the Transition concept in highly diverse communities around the world has been one of the most fascinating developments in the time since the whole thing began. d) Transition as a tool for turning problems into solutions: In Transition, we take issues that feel poisonous, which are distressing and potentially catastrophic—peak oil, climate change, economic contraction—but we view them as possibilities, as opportunities. This ability to “transmute” such issues is one of the key aspects of Transition. e) Transition as ... a cultural shift: When we started Transition in 2005-6, I imagined we were developing an environmental response, a sustainability-focused process. After five years of this fascinating international experiment, I now see it as a cultural process. It is about asking what the culture of your community would need to be like to be as resilient as possible in the face of great change. It goes beyond reducing energy and planting trees. and needs, ultimately, to seep into the culture of place: how a place thinks of itself, what it takes pride in. This is the depth of the change Transition initiatives are attempting to effect.

One could be mistaken for thinking that a Transitioned, powered- down future will require a complete overhaul of our cultural values,

the wholesale replacement of our current approach with an entirely new set of values. However, as Tom Crompton, author of Common Cause,(3) explained to me, cultural values lie along a spectrum, from the “intrinsic” (which, he argues, include ‘the value placed on a sense of community, affiliation to friends and family, and self- development”), to the “extrinsic” (“values that are contingent upon the perceptions of others—they relate to envy of ‘higher’ social strata, admiration of material wealth, or power”). These two act in opposition to each other, but what matters is not somehow enabling everyone to be intrinsic all the time—we show different values when at home with our families from when out shopping or at work. What is important is to achieve a healthy balance.

[…] Research also shows that when people adopt a behavior change due to an intrinsic motivation they will pursue it for longer. Trying to motivate behavior change through an extrinsic motivation has been shown to not be effective in the long term (for example, encouraging people to put up solar panels because they’re the “must-have” consumer durable for this month). Transition works because it cultivates intrinsic values: feeling connected to other people, working together, making positive change happen around us where we live, and so on, rather than appealing to extrinsic values, it is already showing that a cultural shift to more intrinsic values is a shift that can inspire sustained change. f) Transition as ... an economic process: The next section of this book proposes that Transition is headed towards a new culture of social entrepreneurship. After our communities and their economic futures have been so damaged by the irresponsibility of the banking industry and the vagaries of economic globalization, perhaps there is a different way of doing things. […A]t present our communities are like big leaky buckets—every leak represents a potential local livelihood or business. It is becoming increasingly clear that, as government budgets are cut, funding bodies reduce what is available, and as donors become more stretched, Transition initiatives need to be able to support themselves as well as the wider process of localization. g) Transition as… storyteller: A Transition initiative should shift the story the community tells about itself. At the moment, we are surrounded by stories of the unlimited power of technology to

overcome any problems, of a world that will forever amaze itself with the brilliance of its own inventiveness; or by stories that tell of the rapid and disastrous unraveling of everything in an apocalyptic societal collapse. Transition tells a different story.

Why does storytelling matter? As Shaun Chamberlin puts it in The Transition Timeline, stories: “Tell us what is important, and they shape our perceptions and thoughts. This is why we use fairy stories to educate our children, why advertisers pay such extraordinary sums to present their perspectives, and why politicians present both positive and negative visions and narratives to win our votes.

Conventional Environmentalism v. The Transition Approach: a) Individual behavior vs Group behavior; b) Single issue vs Holistic; c) Tools: lobbying, campaigning and protesting vs Tools: public participation, eco-psychology, arts, culture and creative education; d) Sustainable development vs Resiliency/Relocalization; e) Fear, guilt and shock as drivers for action vs Hope, optimism and proactivity as drivers for action; f) Changing National and International policy by lobbying vs Changing National and International policy by making them electable; g) The man in the street as the problem vs The man in the street as the solution; h) Blanket campaign vs Targeted interventions; i) Single level engagement vs Engagement on a variety of levels; j) Prescriptive— advocates answers and responses vs Acts as a catalyst—no fixed answers; k) Carbon footprinting vs Carbon footprinting plus resilience indicators; l) Belief that economic growth is still possible, albeit greener growth vs Designing for economic renaissance, albeit a local one. David Holmgren’s Permaculture Principles: One of the principal foundations of the Transition concept is permaculture. Permaculture is something notoriously difficult to explain in a single sentence: it resists an off- the-cuff definition that would enable an accurate mental picture to be formed. In essence, it is a design system for the creation of sustainable human settlements. When designing the transition that our settlements and communities will inevitably have to undertake, we need a design template with which we can successfully assemble its various components—social, economic, cultural and technical—in the most efficient way possible. Permaculture can be thought of as the design ‘glue’ and the ethical foundations we use to underpin Transition work, to stick together all the elements of a post-peak settlement. The reason that people with a permaculture background tend to “get” the Transition concept ahead of most other people is that it is based on permaculture design principles. I 100 have spent the last ten years teaching permaculture, and its ethics and principles very much underpin my thinking. Permaculture was originally conceived in the 1970s at the time of the first oil crisis as being a “Permanent Agriculture,” moving from annual cropping and monoculture in agriculture to multi-layered systems making use of productive and useful trees and perennial plants.(6) Its focus on agricultural systems soon broadened, as it became clear that sustainability in food cannot happen in isolation from the range of other elements that make up society—economics, building, energy and so on. The term “permaculture” became seen as a contraction of “permanent culture,” being about the creation of a culture of permanence. Its most thorough early exposition, Bill Mollison’s Permaculture: A Designer’s Manual,(7) was, in effect, a manual for Earth repair, an astonishingly broad, ambitious, en- cyclopedic work which offered the reader a toolkit for Earth restoration. Over the next fifteen years permaculture, at least in the mainstream psyche (despite growing massively and inspiring and underpinning thousands of projects around the world), became perceived by many as an odd form of gardening using car tires and obscure plants which probably no one would want to sit down to for supper. In 2004, David Holmgren, the co-originator of the concept, published Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustainability, which put permaculture back on the map as a radical design science, and redefined the principles that will be needed to underpin a post-peak world. […] Permaculture is a movement which offers, as redefined by Holmgren, the design system and philosophical underpinning of a post- peak society, yet at the same time, according to Stewart, it is often guilty of maintaining a distance from that society. Peak oil, to me, is a call to the bodgers and chairmakers in the woods, the market gardeners and or- chardists up misty rural lanes, the small-scale wind installers on the wind- swept highlands, to bring all the wonderful skills they have accumulated, the insights they have obtained through years of practice and contempla- tion, backt to where the mass of the population is starting to realize things are not right. It is a call to learn new ways of communicating with the mainstream, and with an ethic of service, to seek to engage with others on an unprecedented scale.64 Permaculture is a design system based on ecological principles which provides the organizing framework for implementing a permanent or sustainable culture. It… draws together the diverse skills and ways of living which need to be rediscovered and developed to empower us to

101 move from being dependent consumers to becoming responsible producers. “In this sense, permaculture is not the landscape, or even the skills of organic gardening, sustainable farming, energy-efficient building or ecovillage development as such, but can be sued to design, establish, manage and improve these and all other efforts made by individuals, households and communities towards a sustainable future,” David Holmgren, Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustainability, Holmgren Design Services, 2007. “Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted and thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless labour; and of looking at plants and animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system,” Bill Mollison. “Permaculture is the conscious design and maintenance of agricultur- ally productive systems which have the diversity, stability, and resilience of natural ecosystems. It is the harmonious integration of the landscape with people providing their food, energy, shelter and other material and non-material needs in a sustainable,” Graham Bell. Observe and Interact: The power of good observation is something not many of us have, and detailed observation of where we are will underpin any actions we undertake. A post-peak world will depend on detailed observation and good design rather than energy-intensive solutions. Catch and Store Energy: Energy passes through our natural systems, and is stored in a variety of ways, in water, trees, plants, soils, seeds and so on. We need to become skilled at making best use of these, and move our idea of “capital” from what we have in the bank, to the resources we have around us. I once heard Holmgren say that a good woodpile, such as you would see in Eastern Europe, is a far more reasonable indicator of national wealth than GDP. Obtain A Yield: This principle states that any intervention we make in a system, any changes we make or elements we introduce ought to be productive, e.g. productive trees in public places, edible roof gardens, or urban edible landscaping. Apply Self-Regulation & Accept Feedback: A well-designed system using permaculture principles should be able to self-regulate, and require the minimum of intervention and maintenance, like a woodland ecosystem, which requires no weeding, fertilizer or pest control. Use & Value Renewable Resources & Services: Where nature can perform particular functions, be it aerating soil (worms), fixing nitrogen

102

(clover) or building soil (trees) we should utilize these attributes, rather than thinking we can replace them. Where nature can take some work off our hands we should let it. Produce No Waste: The concept of waste is essentially a reflection of poor design. Every output from one system could become the input to another system. We need to think cyclically rather than in linear systems. Design from Patterns to Details: We need to be able to keep looking at our work from a range of perspectives. This principle argues that we need to see our work in the wider context of watershed, regional economy and so on, so as to keep a clearer sense of the wider canvas on which we are painting, and the forces that affect what we are doing. Integrate Rather Than Segregate: Permaculture has been described as the science of maximizing beneficial relationships. In a powered-down settlement, what will become increasingly important is the relationships that we can weave between different elements of the place […]. Solutions are to be found in integrated holistic solutions rather than increased specialization and compartmentalization. Use Small and Slow Solutions: This principle represents the core argument of this book, that, as Holmgren puts it, “systems should be designed to perform functions at the smallest scale that is practical and energy-efficient for that function.” Our solutions will be based on the principle that the smaller and more intensive they can be, the more resilient they will be. Use & Value Diversity: Monocultures are incredibly fragile and prone to disease and pests, more diverse systems have much more inbuilt resilience. Our towns will be much more able to prosper during energy descent if they have a diversity of small businesses, local currencies, food sources, energy sources and so on than if they are just dependent on centralized systems, globalization’s version of monoculture. Use Edges & Value the Marginal: One of the observations used a lot in permaculture is the idea of “edge” that the point where two ecosystems meet is often more productive than either of those systems on their own. This principle reminds us of the need to overlap systems where possible so as to maximize their potential. Creatively Use & Respond to Change: Natural systems are constantly in flux, evolving and growing. The way they respond to shock, such as forest fires, can teach us a great deal about how we might manage the transition away from fossil fuels. Remaining observant of the changes around you, and not fixing onto the idea that anything around you is fixed or permanent will help too.

103

Six Principles That Underpin The Transition Model: There are six principles that I feel define what is distinctive about the Transition concept. They have emerged from observing the process as it has un- folded, and, I think, neatly sum up what is unique to this evolving approach.

1. Visioning: […] In the context of these six principles, visioning refers to the fact that the Transition approach has, as a fundamental principle, the belief that we can only move towards something if we can imagine what it will be like when we get there. The vision we have in our mind when we set out on this work will go a long way towards determining where we will end up. Are we working towards Holmgren’s “Techno Explosion,” or perhaps something more realis- tic and desirable? Creating a clear and enticing vision of our desired out-come is a key principle of the Transition process.

2. Inclusion: The scale of the challenge of peak oil and climate change cannot be addressed if we choose to stay within our comfort zones, if “green” people only talk to other “green” people, business people only talk to other business people, and so on. The Transition approach seeks to facilitate a degree of dialogue and inclusion that has rarely been achieved before, and has begun to develop some innovative ways of bringing this about. This is seen as one of the key principles simply because without it we have no chance of success.

3. Awareness-raising: The end of the Oil Age is a confusing time. We are constantly exposed to bewildering mixed messages. The media presents us with headlines such as “Steep decline in oil production brings risk of war and unrest, says new study,”(9) and “Carbon output rising faster than forecast, says study,”(10) yet at the same time advertising puts across the conflicting message that business as usual is the only way forward, that globalization is the only model that can feed the world, and that just buying this next thing will make us happy. Indeed the contrast can sometimes be striking, with an article about the melting of Arctic ice-sheets next to an advertisement for a new car or cheap flights.

The media to which are we are increasingly exposed continually give out double messages, which can leave one feeling perplexed. Some- times new Transition Initiatives feel that they don't need to do much awareness-raising because everyone must be aware of these issues by now, but it is essential to start with the assumption that people don't 104

know anything about these issues. We need to assume no prior knowledge, and set out the case as clearly, accessibly and entertain- ingly as possible, giving people the key arguments in order to let them formulate their own responses.

4. Resilience: […T]he concept of resilience, but it is useful to restate at this point that the rebuilding of resilience is, alongside the need to move rapidly to a zero carbon society, central to the Transition concept. Indeed, to do one without the other will fail to address either challenge.

5. Psychological Insights: Insights from psychology are also key to the Transition model. It is understood that among the key barriers to engagement are the sense of powerlessness, isolation and overwhelm that environmental issues can often generate. These do not leave people in a place from which they can generate action, either as an individual or as a community. The Transition model uses these insights firstly through the creation of a positive vision […], secondly by creating safe spaces where people can talk, digest and feel how these issues affect them, and thirdly by affirming the steps and actions that people have taken, and by designing into the process as many opportunities to celebrate successes as possible. This coming together—the sense of not being the only person out there who is aware of peak oil and climate change and who finds it scary—is very powerful. It enables people to feel part of a collective response, that they are part of something larger than themselves.

6. Credible & Appropriate Solutions: In the film Way to Go: Life at the End of Empire, Tim Bennett talks about what he calls the “happy chapter” at the end of most environmental books, which spend nine chapters telling you how dreadful everything is, and one on the end with a few token solutions. Similarly, I have heard many a talk where the speaker has set out the scale of the climate challenge, and at the end has one slide about turning down our thermostats and changing our light bulbs.

It is important that Transition Initiatives, having laid out the peak oil and climate change arguments, enable people to explore solutions of a credible scale. One of the reasons behind what we might call the ‘light-bulb syndrome’ is that people are often only able to conceive two scales of response; individuals doing things in their own homes, or the government acting on a national scale. The Transition model 105

explores the ground between these two: what could be achieved at a community level. The Project Support Concept: One of the things that distinguish the Transition approach is the concept of the Project Support Project (PSP). Ideally, we need Transition Initiatives to be self-organizing, and able to harness the passion and enthusiasm that the process unleashes…. The Gaia Foundation has catalyzed and supported hundreds of projects, and has done much work in developing organizational models. It is a small group that has no one person at the centre and that is founded on a set of shared principles. Any project supported by the Foundation agrees with the following: a) It involves the personal growth of those involved; b) It strengthens and/or builds community; and c) It works in service of the Earth. Any projects that meet these criteria (Croft recommends no more than six) can apply to become a Gaia Foundation project. Each project has its own bank account, makes its own decisions, and so on. In essence, the concept of a PSP is that, rather than being an organization that coordinates and drives a wide range of projects itself, the aim is instead to create an atmosphere within which projects emerge and then to support them when they do. This means that the organization can be much lighter and more responsive and in effect, truly act as the catalyst that these projects are intended to be. With Transition Town Totnes, we have made this a central concept. We see the role of TTT as an organization to raise awareness, to continuously raise the profile of the project and its aims, to build interest in the concepts as a whole, and to build enthusiasm for the Transition “brand.” We exist to inspire and motivate the initiation of projects, and then to network and nurture them once they start. Within this model, one has to be careful that the integrity of the name is preserved. In order for someone to call a project they are doing a TTT project, they need to submit an A4 sheet outlining their proposal. One of Croft’s suggestions is that groups ask themselves an important key commitment question. Once their proposed project has been effectively worked into a plan, and the draft budget finalized the planning group considers this: “If this project would not get funding from else- where, would those involved be willing to carry the financial burden of any losses incurred by the project?” The group driving the second launch of the Totnes Pound found this very useful, a real focuser of minds and generator of commitment.

106

Issue of Scale: One of the questions we are often asked is what is the ideal scale for a Transition Initiative. In many ways market towns, which are on the scale that many of the first Transition Initiatives started, are the ideal scale. They have a clear hinterland, historically defined by the villages and rural areas whose inhabitants brought their produce to that town rather than to an adjoining one. Similarly, islands are a good scale to work on, as they have a clearly defined boundary. Why the concept of “Transition Towns” felt so right at the beginning was that the small town is a scale we can all innately relate to. Many people living in a large city crave the more identifiable scale of a town, or in this context, the neighborhood. Many people feel that as globalization has increased, the sphere that we are connected to and can actually influence has shrunk. Perhaps so few people vote now because they have come to feel that their vote makes no difference. I have come to think that the ideal scale for a Transition Initiative is one over which you feel you can have an influence. A town of 5,000 people, for example, is one that you can relate to; it is one with which you can become familiar. […M]ost cities were, historically, a collection of villages, and still have that feel to them. This concept of working at a neighborhood scale is no: a new one.(14) […] There is no magic formula for the question of scale. Your group will need to follow its instincts, but don't worry about it—it will emerge naturally. Do resist the temptation, which has arisen for some, to try to start too big, thinking at the scale of Transition Yorkshire, or Transition Scotland. While useful as concepts, they are really putting the cart before the horse. While it may be the case that at some point in the future the broad spectrum of groups in a geographical area may recognize a need to network themselves to maximize the effectiveness, this needs to grow from a base of a network of vibrant Transition communities, rather than be created in advance […]. The Interface Between Transition Initiatives & Local Politics: The power of the Transition process is its potential to create a truly community-led process which then interfaces with local politics, but on its own terms. The role we identify for Local Authorities in this process is to support, not to drive it. Local Agenda 21, although it created many in- teresting initiatives, was in essence a top-down process trying to pretend that it wasn’t. It is important that Transition Initiatives operate independently of input from local politicians, at least to begin with. A Transi- tion Initiative could not, by definition, be a project conceived and driven forward by a Council, although it is one where the active and enthusiastic

107 support of local government is invaluable. What has been happening increasingly in recent months is that the first contact from a community is from someone in the local council, be it District, Parish or Town Coun- cil. Sometimes a Council member will end up as part of the Steering Group, or the Council will offer their support in a range of ways. […] When Transition Initiatives do approach their local or district council, they do so representing a significant part of the community, and with a groundswell of momentum behind them. In Kinsale, once the EDAP was done, a motion endorsing it was submitted to Kinsale Town Council and unanimously approves. In Totnes, six months after the Offi- cial Unleashing. The Council passed resolution endorsing the work of Transition Town Totnes (TTT). This support is very powerful in terms of being able to drive the initiative forward with enhanced credibility but should only be sought once the project has an established track record and has forged its own identity. For many towns in the US, such as Portland and Oakland, the passing by the local authority of a “Peak Oil Resolution” is seen as a key step. This may be the case, but my sense is that the important first steps are to engage the community in the awareness-raising and building the energy for the project, rather than disappearing at an early stage into the bewildering world of policy writing and working at the local government level. Once you have achieved this, local government will want to be part of the process because they can see it as being where the energy and innovative thinking is taking place. In terms of TTT’s interaction with the local authority, one of the most important elements of this is its Liaison with Local Government Group. This was formed by a group of people who had been involved for some time as local councilors, or had sat on various bodies and understood how the political structure works. This group goes through each new program of events that is coming up and invites the public representatives who they feel should be there. They also keep an eye on upcoming council consultations. They are a centrally important part of the TTT Initiative. One could argue that if at an early stage prominent local political figures want to get involved, their role is to work with such a group to drive forward the whole larger process.65 Social Justice (Because Of Wanting A Fairer World): There is a strong argument(3) that the more equal a society becomes, almost all desirable social indicators, such as teenage pregnancies and mental illness, fall. The gulf between rich and poor continues to rise, with many damag-

108 ing impacts on global society. Many people are motivated to engage in Transition because a more local economy, in which assets and key enterprises are owned and managed by and on behalf of the local community, offers a far better route to social justice, as well as local economic resilience, than business-as-usual does. This is particularly pertinent in the current economic climate of austerity, with deep cuts and closure of services leading increasingly to a sense of injustice and unfairness.66 The New Economics Foundation: And what is it exactly that we are so fearful to move away from? The New Economics Foundation has shown that: a) Increased income stopped making us any happier sometime around 1961.(6) a) When asked which decade from the 1950s on- wards respondents would most like to have lived in, the 1960s emerged as most popular. b) 62% of people in the UK have jobs they find unin- teresting or stressful. c) 87% of Britons agree with the statement: “Socie- ty has become too materialistic, with too much emphasis on money and not enough on the things that really matter.” d) The degree to which we trust each other has fallen by half since the 1950s.(8) Also, with national indebtedness now at a record $1.2 trillion, it is clear that we are paying through the nose for something that fails to meet our fundamental human aspirations: happiness, security, time for relaxation, rewarding work and access to healthy food […]. Central to this [idea] is the proposition that the future with less oil could be preferable to the present, if we are able to engage with enough imagination and creativity sufficiently in advance of the peak […]. What that engagement will look like in each community will emerge from that community itself. The idea that every village, town, city, hamlet, island or district could become a Transition Initiative may seem fanciful, yet it is entirely possible. It is an idea whose time has come. It is important to remind ourselves that this is not a process which has achieved nothing until it has completely powered-down its community; rather, what matters is the journey, the process, the coming together and doing it. The Age of Cheap Energy is over. The sooner we can acknowledge that and can start to engage our collective creativity, the less likely it is that we will sink into despondency, blame-seeking and powerlessness, and the more likely it is that we will unleash the most extraordinary and historic transition. We are alive at a pivotal moment in human history. While peak oil and climate change are undeniably profoundly chal- lenging, also inherent within them is the potential for an economic, cultural and social renaissance the likes of which we have never seen. We will see a flourishing of local businesses, local skills and solutions, and a

109 flowering of ingenuity and creativity. It is a Transition in which we will inevitably grow, and in which our evolution is a precondition for progress. Emerging at the other end, we will not be the same as we were; we will have become more humble, more connected to the natural world, fit- ter, leaner, more skilled and, ultimately, wiser. We will emerge blinking into a new way of living, yet it will feel more comfortable and familiar than what we left behind. If we are to trade mobility, growth and affluence for something else, we need to be able to articulate something preferable and more nourishing to put in its place. I hope this book has inspired you to be a catalyst for exploring these new possibilities, in your life, your community and your world. May it keep you awake at night, but this time for all the right reasons. Where Might All This Be Going? Throughout this [segment of S3K 1.0 Superstructure derived from, The Transition Handbook] the underlying question has been: “How can localization and resilience shift from being abstract ideals to becoming a tangible, on-the-ground reality?” I posed this question to Michael Shuman, a longtime pioneer of localization.(5) He identified three highly relevant areas: 1) “The first is, I think, that all of us have to go to business school. We have to realise that even if we’re going to be advocates of local economies, we have to be those economies and model those businesses that we want out there and prove the concept wherever possible. 2) The second thing is that, rather than trying to beat those on the right [politically] that people just instinctively distrust, I think it’s about embracing those with different political views and finding the right ideological and philosophical mix that gets us from here to there. 3) I think the last piece is seeing ourselves as part of the problem. Our consumption dollars, what drives the system, our investment dollars provide the foundation for the system. The more that we can create alternative systems by channeling our consumption and investment and convince others these are great ways of living, and consistent with what we’re trying to achieve long term, I think that’s the way we’re going to succeed.” This stresses that the task now is to step forward to add new skills and a new element of practicality and maturity to a movement that has often, largely, felt happier campaigning against stuff than creating new, viable businesses and organizational models. We need both, but the practical building of a new economy and a new infrastructure needs to start today, and it needs to be underpinned by a sense of the extraordinary timeliness of what we are doing.

110

Milton Friedman, the father of neoliberal economics and once described as “the most influential economist of the second half of the twentieth century …possibly of all of it” once said: “Only a crisis—actual or perceived—produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around .... That, I believe, is our basic function; to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.” Unfortunately, at present, times of crisis and shock tend to be capital- ized on by those with dubious motivations to grab, privatize and redirect wealth to fewer and fewer people—something we are increasingly seeing. Our hope ties in the extent to which Transition, or something like it, is able to inspire and to hold more appeal than less desirable approaches. This will be a quiet revolution, a humble revolution, one that gently but surely changes culture and shifts the stories we tell about the people and places around us. It is not about rejecting progress, or choosing austerity and misery; rather, about facing up to the possibility of increased austerity and circumstances that some might see as being miserable, and looking at them with fresh eyes and seeking solutions that celebrate what makes us feel alive and best meets our needs. […] We need to get away from seeing localization as something that just takes place on the pinboards of wholefood shops, and see it as a key strategy for economic development.67

This is where the next transformative threshold from the stratified, integral vision of the Society of the Third Millennium (S3K) launches into its second phase (2020-2030) within the 30-year-master-plan that transitions to the new economy.

S3K 2.0: THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION (TIR) A Second Enlightenment & New Empathetic Civilization

The creation of the post carbon Third Industrial Revolution (TIR) based on renewable sources of energy, is Jeremy Rifkin’s vision for actualiz- ing our collective development of declining egocentricism and increase levels of empathy. On March 15, 2010, Jeremy Rifkin addressed “the British Royal Society for the Arts in a speech titled after his book “The Empathetic Civi- lization.” The following excerpts are from the section called “Rethinking Human Nature and the History of the Human Journey on the Cusp of the Biosphere Era.”

111

Two spectacular failures, separated by only 18 months, marked the end of the modern era. In July 2008, the price of oil on world markets peaked at $147 a barrel, inflation soared, the price of everything from food to gasoline skyrocketed, and the global economic engine shut off. Growing demand in the developed nations, as well as in China, India, and other emerging economies, for diminishing fossil fuels precipitated the crisis. Purchasing power plummeted and the global economy col- lapsed. That was the earthquake that tore asunder the industrial age built on and propelled by fossil fuels. The failure of the financial markets two months later was merely the aftershock. The fossil fuel energies that make up the industrial way of life are sunsetting and the industrial infrastructure is now on life support. In December 2009, world leaders from 192 countries assembled in Copenhagen to address the question of how to handle the accumulated entropy bill of the fossil fuel based industrial revolution-the spent C02 that is heating up the planet and careening the earth into a catastrophic shift in climate. After years of preparation, the negotiations broke down and world leaders were unable to reach a formal accord. The problem runs deeper than the issue of finding new ways to regulate the market or imposing legally binding global greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. The real crisis lies in the set of assumptions about human nature that governs the behavior of world leaders—assumptions that were spawned during the Enlightenment more than 200 years ago at the dawn of the modern market economy and the emergence of the nation state era. The Enlightenment thinkers—John Locke, Adam Smith, Marquis de Condorcet—took umbrage with the faith based Medieval Christian world view that saw human nature as fallen and depraved and that looked to salvation in the next world through God’s grace. Many—but, not all— preferred to cast their lot with the idea that human beings’ essential nature is rational, detached, autonomous, acquisitive and utilitarian and argued that individual salvation lies in unlimited material progress here on Earth. The Age of Faith was subsumed, at least in part, by the Age of Reason. The Enlightenment notions about human nature were reflected in the newly minted nation-state whose raison d’etre was to protect private property relations and stimulate market forces as well as act as a surro- gate of the collective self-interest of the citizenry in the international arena. Like individuals, nation-states were considered to be autonomous

112 agents embroiled in a relentless battle with other sovereign nations in the pursuit of material gains. It was these very assumptions that provided the philosophical under- pinnings for a geopolitical frame of reference that accompanied the first and second industrial revolutions in the 19th and 20th centuries. These beliefs about human nature came to the fore in the aftermath of the global economic meltdown and in the boisterous and acrimonious con- frontations in the meeting rooms in Copenhagen, with potentially disastrous consequences for the future of humanity and the planet. If human nature is as many of the Enlightenment philosophers claimed, then we are likely doomed. It is impossible to imagine how we might create a sustainable global economy and restore the biosphere to health if each and every one of us is, at the core of our biology, an autonomous agent and a self-centered and materialistic being. Recent discoveries in brain science and child development, however, are forcing us to rethink these long-held shibboleths about human nature. Biologists and cognitive neuroscientists are discovering mirror- neurons—the so-called empathy neurons—that allow human beings and other species to feel and experience another’s situation as if it were one’s own. We are, it appears, the most social of animals and seek intimate participation and companionship with our fellows. Social scientists, in turn, are discovering previously hidden strands of the human narrative which suggests that human evolution is measured not only by the expansion of power over nature, but also by the intensifi- cation and extension of empathy to more diverse others across broader temporal and spatial domains. The growing scientific evidence that we are a fundamentally empathic species has profound and far-reaching consequences for society, and may well determine our fate as a species. What is required now is nothing less than a leap to global empathic consciousness and in less than a generation if we are to resurrect the global economy and revitalize the biosphere. The question becomes this: what is the mechanism that allows empathic sensitivity to mature and consciousness to expand through history? The pivotal turning points in human consciousness occur when new energy regimes converge with new communications revolutions, creating new economic eras. The new communications revolutions become the command and control mechanisms for structuring, organizing and managing more complex civilizations that the new energy regimes make possible. For example, in the early modern age, print communication became the means to organize and manage the technologies, organizations, and

113 infrastructure of the coal, steam, and rail revolution. It would have been impossible to administer the first industrial revolution using script and codex. Communication revolutions not only manage new, more complex energy regimes, but also change human consciousness in the process. Forager/hunter societies relied on oral communications and their consciousness was mythologically constructed. The great hydraulic agricultural civilizations were, for the most part, organized around script communication and steeped in theological consciousness. The first industrial revolution of the 19th century was managed by print communication and ushered in ideological consciousness. Electron- ic communication became the command and control mechanism for arranging the second industrial revolution in the 20th century and spawned psychological consciousness. Each more sophisticated communication revolution brings together more diverse people in increasingly more expansive and varied social networks. Oral communication has only limited temporal and spatial reach while script, print and electronic communications each extend the range and depth of human social interaction. By extending the central nervous system of each individual and the society as a whole, communication revolutions provide an ever-more inclusive playing field for empathy to mature and consciousness to expand. For example, during the period of the great hydraulic agricultural civilizations characterized by script and theological consciousness, empathic sensitivity broadened from tribal blood ties to associational ties based on common religious affiliation. Jews came to empathize with Jews, Chris- tians with Christians, Muslims with Muslims, etc. In the first industrial revolution characterized by print and ideological consciousness, empathic sensibility extended to national borders, with Americans empathizing with Americans, Italians with Italians, Japanese with Japanese and so on. In the second industrial revolution, characterized by electronic communication and psychological consciousness, individuals began to identify with like-minded others. Today, we are in the early stages of another historic convergence of energy and communication—a third industrial revolution—that could extend empathic sensibility to the biosphere itself and all of life on Earth. The distributed Internet revolution is coming together with distributed renewable energies, making possible a sustainable, post-carbon economy that is both globally connected and locally managed.

114

In the 21st century, hundreds of millions—and eventually billions— of human beings will transform their buildings into power plants to harvest renewable energies on site, store those energies in the form of hydrogen and share electricity, peer-to-peer, across local, regional, national and continental inter-grids that act much like the Internet. The open source sharing of energy, like open source sharing of information, will give rise to collaborative energy spaces—not unlike the collaborative social spaces that currently exist on the Internet. When every family and business comes to take responsibility for its own small swath of the biosphere by harnessing renewable energy and sharing it with millions of others on smart power grids that stretch across continents, we become intimately interconnected at the most basic level of earthly existence by jointly stewarding the energy that bathes the planet and sustains all of life. The new distributed communication revolution not only organizes distributed renewable energies, but also changes human consciousness. The information communication technologies (ICT) revolution is quickly extending the central nervous system of billions of human beings and connecting the human race across time and space, allowing empathy to flourish on a global scale, for the first time in history. Whether in fact we will begin to empathize as a species will depend on how we use the new distributed communication medium. While distributed communications technologies—and, soon, distributed renewable energies—are connecting the human race, what is so shocking is that no one has offered much of a reason as to why we ought to be connected. We talk breathlessly about access and inclusion in a global communications network but speak little of exactly why we want to communicate with one another on such a planetary scale. What’s sorely missing is an overarching reason for why billions of human beings should be increasingly connected. Toward what end? The only feeble explanations thus far offered are to share information, be entertained, advance commercial exchange and speed the globalization of the economy. But what if our distributed global communication networks were put to the task of helping us re-participate in deep communion with the common biosphere that sustains all of our lives? The biosphere is the narrow band that extends some forty miles from the ocean floor to outer space where living creatures and the Earth’s geochemical processes interact to sustain each other. We are learning that the biosphere functions like a indivisible organism. It is the continuous sym- biotic relationships between every living creature and between living crea-

115 tures and the geochemical processes that ensure the survival of the planetary organism and the individual species that live within its biospheric envelope. If every human life, the species as a whole, and all other life- forms are entwined with one another and with the geochemistry of the planet in a rich and complex choreography that sustains life itself, then we are all dependent on and responsible for the health of the whole organism. Carrying out that responsibility means living out our individual lives in our neighborhoods and communities in ways that promote the general well-being of the larger biosphere within which we dwell. The Third Industrial Revolution offers just such an opportunity. If we can harness our empathic sensibility and establish a new global ethic to harmonize the many relationships that make up the life- sustaining forces of the planet, we will have moved beyond the detached, self-interested and utilitarian philosophical assumptions that accompanied national markets and nation state governance and into a new era of biosphere consciousness. We leave the old world of geopolitics behind and enter into a new world of biosphere politics, with new forms of governance emerging to accompany our new biosphere awareness. The Third Industrial Revolution and the new era of distributed capitalism allow us to sculpt a new approach to globalization, this time emphasizing continentalization from the bottom up. Because renewable energies are more or less equally distributed around the world, every region is potentially amply endowed with the power it needs to be relatively self- sufficient and sustainable in its lifestyle, while at the same time interconnected via smart grids to other regions across countries and continents. When every community is locally empowered, both figuratively and literally, it can engage directly in regional, transnational, continental, and limited global trade without the severe restrictions that are imposed by the geopolitics that oversee elite fossil fuels and uranium energy distribution. Continentalization is already bringing with it a new form of governance. The nation-state, which grew up alongside the First and Second In- dustrial Revolutions, and provided the regulatory mechanism for managing an energy regime whose reach was the geosphere, is ill suited for a Third Industrial Revolution whose domain is the biosphere. Distributed renewable energies generated locally and regionally and shared openly— peer to peer—across vast contiguous land masses connected by intelligent utility networks and smart logistics and supply chains favor a seamless network of governing institutions that span entire continents.

116

The European Union is the 1st continental governing institution of the 3rd Industrial Revolution era. The EU is already beginning to put in place the infrastructure for a European-wide energy regime, along with the codes, regulations and standards to effectively operate a seamless transport, communications and energy grid that will stretch from the Irish Sea to the doorsteps of Russia by midcentury. Asian, African and Latin American continental political unions are also in the making and likely be the premier governing institutions on their respective continents by 2050. In this new era of distributed energy, governing institutions will more resemble the workings of the ecosystems they manage. Just as habitats function within ecosystems, and ecosystems within the biosphere in a web of interrelationships, governing institutions will similarly function in a collaborative network of relationships with localities, regions, and nations all embedded within the continent as a whole. This new complex political organism operates like the biosphere it attends, synergistically and reciprocally. This is biosphere politics. The new biosphere politics transcends traditional conservative/liberal distinctions so characteristic of the geopolitics of the modern market economy and nation-state era. The new divide is generational and contrasts the traditional top-down model of structuring family life, education, commerce, and governance with a younger generation whose thinking is more relational and distributed, whose nature is more collaborative and cosmopolitan, and whose work and social spaces favor open-source commons. For the Internet generation, “quality of life” becomes as important as individual opportunity in fashioning a new dream for the 21st century. The transition to biosphere consciousness has already begun. All over the world, a younger generation is beginning to realize that one’s daily consumption of energy and other resources ultimately affects the lives of every other human being and every other creature that inhabits the Earth. The Empathic Civilization is emerging. A younger generation is fast extending its empathic embrace beyond religious affiliations and national identification to include the whole of humanity and the vast project of life that envelops the Earth. But our rush to universal empathic connectivity is running up against a rapidly accelerating entropic juggernaut in the form of climate change. Can we reach biosphere consciousness and global empathy in time to avert planetary collapse?68

117

One way to avert planetary collapse is for a massive mobilization to construct the Hydrogen Economy—the Apollo Alliance Project. According to their website:

The Apollo Alliance provides a message of optimism and hope, framed around rejuvenating our nation’s economy by creating the next generation of American industrial jobs and treating clean energy as an economic and security mandate to rebuild America. America needs to hope again, to dream again, to think big, and to be called to the best of our potential by tapping the optimism and can-do spirit that is embedded in our nation’s history. In 1961, John F. Kennedy challenged the nation to send a man to the moon and return him safely home again within the decade. It was an audacious dare. The technology did not yet exist, but he marshaled the resources of a nation—focusing public investment, research, science and technology education, worker training, and America’s industrial might on a common purpose. It was leadership toward a common positive goal and it worked. In less than eight years Neil Armstrong placed the first human footprint on the lunar surface, and President Kennedy to this day remains honored for his vision and as a leader of courage. Now America has an Apollo project for the 21st century. Today the stakes are much, much higher. We face an economy hemorrhaging its highest paying and most productive jobs, cities falling apart with over a trillion dollars in unmet public investment in crumbling schools, transportation, and infrastructure. The middle class is increasingly insecure as career ladders are broken and not replaced in new service sector jobs. And on a global scale we face never before seen environmental disruption, rising social inequity, and the emergence of fundamentalist anger that threatens our very security. We need new leaders of vision and a new unifying call to action [...]. The mission of the Apollo Alliance is to build a broad-based constituency in support of a sustainable and clean energy economy that will create millions of good jobs for the nation, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and create cleaner and healthier communities. Through policy alternatives, organizing, and on the ground results in states and cities across the nation, we are demonstrating that a socially just, environmentally balanced and economically prosperous future is attainable. Our challenge today is to liberate the US economy and our national security from dependence on fossil fuels. In 2003, we launched the Apollo Alliance to unify constituencies behind a bold plan of investment in clean energy technology and sustainable infrastructure that can create 118

millions of good jobs, reduce our impact on the global environment and dramatically reduce our dependence on oil in a generation.

There are ten other reasons why such a comprehensive strategic initiative would be a good idea to promote and pursue:

1. We will soon reach the peak production of oil—creating an energy crisis that will threaten the entire world. 2. Fossil fuels shortages will lead to regression to previously banned energy sources. 3. Fossil fuels are destroying the planet affecting all of us. 4. Consumers are ready for an alternative energy source as a result of high gas prices. 5. It will make us energy independent, thus help diffuse the dangerous geopolitical conflicts. 6. Terrorism in the Post 9/11 era provides political urgency. 7. Ecological sustainability no longer perceived as primarily an environmental issue. 8. Financial rewards are strong motivational source even for those who are not eco-friendly. 9. It’s an all-encompassing vision that I includes all the values & issues of the New Progressives. 10. A great potential for true democratization in the U.S. and all over the world.

Identifying such a National Unifying Purpose was the necessary progression fulfilled by PHASE I: Continuum Y, step #6 of the GUTS. However, this form of cognitive activism proved to be very difficult for activists and progressive political candidates. According to an excerpt in George Lakoff’s new book, Don't Think of an Elephant:

Unlike the right, the left does not think strategically. We think issue by issue. We generally do not try to figure out what minimal change we can enact that will have effects across many issues. There are a very few exceptions. For example, at the present moment there is a strategic proposal called the New Apollo Initiative. Simply put, the idea is to put thirty billion dollars a year—which is the amount that now goes in subsidies to support the coal and gas industries—into alternative energy. What makes this strategic? It is strategic because it is not just an energy issue or a sustainability issue. It is also:

119

 A jobs issue: It would create 2 to 4 million jobs.  A health issue: Less air pollution means less childhood asthma.  A clean water, clean air issue.  A species issue, because it would clean up environments & habitats.  A global warming issue, because we would be making a contribution to lowering greenhouse gasses without a program specifically for global warming.  A foreign policy issue, because we would no longer be dependent on Middle Eastern oil.  A Third World development issue, because every country, no matter how “underdeveloped,” can make its own energy if it has the appropriate alternative technologies. Such countries would not have to borrow money to buy oil and pollute their environments. And they would not have to pay interest on the money borrowed. Fur- thermore, every dollar invested in energy in the Third World has a multiplier effect of six.

In short, a massive investment in alternative energy has an enormous yield over many issue areas. This is not just about energy; it is about jobs, health, clean air and water, habitat, global warming, foreign policy, and Third World development. It is also about putting together new coali- tions and organizing new institutions and new constituencies. Thirty billion dollars a year for ten years put into alternative energy would have massive effects. But progressive candidates are still thinking in much smaller terms, not long-term and strategically.69

The Apollo Alliance promotes a ten-point strategy that includes planning for the construction of the Hydrogen Economy. So I want to go more in- depth on this pillar of Jeremy Rifkin’s TIR that describes the potentially wide-sweeping transformation that such a monumental mission would make, while also addressing the critics. But first, its political and social significance as described in an article from the December 23, 2002 issue of The Nation entitled “Hydrogen: Empowering the People.”

While the fossil-fuel era enters its sunset years, a new energy regime is being born that has the potential to remake civilization along radically new lines—hydrogen. Hydrogen is the most basic and ubiquitous ele-

ment in the universe. It never runs out and produces no harmful CO2 emissions when burned; the only byproducts are heat and pure water. That is why it's been called “the forever fuel.” 120

Hydrogen has the potential to end the world's reliance on oil. Switch- ing to hydrogen and creating a decentralized power grid would also be the best assurance against terrorist attacks aimed at disrupting the national power grid and energy infrastructure. Moreover, hydrogen power will dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions and mitigate the effects of global warming. In the long run, the hydrogen-powered economy will fundamentally change the very nature of our market, political and social institutions, just as coal and steam power did at the beginning of the In- dustrial Revolution. Hydrogen must be extracted from natural sources. Today, nearly half the hydrogen produced in the world is derived from natural gas via a steam-reforming process. The natural gas reacts with steam in a catalytic converter. The process strips away the hydrogen atoms, leaving carbon dioxide as the byproduct. There is, however, another way to produce hydrogen without using fossil fuels in the process. Renewable sources of energy—wind, photovoltaic, hydro, geothermal and biomass—can be harnessed to produce electricity. The electricity, in turn, can be used, in a process called electrolysis, to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen can then be stored and used, when needed, in a fuel cell to generate electricity for power, heat and light. Why generate electricity twice, first to produce electricity for the process of electrolysis and then to produce power, heat and light by way of a fuel cell? The reason is that electricity doesn't store. So, if the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing or the water isn't flowing, electricity can't be generated and economic activity grinds to a halt. Hydrogen provides a way to store renewable sources of energy and insure an ongoing and continuous supply of power. Hydrogen-powered fuel cells are just now being introduced into the market for home, office and industrial use. The major auto makers have spent more than $2 billion developing hydrogen-powered cars, buses and trucks, and the first mass-produced vehicles are expected to be on the road in just a few years. In a hydrogen economy the centralized, top-down flow of energy, controlled by global oil companies and utilities, would become obsolete. Instead, millions of end users would connect their fuel cells in- to local, regional and national hydrogen energy webs (HEWs), using the same design principles and smart technologies that made the World Wide Web possible. Automobiles with hydrogen cells would be power stations on wheels, each with a generating capacity of 20 kilowatts. Since the av-

121

erage car is parked most of the time, it can be plugged in, during nonuse hours, to the home, office or the main interactive electricity network. Thus, car owners could sell electricity back to the grid. If just 25 percent of all US cars supplied energy to the grid, all the power plants in the country could be eliminated. Once the HEW is set up, millions of local operators, generating electricity from fuel cells onsite, could produce more power more cheaply than can today's giant power plants. When the end users also become the producers of their energy, the only role remaining for existing electrical utilities is to become "virtual power plants" that manufacture and market fuel cells, bundle energy services and coordinate the flow of energy over the existing power grids. To realize the promise of decentralized generation of energy, however, the energy grid will have to be redesigned. The problem with the existing power grid is that it was designed to insure a one-way flow of energy from a central source to all the end users. Before the HEW can be fully actualized, changes in the existing power grid will have to be made to facilitate both easy access to the web and a smooth flow of energy services over the web. Connecting thousands, and then millions, of fuel cells to main grids will require sophisticated dispatch and control mechanisms to route energy traffic during peak and nonpeak periods. A new technology developed by the Electric Power Research Institute called FACTS (flexible alternative current transmission system) gives transmission companies the capacity to “deliver measured quantities of power to specified areas of the grid.”70

Rifkin goes on to describe the historical significance of “the harnessing of hydrogen and fuel cells [that] will spawn a new economic revolution in the 21st century—one as powerful in its commercial, social and political impacts as the joining of coal and steam power in the 19th century, and oil and the internal combustion engine in the 20th century.” He elaborates in the following passages from his 2002 book: The Hydrogen Economy.

[…] Unlike its predecessors, however, the new energy regime has the potential to be sustainable, non-polluting, and to provide a decentralized and democratic source of power, thus, for the first time in almost a century, we have a rare opportunity to comprehensively sever the ties of corporate dominance in our society through our energy independence. Think of it, a true form of Democracy at our shores [...]. A decentralized, hydrogen-energy regime offers the hope, at least, of connecting the unconnected and empowering the powerless. When that happens, we 122 could entertain the very real possibility of “reglobalization,” this time from the bottom up, and with everyone participating in the process. The fossil-fuel era brought with it new ways or organizing society, including industrial enterprise, nation-state governance, dense urban settlement, and a bourgeois lifestyle. Because it is so different from the various forms of hydrocarbon energy, hydrogen will give rise to a wholly new type of energy infrastructure as well as to radically different economic institutions and new patterns of human settlement [...]. When every human being on Earth can be the producer of his or her own energy, the very nature of commercial life radically changes. Economic activity becomes far more widely diffused. The desegregation of commerce, in turn, allows for a desegregation of human settlement. The centralization of power and economies of scale that so characterized the fossil-fuel era inevitably led to a concentration of human population in mega-cities that used up vast amounts of energy and were ultimately unsustainable. The creation of decentralized hydrogen energy webs connecting end users would make possible the establishment of human settlements that are more widely dispersed and more sustainable in relationship to local and regional environmental resources. The worldwide hydrogen energy web, like the worldwide communications web, will allow us to connect every human being on the planet with every other in an indivisible and interdependent economic and social matrix. The human species can now become a human community fully integrated into the Earth’s ecosystems. Unfortunately, our ideas about personal and collective security are still mired in a fossil-fuel state of mind. In the oil age, each human being’s sense of personal security came to mirror the organizational values of the larger institutional framework that managed the flow of energy and economic activity. Au- tonomy and mobility became the undisputed social virtues of the era, in both personal and institutional life. In the coming hydrogen economy, the sheer density of human interaction, as well as the speed of engagement, will give rise to a new sense of security, bound up in embed- dedness in multiple commercial, social, and environmental networks and in global interdependence. Our individual security and the well-being of the Earth’s diverse human, biological, and geological communities will become seamless. We will come to see ourselves as part of a single Earth organism. The divisive geopolitics that so permeated the fossil-fuel era will give way to a new sense of biosphere politics in a hydrogen age.71

123

However, there are tremendous obstacles to creating a hydrogen economy. So much so, that critics like James Kunstler proclaim it to be “a public delusion that arises when people begin to feel frightened” about the catastrophic consequences of peak oil and natural gas “because we don’t have a Plan B.”72 And investigative journalist Mike Ruppert raises an important issue in the documentary “The End of Suburbia: Oil Depletion and the Collapse of the American Dream,” by stating “[…] people need to ask very serious questions about alternative energy before jumping into a life boat that they have no idea whether if it is going to float or not […].” Determining if hydrogen is a viable energy alternative is of critical importance and many concerns that critics raise are legitimate. As stated by Rifkin, hydrogen is not a form of energy but an energy carrier and a means of storage, therefore, require other energy inputs to make the electricity to split water into oxygen and hydrogen. Unfortunately, as previously mentioned, burning other fossil fuels like methane, natural gas and even nuclear power— all of which are not sustainable alternatives—create our current production of hydrogen. In addition, by using such non-renewable energy sources it takes more energy to make hydrogen then what you get. Not to mention, the problematic properties of hydrogen itself which make it currently difficult to produce, store, distribute and use safely by the consumer. Finally, there is the enormous capital investment it would take to create a new energy infrastructure consisting of new factories, filling stations, storage facilities, hydrogen maintenance centers and a whole new fleet of cars that will have to eventually replace the current 200 million vehicles on the road in the U.S. and 400 million throughout the rest of the world. Nevertheless, with all of these challenges, hydrogen remains theoretically sound and warrants a major thrust of support and development. And one prominent peak oil expert seconds such sentiments. According to Richard Heinberg, journalist, editor, lecturer and author of six books including his seminal work on peak oil, The Party’s Over, elaborates on the feasibility of hydrogen in his book, The Oil Depletion Protocol: A Plan To Avert Oil Wars, Terror- ism And Economic Collapse.

In principle, hydrogen could […] store energy produced as electricity from […] renewable sources […] and provide a fuel for cars and trucks. Hydrogen is non-polluting, produces no greenhouse gases when burned, and has a higher energy density by weight than any of the fossil fuels [...] (10) in principle electricity from wind could yield hydrogen at a cost comparable to that of gasoline today […].

124

Hydrogen generation and storage systems and fuel cell technologies all deserve more research funding and will no doubt play a role in the world’s energy future, but we should not imagine that hydrogen will be able to replace oil on a large scale any time soon. A 2004 report from the US National Academies of Science, titled “The Hydro- gen Economy: Opportunities, Costs, Barriers, and R&D Needs,” sum- marizes the situation well in saying that, “In the best case scenario, the transition to a hydrogen economy would take many decades, and any re- ductions in oil imports and carbon dioxide emissions are likely to be mi- nor during the next 25 years.” (12)73

However, we should be cautiously optimistic and maintain a good measure of skepticism due to some of the supporters of the Apollo Alliance itself. We should create a new alliance consisting of Cultural Creatives because of claims made by some critics that, “the Apollo Alliance is a Democratic Party linked group advocating alliances [with not only] environmentalists, labor unions [but also] pro-war neo-conservatives,” and “is a part of Set America Free, a group that includes warmongers partly responsible for the political collapse that has kept renewable energy initiatives from being enacted.” 34 And according to the Oil Empire website one particular participant that raises red flags is the “former CIA director James Woolsey, a member of the Pro- ject for a New American Century (PNAC). In September 2000, PNAC published a report ‘Rebuilding America's Defenses,’ which predicted that a ‘new Pearl Harbor’ would be needed to enact the neo-con plans for global empire [recall what the authors of Millennials Rising said about historic sparks]. PNAC includes Cheney, Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and the rest of the gang that brought us World War IV (WW III was the ‘Cold War’). On September 10, 2001, PNAC member Donald Rumsfeld admitted $2.3 trillion was ‘missing’ from the Pentagon budget—that money would be enough to fund needed energy shifts.”74 Some of the other participants that give cause for increasing suspicions towards the true intentions of the Apollo Alliance are: Milton Copulos (Pres- ident of National Defense Council Foundation); Congressman Eliot Engel (a conservative Democrat and member of Board of Advisors of Foundation for the Defense of Democracies); Frank Gaffney (President of the Center for Security Policy and was in the Pentagon during the Reagan administration, part of the massive increase in military spending that could have been used to mitigate the impacts of Peak Oil and climate change when there was still time to shift course.); Anne Korin (the Co-Director of Institute for the Analysis of Global Security); Deron Lovaas (member of the Natural Resources Defense Council which is one of the few environmental groups that endorsed the 125

NAFTA treaty and has numerous other ethical conflicts of interest.); Cliff May (President of Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and was Di- rector of Communications for the Republican National Committee (RNC) from 1997 to 2001.); Robert C. McFarlane (Former Reagan National Security Advisor and a co-conspirator in the Iran-Contra scandal. Daniel Pipes (Di- rector of the Middle East Forum and is a neo-conservative affiliated with the Project for a New American Century agenda.); and Meyrav Wurmser (of the Hudson Institute which is an extremely conservative think tank promoting militarism.) In addition, aside from some suspect participants within the Apollo Alli- ance, according to the Oil Empire website there is an inference made by the Apollo Alliance “that the solutions to oil addiction are primarily technological” and omit any cultural changes to the infinite economic growth paradigm of the consumer-oriented “American way of life.”36 There appears to be no significant measures of adopting an energy efficiency and conservation plan which, would be vital and necessary to mitigate the consequences of the coming energy, food and water shortages. All of this suggest at least two things: 1) the power elite realize that the decentralization of energy is the most significant threat to their top-down dominance and 2) they may be attempting to co-op it through a corporate reconfiguration to make it fit the monopoly-mould of centralized control. For this reason and the many others I propose that we, the people, reclaim the visionary venture of the Hydrogen Economy by incorporating it into the cohesive vision of the Society of the Third Millennium (S3K), because it is the forever fuel that will transform our world into an ecologically sustainable global society. Secondly, we need to recreate a new version of the “Apollo Alliance” that truly represents the people’s interest because Jeremy Rifkin is correct when he wrote in his book:

The window of opportunity is closing creating a new sense of urgency to act now before the corporate monopolization of hydrogen solidifies. The worldwide hydrogen energy web (HEW) will be the next great technological, commercial, and social revolution in history. It will follow on the heels of the development of the worldwide communications web in the 1990s and like the former, will bring with it a new culture of engagement. While the HEW is potentially a revolution in energy design that could decentralize and democratize energy and recast commercial and social institutions along radically new lines, there is no guarantee that, in fact, it will. Here, the history of the Internet and the World Wide Web is instructional. The Internet contains the promise of empowering billions of people, giving everyone on Earth potential access to eve- 126

ryone else and making communication and exchange of information between people truly democratic. The “Net” activists of the 1990s argued that information ought to be freely shared. While community nets and free-nets were established early to make good on that vision, they were too few, too weak, and too devoid of meaningful content to withstand a better-financed more highly organized campaign waged by companies like AOL and Microsoft to gain control over the new medium. Com- mercial forces have conspired, from the very beginning, to gain an unbreakable hold over the portals of cyberspace so that they could become the gatekeepers and arbiters of the Information Age. A similar threat and challenge face the hydrogen energy web.75

Rifkin elaborates further on this sense of urgency and crucial moment in time in The Nation article I referenced before:

Whether hydrogen becomes the people’s energy depends, to a large extent, on how it is harnessed in the early stages of development. The global energy and utility companies will make every effort to control access to this new, decentralized energy network just as software, telecommunications and content companies like Microsoft and AOL Time Warner have attempted to control access to the World Wide Web. It is critical that public institutions and nonprofit organizations—local governments, cooperatives, community development corporations, credit unions and the like—become involved early on in establishing distributed-generation associations (DGAs) in every country [emphasis added]. Again, the analogy to the World Wide Web is apt. In the new hydrogen energy era, millions of end users will generate their own “content” in the form of hydrogen and electricity. By organizing collectively to control the energy they produce—just as workers in the twentieth century organized into unions to control their labor power— end users can better dictate the terms with commercial suppliers of fuel cells for lease, purchase or other use arrangements and with virtual utility companies, which will manage the decentralized “smart” energy grids. Creating the appropriate partnership between commercial and noncommercial interests will be critical to establishing the legitimacy, effectiveness and long-term viability of the new energy regime.76

And the decentralization of power through the Hydrogen Economy does not only pose a threat to the economic elites in the United States but the ruling establishment throughout the world. In fact, according to Rifkin “[…] it could have an even greater impact on emerging nations.” 127

The per capita use of energy throughout the developing world is a mere one-fifteenth of the consumption enjoyed in the United States. The global average per capita energy use for all countries is only one-fifth the level of this country. Lack of access to energy, especially electricity, is a key factor in perpetuating poverty around the world. Conversely, access to energy means more economic opportunity. In South Africa, for example, for every 100 households electrified, ten to twenty new businesses are created. Making the shift to a hydrogen energy regime—using renewable resources and technologies to produce the hydrogen—and creating distributed generation energy webs that can connect communities all over the world could lift billions of people out of poverty. As the price of fuel cells and accompanying appliances continues to plummet with innovations and economies of scale, they will become far more broadly available, as was the case with transistor radios, computers and cellular phones. The goal ought to be to provide stationary fuel cells for every neighborhood and village in the developing world. Renewable energy technologies—wind, photovoltaic, hydro, biomass, etc.—can be installed in villages, enabling them to produce their own electricity and then use it to separate hydrogen from water and store it for subsequent use in fuel cells. In rural areas, where commercial power lines have not yet been extended because they are too expensive, stand- alone fuel cells can provide energy quickly and cheaply.77

We are talking about a potential energy source, which its only emission (aside from heat) is life’s most precious commodity— WATER. And in a world of depleting natural resources due to overcon- sumption, overpopulation and global warming, the worldwide Hydrogen En- ergy Web stands to provide one solution to remedy to the impending global crisis of water shortages, especially for the billions of people in the third world. Rifkin elaborates:

After enough fuel cells have been leased or purchased, and installed, mini energy grids can connect urban neighborhoods as well as rural villages into expanding energy networks. The HEW can be built organically and spread as the distributed generation becomes more widely used. The larger hydrogen fuel cells have the additional advantage of producing pure drinking water as a byproduct, an important consideration in village communities around the world where access to clean water is often a critical concern. Were all individuals and communities in the world to become the producers of their own energy, the result would be a dramatic shift in the 128

configuration of power: no longer from the top down but from the bottom up. Local peoples would be less subject to the will of far-off centers of power. Communities would be able to produce many of their own goods and services and consume the fruits of their own labor locally. But, because they would also be connected via the worldwide communications and energy webs, they would be able to share their unique commercial skills, products and services with other communities around the planet. This kind of economic self-sufficiency becomes the starting point for global commercial interdependence, and is a far different economic reality from that of colonial regimes of the past, in which local peoples were made subservient to and dependent on powerful forces from the outside. By redistributing power broadly to everyone, it is possible to establish the conditions for a truly equitable sharing of the earth’s bounty. This is the essence of reglobalization from the bottom up.78

Of course, if we fail to carry out this epic endeavor, no type of globalization can continue in an energy starved world. Rifkin goes on to frame this opportunity as an evolutionary leap forward within the grand scale of human history and the cycle of technological advancement that usher in new epochs like the transition from a hunters and gatherers society to an agricultural civilization.

Two great forces have dominated human affairs over the course of the past two centuries. The American Revolution unleashed a new human aspiration to universalize the radical notion of political democracy. That force continues to gain momentum and will likely spread to the Middle East, China and every corner of the earth before the current century is half over. A second force was unleashed on the eve of the American Revolu- tion when James Watt patented his steam engine, inaugurating the beginning of the fossil-fuel era and an industrial way of life that fundamentally changed the way we work. The problem is that these two powerful forces have been at odds with each other from the very beginning, making for a deep contradiction in the way we live our lives. While in the political arena we covet greater participation and equal representation, our economic life has been characterized by ever greater concentration of power in ever fewer institutional hands. In large part that is because of the very nature of the fossil- fuel energy regime that we rely on to maintain an industrialized society. Unevenly distributed, difficult to extract, costly to transport, complicated to refine and multifaceted in the forms in which they are used, fossil 129

fuels, from the very beginning, required a highly centralized command- and-control structure to finance exploration and production, and coordinate the flow of energy to end users. The highly centralized fossil-fuel infrastructure inevitably gave rise to commercial enterprises organized along similar lines. Recall that small cottage industries gave way to large- scale factory production in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to take advantage of the capital-intensive costs and economies of scale that went hand in hand with steam power, and later oil and electrifi- cation. In the discussion of the emergence of industrial capitalism, little attention has been paid to the fact that the energy regime that emerged determined, to a great extent, the nature of the commercial forms that took shape.

Now, on the cusp of the hydrogen era, we have at least the “possibility” of making energy available in every community of the world— hydrogen exists everywhere on earth—empowering the whole of the human race. By creating an energy regime that is decentralized and potentially universally accessible to everyone, we establish the technological framework for creating a more participatory and sustainable economic life—one that is compatible with the principle of democratic participation in our political life. Making the commercial and political arenas seamless, however, will require a human struggle of truly epic proportions in the coming decades. What is in doubt is not the technological know-how to make it happen but, rather, the collective human will, determination and resolve to transform the great hope of hydrogen into a democratic reality.79

The awe-inspiring vision of the Society of the Third Millennium that incorporates the transformative venture of creating the worldwide Hydrogen Energy Web is the grand unifying mission that change agents have been searching 130 for during the past fifty years. For this reason and the many others mentioned before, we should boldly pursue the promising possibilities of true democratization and ecological sustainability that the construction of the Hydrogen Economy represents. There is no other greater energy, ecological, economic and political initiative in existence today. Especially, when you consider that by the time these words are swirling around in mainstream media we will be well on our way to a Second Great Depression and well into the Peak Oil Energy Crisis that will lead to worldwide food shortages that far surpasses today’s news headlines of riots with the death for billions of people due to famine. Along with other ecological and economic measures that I will mention shortly, this is one of the big solutions to our energy, environmental and financial crisis. And we should set the completion time period within one generation—that’s 20 years! After all, the proposition of landing a man on the moon was just a farfetched possibility and probable in principle only. It must have appeared to many as impossible considering that some of the technology required to succeed did not yet exist. But we did it and with far less at stake. The barriers to building a Hydrogen Economy will seem to be insurmountable but this is exactly the epic endeavor to test and challenge the Millennials—“to elevate their expectations” and “set goals big enough to engage the imagination of this generation of achievers.” In the meantime, an interim strategy would need to be immediately implemented “to curtail non-essential energy usage and to use energy more efficiently [because it] will be cheaper, and will be necessary in any case. No one doubts that some demand-reduction strategies will be difficult and in many cases unpopular, but in the end they will be unavoidable. The sooner they are undertaken, the less disruptive their impacts are likely to be.”80 The visionary venture of a Hydrogen Economy should be coupled, integrated and carried out in conjunction with The Oil Depletion Protocol as suggested by Richard Heinberg and Lester Brown’s proposed Plan B: Mobi- lizing To Save Civilization, (although I believe it is misnamed since it should not be our collective aim to rescue our carbon-based Western industrialization since it is one of the major causes of our current predicament) nevertheless it includes: 1) Eradicating poverty, stabilizing population (through universal basic education, better health for all, curbing the HIV epidemic, reducing farm subsidies and debt, funding the Poverty-Eradication Budget); 2) Restoring the Earth (by protecting and restoring forests, conserving and rebuilding soils, meeting nature’s water needs, regeneration of fisheries, protecting plant and animal diversity, funding the Earth Restoration Budget); 3) Feeding seven billion well (by rethinking land productivity, raising water productivity, producing protein more efficiently, new protein production systems, moving

131 down the food chain, and other actions on many fronts); 4) Stabilizing the climate (through raising energy productivity, harnessing the wind, hybrid cars and wind power, converting sunlight to electricity, energy from the earth, cutting carbon emissions fast); 5) Designing Sustainable Cities (by redesign- ing urban transport, farming in the city, reducing urban water use) and 6) Building a New Economy (through shifting taxes, shifting subsidies, eco- labeling to vote with our wallets, new industries, new jobs).” In addition, the federal government should make a national call for sacrifice, conservation, efficiency and innovation by acting as a catalyst to initiate the process by assuming three key roles: 1) as the “Enforcer” of energy conservation measures and carbon emissions’ regulations beginning with increasing CAFÉ standards to at least 40 miles per gallon by 2010; 2) as the “Initial Dedicated Customer” like converting the entire U.S. mail delivery fleet to hydrogen vehicles, thus, overcoming the initial obstacle of trying to determine what to create first, the vehicles or the infrastructure—create both concurrently; and 3) be the “Principal Capital Investor” by supplying subsidies, tax credits and other financial measures for continued research and development. In time, what will emerge with all of these comprehensive economic changes is an “Ecology of Commerce,” creating a new financial system of Ecological Economics: the 21st century grand unifying theme for the next stage of human evolution. However, we are going to need a new galvanizing force—a Global Mar- shal Plan 2.0—or a World War II type-mobilization to engage the citizens of our country to implement such titanic actions. We did it once before, we can do it again as Lester Brown decries in the article entitled: “We Need A Sense of Urgency,” published in the news journal, Population Press.

[…] Saving civilization will take a massive mobilization, and at wartime speed. The U.S. entry into World War II offers an inspiring case study in rapid mobilization. Initially, the United States resisted involvement in the war and responded only after it was directly attacked at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. But respond it did. After an all-out commitment, the U.S. engagement helped turn the tide of war, leading the Al- lied Forces to victory within three-and-a-half years. In his State of the Union address on January 6, 1942, one month after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt announced the country’s arms production goals. The United States, he said, was planning to produce 45,000 tanks, 60,000 planes, 20,000 anti-aircraft guns, and 6 million tons of merchant shipping. He added, “Let no man say it cannot be done.”

132

No one had ever seen such huge arms production numbers. But Roosevelt and his colleagues realized that the world’s largest concentration of industrial power at that time was in the U.S. automobile industry. Even during the Depression, the United States was producing 3 million or more cars a year. After his State of the Union address, Roosevelt met with automobile industry leaders and told them that the country would rely heavily on them to reach these arms production goals. Initially they wanted to continue making cars and simply add on the production of armaments. What they did not yet know was that the sale of new cars would soon be banned. From early 1942 through the end of 1944, nearly three years, there were essentially no cars produced in the United States. In addition to a ban on the production and sale of cars for private use, residential and highway construction was halted, and driving for pleasure was banned. Strategic goods—including tires, gasoline, fuel oil, and sugar—were rationed beginning in 1942. Cutting back on private consumption of these goods freed up material resources that were vital to the war effort. The year 1942 witnessed the greatest expansion of industrial output in the nation’s history—all for military use. Wartime aircraft needs were enormous. They included not only fighters, bombers, and reconnaissance planes, but also the troop and cargo transports needed to fight a war on distant fronts. From the beginning of 1942 through 1944, the United States far exceeded the initial goal of 60,000 planes, turning out a stagger- ing 229,600 aircraft, a fleet so vast it is hard even today to visualize it. Equally impressive, by the end of the war more than 5,000 ships were added to the 1,000 or so that made up the American Merchant Fleet in 1939. In her book No Ordinary Time, Doris Kearns Goodwin describes how various firms converted. A sparkplug factory was among the first to switch to the production of machine guns. Soon a manufacturer of stoves was producing lifeboats. A merry-go-round factory was making gun mounts; a toy company was turning out compasses; a corset manufacturer was producing grenade belts; and a pinball machine plant began to make armor-piercing shells. In retrospect, the speed of this conversion from a peacetime to a wartime economy is stunning. The harnessing of U.S. industrial power tipped the scales decisively toward the Allied Forces, reversing the tide of war. Germany and Japan, already fully extended, could not counter this effort. Winston Churchill often quoted his foreign secretary, Sir Edward

133

Grey: “The United States is like a giant boiler. Once the fire is lighted under it, there is no limit to the power it can generate.” This mobilization of resources within a matter of months demonstrates that a country and, indeed, the world can restructure the economy quickly if it is convinced of the need to do so. In this mobilization, the scarcest resource of all is time. With climate change, for example, we are fast approaching the point of no return. The temptation is to reset the clock, but we cannot. Nature is the timekeeper […]. Many people—although not yet the majority—are already convinced of the need for a wholesale economic restructuring […We need] to convince more people of this need, helping to tip the balance toward the forces of change and hope.81

S3K 3.0—Long-Term Vision Of The Venus Project For A Resource Based Economy (RBE) As Promoted By The Zeitgeist Movement

(Image Courtesy Of Wiki Commons)

Not too long ago, the Zeitgeist Movement was known to be the activist arm to The Venus Project, which constitutes Jacques Fresco’s life-long work as an industrial designer and social engineer. It could be summarized as “the application of The Scientific Method for social concern.”

Our approach to social evolution begins with our values. Our values are combinations of personal reflections on our acquired knowledge, coupled with the traditionalized, cultural indoctrinations we are born in- to. As time moves forward, our values change. Sadly, most of the values people have today come from a social system that is largely out of date in terms of its relationship to modern science and technology.

134

The process of accomplishment consists of: knowing what we want (Goals), thinking about the material in the most effective and hence, scientific way (Method), and using our most effective technological instruments to make that goal become a reality (Tools). The valued goals of The Zeitgeist Movement and hence The Venus Project, are to redesign society for the benefit of all humanity, making sure there is enough of everything for everyone, maximizing personal freedom and happiness, while constantly reducing offensive social behavior, or crime. These values can only be accomplished using the intelligent and humane methods of science and the tools of technology. Social Cybernation: We call for a straightforward redesign of our culture, in which the age-old inadequacies of war, poverty, hunger, debt and unnecessary human suffering are viewed not only as avoidable, but also as totally unacceptable. Anything less simply results in a continuation of the same catalog of problems inherent in the present system,” Jacque Fresco. The time has come for a restructuring of our world society. The cause of this need is not some creative interest or intellectual ambition. The cause is the failing monetary structure, increasing world poverty and conflict, the constant corruption generated by the pursuit of profit and the continual poisoning of the planet and ourselves by the commercial industry at large. We stand at the crossroads. Either we take responsibility for our lives and for society itself, or we pay the price. The more we continue within this outdated system, the more unstable things are going to become. The Venus Project: is an organization that wants nothing less than a peaceful and sustainable global civilization. It seeks to update society to present day knowledge and modern methods. Its tenets are essentially based on the application of Science and Technology for human and social concern. The social structure it advocates is called a Resource-Based Economy. A Resource Based Economy utilizes existing resources rather than commerce. All goods and services are available without the use of currency, credit, barter or any form of debt or servitude. The aim of this new social design is to free humanity from the repetitive, mundane and arbitrary occupational roles which hold no true relevance for social development, while encouraging a new incentive system that is focused on self- fulfillment, education, social awareness and creativity, as opposed to the shallow and self-centered goals of wealth, property and power which are dominant today. The Venus Project recognizes that the earth is abundant

135 with resources, and that our outdated methods of rationing resources through monetary control are no longer relevant. In fact, they are very counterproductive to our survival. The monetary system was created thousands of years ago during periods of great scarcity. Its initial purpose was contrived as a method of distributing goods and services based on labor contributions. It is not at all related to our true capacity to produce goods and services on this planet. Advancing technology is now phasing out the role of humans in the economic labor force. This paradigm shift is going to alter society one way or another. It will either lead us unto a new social system which does not require human servitude for income; where society is designed as a whole to benefit itself with the use of advanced technology being pur- posefully accelerated for social betterment… or we will likely be led down the path of chaos and disorder, where unemployment is rampant, crime is epidemic, draconian police state measures are introduced to suppress dissent and environmental resources become more exploited and destroyed. Now, for the sake of argument, let’s completely forget about our current monetary based social system and take a fresh look at modern industrial production methods, as would be implemented in a Resource-Based Economy. The question is how would we design a production system that maximizes high quality output, reduces waste, considers the dynamic equilibrium of the biosphere, and reduces repetitive and mechanical human labor? Based on The Scientific Method, here is how the logical reasoning for industrial production methods would unfold:

 Step 1: Survey the planetary resources.

 Step 2: Decide on what needs to be produced, oriented by priority ranging from bare necessities (such a food, water, shelter, etc.) to utility based production items (raw materials, automated machines, technological development, etc.) to production items used for non-utility based purposes. (Entertainment Media, Radios, Musical Instruments)

 Step 3: Optimization of production methods/maximizing product lifespan.

 Step 4: Distribution methods for human access.

 Step 5: Optimized recycling of those products that eventually become obsolete or inoperable. 136

Step 1: Survey the planetary resources. It is critical that we know what we have on this planet, for that translates into what the possibilities are. With this information, industrial production is always adjusted to compensate for any emerging scarcity, along with the most mathematical- ly appropriate raw material distribution, based on availability and its most relevant application. Any scarce resource is immediately addressed by seeking alternatives and substitutes. This awareness can be obtained by real-time electronic feedback coming from all resource sectors of the planet, fed into a central computer database that monitors any growing scarcity or problem. This idea of world resource monitoring is not farfetched, even if it might sound complex. In fact, the US military and Pentagon already have satellites and ocean monitors for the purpose of defense. These instruments could simply be reoriented for the purpose of environmental monitoring rather than human monitoring. Step 2: Decide on what production is required. What do we need? This is a very powerful question, for, besides food, water and shelter, most on the planet today have no idea what they really want or need, for they have never been informed as to the true state of technology. What we think we need is a direct result of the state of society’s awareness of technological development. For instance, a person 300 years ago might need a needle and thread to fix a torn shirt. Today, they would think they need an electronic sewing machine…yet…. More accurately, what they really need is a kind of shirt material that doesn’t tear easily or at all. Someone who has dust in his or her home would think, “I need a vacuum cleaner.” Are they sure? Perhaps what they actually need is a household pressure system that does not enable dust to enter or is equipped with electrostatic air filters that eliminate what little dust there is and destroys air borne bacteria. In other words, if we critically examine what we think we need in a material sense, we can begin to see that needs are always in transition. Science and technology are barometers of utilitarian human need, and therefore all products that are created should be as advanced as is technologically possible. Our current monetary system, which generates wasteful, outdated products constantly just to keep industry and the economy going, does not have the ability or the desire to produce the most advanced tools for our use. This is because the majority of the products produced would not even exist if industry focused on what would best serve the needs of society.

137

Step 3: Optimization of production methods/maximizing product lifespan. If I was going to build a desk for myself, I would try to make sure that desk would last as long as possible. This makes sense, right? If the desk breaks, that means I would have to build another one, at the cost of more materials and more labor. It would seem logical that everything produced in society would have the longest possible life span that is technically possible. Sadly, the exact opposite occurs in our current system, for, as previously discussed, the current monetary system thrives on multiplicity and planned obsolescence. Without it, the whole economy would collapse. This mechanism of the monetary system is nothing but detrimental. How anyone can sit back and defend the Monetary System’s propensity for waste is horrifying. In a saner world, we will make things that last. The optimization of production methods is about using the most powerful materials and methods, while outputting the most long lasting and effective products. Human labor is not only currently being replaced by machines because it is more cost effective within the profit system, machine labor is exceedingly better than human labor, and output statis- tics have shown this continually – Industrial productivity increases when machine labor replaces human labor. This, of course, should be no surprise, for a machine does not get tired and it is always more accurate and consistent than a human, mechanically. High-efficiency labor automation, coupled with scientifically managed resources will allow for a fluid, scarcity-less environment which could be operated by only a very small fraction of the population. Step 4: Distribution methods for human access. Distribution methods would also depend on the state of technology. For instance, production could eventually become so streamlined, that a product is only created when the request is made by a person in need. Regardless, warehouse like distribution centers, along with automated delivery would be the most simplistic way for now. Also, since there is no money used in this system, there is little need for a person to hoard their items. There is also no reason for a person to steal something that is available to everyone…and they certainly couldn’t sell it. In light of the fact that all goods in a Resource-Based Economy are designed to last as long as possible, the consumer culture values that exist today would also be outgrown. Not to mention the outgrowth of all of the other value distortions imposed by advertising today, which make people feel greedy, inferior or inept due to what they do and don’t own. Advertising would not exist in this new system, outside of general prod-

138 uct information available to people who think they might need it. To obtain a product, a person would likely go online, search for the item’s function, select the item and request it. It would be available for pickup or delivery soon after. Step 5: Optimized Recycling of the products that become outdated or inoperable. This step actually begins at the production stage, for each product designed has had incorporated into it the consideration of recycling in advance. Ideally, everything produced would be sustainable and recyclable. This strategic consideration would ensure that obsolete products would be reused, reducing waste, to the maximum extent possible. Now, one of the more difficult and confusing components for many to consider in regard to the above 5 steps for our Resource-Based Econ- omy’s new industrial production methodology, has to do with number 3 and the use of machines for replacing human labor in as many areas as possible. The question of, “Who will maintain the machines?” is common. This will be addressed in a moment. However, let’s briefly review the history and application of machine automation and computer technology. The first major automated robot, the Unimate from Unimation Inc., had a work envelope of 350 cubic feet. It occupied 20 square feet of floor space. The Unimate was deployed for the first time in 1961 at the General Motors Corporation plant in Trenton, New Jersey, where it un- loaded a diecasting machine. Six years later, GM was using the Unimate for spot welding and attaching clips to seat frames. In 1970, the au- tomaker built the first automated spot welding line, consisting of 28 robots. Those who were in the business of making these machines knew exactly what the implications were. In 1962, John Snyder, the president of U. S. Industries, Inc., a manufacturer of automated equipment, set up the “Foundation on Automation and Employment” to try to “develop ways to ease automation's impact on displaced workers.” He once stated: “I want to sell the automation machines that my company makes, but if our economy turns sour, if the unemployment problem is not solved, I will have difficulty selling them and no reason to make them. To my way of thinking, all businessmen should share this view—that the unemployment problem and the automation problem are as serious for business as for labor.” In 1946, the first general-purpose electronic computer was developed- called ENIAC. This computer has 18,000 radio tubes, took up 680

139

square feet and weighed more than 30 tons. Penn professor Irving Brain- erd once speculated that during the 80,223 hours ENIAC operated, it crunched more calculations than had been performed by all humanity since time began. Now, a computer chip measuring 0.02 inches (0.5 mm) square has the same performance power as the ENIAC. Now, machinery today is being combined with computerization. Es- sentially, the computer is the brain of the machine and instructs the machine in terms of what it is to do. This combination of machine and computer intelligence could be termed: Cybernation. Cybernated machines today are probably the most powerful and influential inventions humanity has ever created. The possibilities of these tools are on pace to change the entire fabric of society…beginning first with the freeing of the human labor force.82

The next set of excerpts are from Peter Joseph’s movie “Moving For- ward” the third documentary in the Zeitgeist trilogy. As director, writer and producer he narrates and interviews many different people providing critical comments of our current dysfunctional social system and seeks out solutions by scientists, psychologists, economists and engineers. I cite information from the third segment of the film as a summary of ideas that describes a scientific approach to resolving our worldwide problems through a “Global Resource Management System.”

Strategic Preservation, Strategic Safety & Efficiency Strategy. We see a ton of solar – wind – tidal – wave – heat differential and geothermal possibilities for energy production. So we can strategize objectively, about what we use and where, to avoid what could be called “negative retroactions”, or anything that results from production or use that dam- ages the environment and hence, ourselves. We will call this “Strategic Safety” to couple in with our “Strategic Preservation.” But production strategies do not stop there. We are going to need an “Efficiency Strategy,” for the actual mechanics of production itself. And what we find is that there are roughly three specific protocols we must adhere to:

1. Every good we produce must be designed to last as long as possible. Naturally, the more things break down, the more resources we are going to need to replace them, and the more waste produced.

140

2. When things do break down, or are no longer usable for whatever reason, it is critical that we harvest, or recycle as much as we possibly can. So the production design must take this into account directly at the very earliest stages.

3. Quickly evolving technologies, such as electronics, which are subject to the fastest rates of technological obsolescence, would need to be designed to foreshadow and accommodate physical updates. The last thing we want to do is throw away an entire computer system just because it has only one broken part, or is outdated. So we simply design the components to be easily updated, part by part, standardized and universally interchangeable, foreshadowed by the current trend of technological change.

And when we realize that the mechanisms of “Strategic Preserva- tion,” “Strategic Safety” and “Strategic Efficiency” are purely technical considerations devoid of any human opinion or bias, we simply program these strategies into a computer which can weigh and calculate all the relevant variables, allowing us to always arrive at the absolute best method for sustainable production based on current understandings. And while that might sound complex all it is, is a glorified calculator, not to mention that such multi-varied decision making and monitoring systems, are already used across the world today for isolated purposes. It is simply a process of scaling it out. So... now, we not only have our Resource Management System, but also a Production Management System, both of which are easily computer automated to maximize efficiency, preservation and safety. The informational reality is that the human mind or even a group of humans, cannot track what needs to be tracked. It must be done by computers, and it can be. Distribution. What sustainability strategies make sense here? Well, since we know that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and since energy is required to power transport machines, the less transport distance, the more efficient. Producing goods in one continent and shipping them over to another only makes sense if the goods in question simply cannot be produced in the target area. Otherwise, it is nothing but wasteful. We must localize production, so distribution is simple, fast, and requires the least amount of energy. We'll call this the “Proximity Strategy,” which simply means we reduce the travel of goods as much as possible whether raw materials or finished consumer products.

141

Of course, it might also be important to know what goods we are transporting and why. And this falls under the category of Demand. Demand. Simply, what people need to be healthy and to have a high quality of life. The spectrum of material human needs range from core life supporting necessities such as food, clean water and shelter, to social and recreational goods which allow for relaxation and personal, social en- joyment: both important factors in human and social health overall. So, very simply, we take another survey. People describe their needs, demand is assessed, and production begins based on that demand. And since the level of demand of different goods will naturally fluctuate and change around different regions, we need to create a “Demand/Distribution Track- ing System” so to avoid overruns and shortages. Of course, this idea is old news; it is used in every major store chain today to make sure they keep up with their inventory. Only this time, we are tracking on a global scale. But, wait a minute. We really can’t fully understand demand if we don’t account for the actual usage of the good itself. Is it logical and sustainable for every single human to say, have one of everything made? Regardless of their usage? No. That would be simply wasteful and inefficient. If a person has a need for a good but that need is only for say, 45 minutes a day on average, it would be much more efficient if that good was made available to them and to others when needed. Many forget that it isn't the good that they want, it is the purpose of that good. When we realize that the good itself is only as important as its utility, we see that “external restriction,” or what we might call today “ownership,” is extremely wasteful and environmentally illogical in a fundamental, economic sense. So, we need to devise a strategy called…. Strategic Access. This would be the foundation of our “De- mand/Distribution Tracking System” which makes sure we can meet the demand of the population’s needs for access of whatever they need, when they need it. And as far as physically obtaining the goods, centralized and regional access centers all make sense for the most part, placed in close proximity to the population and a person would simply come in, take the item, use it and when finished, return it when it is no longer needed... sort of how a library works today. In fact, these centers could not only exist in the community in the way we see local stores today, but specialized access centers would exist in specific areas where often certain goods are utilized, saving more energy with less repeat transport. And once this Demand Tracking System is in order, it is tied into our Produc- tion Management system, and of course, into our Resource Management system. Hence creating a unified, dynamically updating, global economic

142 management machine, that simply makes sure we remain sustainable. Starting with securing the integrity of our finite resources, moving to make sure we only create the best, most strategic goods possible, while distributing everything in the most intelligent and efficient way. And the unique result of this preservation-based approach, which is intuitively counter to many, is that this logical, ground up empirical process of preservation and efficiency—which can only define true human sustainability on this plane—would likely enable something never before seen in human history: Access Abundance. Not just for a percentage of the global population, but the entire civilization. This economic model, as was just generalized... this responsible, systems approach to total Earth resource management and processes, designed, again, to do nothing less than take care of humanity as a whole in the most efficient and sustainable way, could be termed: a “Resource Based Economy.” The idea was defined in the 1970s by structural engineer Jacque Fresco. He understood back then that society was on a colli- sion course with nature and itself, unsustainable on every level, and if things didn't change, we would destroy ourselves, one way or another. Talk show host interviewer: “Are all of these things you are saying Jacque, could they be built with what we know today? Or, ...are you guessing based on what we know today?” Fresco: “No. All of these things can be built with what we know today. It would take 10 years to change the surface of the earth. To rebuild the world into a second Garden of Eden. The choice lies with you. The stupidity of a nuclear arms race, the development of weapons, trying to solve your problems politically by electing this political party or that political party, that all politics is immersed in corruption. Let me say it again: Communism, socialism, fascism, the Democrats, the liberals—we want to absorb human beings... all organizations that believe in a better life for man! There are no Negro problems or Polish problems or Jewish problems or Greek problems or women’s problems—there are human problems! I’m not afraid of anybody, I don't work for anyone; no one can dis- charge me. I have no boss. I am afraid to live in the society we live in today. Our society cannot be maintained by this type of incompetency. It was great—the free enterprise system—about 35 years ago [stated in 1970]. That was the last of its usefulness. Now we have got to change our way of thinking or perish.” The horror movies of the future will be our society—the way it didn't work—and politics ...would be part of a horror movie. Well, lots of people today use the term “cold science” because it’s analytical, and they

143 don’t even know what analytical means. Science means: closer approxi- mations to the way the world really works. So, it’s telling the truth—is what it is. A scientist doesn’t try to get along with people. They tell them what their findings are. They have to question all things. And if some scientist comes up with an experiment that shows certain materials have certain strengths, other scientists have to be able to duplicate that experiment and come up with the same results. Even if a scientist feels that an airplane wing due to mathematics or calculations can hold up a given amount of weight they still pile sandbags on it to see when it breaks, and they say “you know my calculations are right” or “they are not correct.” I love that system because it’s free of bias and free of thinking that math can solve all the problems. You have to put your Math to test also. I think that every system that can be put to test should be put to test. And that all decisions should be based upon research. A Resource Based Economy is simply the scientific method applied to social concern—an approach utterly absent in the world today. Society is a technical invention. And the most efficient methods of optimized human health, physical production, distribution, city infrastructure and the like reside in the field of science and technology—not politics or monetary economics. It operates in the same systematic way as, say an airplane and there is no Republican or Liberal way to build an airplane. Likewise, nature itself is the physical referent we use to prove our science, and it is a set system—emerging only from our increased understanding of it. In fact, it has no regard for what you subjectively think or believe to be true. Rather, it gives you an option: you can learn and fall in line with its natural laws and conduct yourself accordingly—invariably creating good health and sustainability, or you can go against the current—to no avail. So, a Resource Based Economy is nothing more than a set of proven, life supporting understandings where all decisions are based upon optimized human and environmental sustainability. It takes into account the empirical “Life Ground” which every human being shares as a need regardless, again, of their political or religious philosophy. There is no cultural relativism to this approach. It isn't a matter of opinion. Human needs are human needs. And having access to the necessities of life, such as clean air, nutritious food and clean water, along with a positively reinforcing, stable, nurturing, non-violent environment, is demanded for our mental and physical health, our evolutionary fitness, and hence, the species’ survival itself. A Resource Based Economy would be based upon available resources. You can't just bring a lot of people to an island or

144 build a city of 50,000 people without having access to the necessities of life. So, when I use the term “a comprehensive systems approach” I’m talking about doing an inventory of the area first and determining what that area can supply—not just architectural approach—not just design approach—but design must be based on all of the requirements to enhance human life. And that’s what I mean by an integrated way of thinking. Food, clothing, shelter, warmth, love—all those things are necessary. And if you deprive people of any of them you have a lesser human being, less capable of functioning. As previously outlined, a Resource Based Economy’s ground-up global, systems approach to extraction, production and distribution is based upon a set of true economic mechanisms, or “strategies” which guarantee efficiency and sustainability in every area of the economy. So, continuing this train of thought regarding logical design, what is next in our equation? Where does all this materialize? Cities: The advent of the city is a defining feature of modern civilization. Its role is to enable efficient access to the necessities of life along with increased social support and community interaction. So how would we go about designing an ideal city? What shape should we make it? Square? Well, given we are going to be moving around the thing we might as well make it as equidistant as possible for ease, hence the circle.

(Image Courtesy Of Wiki Commons)

What should the city contain? Well, naturally we need a residential area, a goods production area, a power generation area, an agricultural area. But we also need nurturing as human beings—hence culture, nature, recreation and education. So lets include a nice open park, an entertain- 145 ment/events area for cultural purposes and socializing and educational and research facilities. And since we are working with a circle it seems rational to place these functions in belts based on the amount of land required for each goal along with ease of access.

Now, let's get down to specifics: First we need to consider the core infrastructure or intestines of the city organism. These would be the water, goods, waste and energy transport channels. Just as we have water and sewage systems under our cities today, we would extend this channeling concept to integrate waste recycling and delivery itself. No more mailmen or garbage men. It is built right in. We could even use automated pneumatic tubes and similar technologies. Transport: This also applies to transportation. It needs to be integrated and strategically designed to reduce or even remove the need for wasteful, independent automobiles. Electric trams, conveyors, transveyors and maglevs, which can take you virtually anywhere in the city, even up and down, along with connecting you to other cities as well. And of course, in the event a car is required, it is automated by satellite for safety and integrity. In fact, this automation technology is in working order right now. Automobile accidents kill about 1.2 million people every single year, injuring about 50 million. This is absurd and doesn’t have to occur. Between efficient city design and automated, driverless cars this death toll can be virtually eliminated. Agriculture: Today, through our haphazard, cost-cutting industrial methods—using pesticides, excessive fertilizers and other means—we 146 have successfully destroyed much of the arable land on this planet, not to mention also extensively poisoning our bodies. In fact, industrial and agricultural chemical toxins now show up in virtually every human being tested, including infants. Fortunately, there is a glaring alternative: the soil-less mediums of hydroponics and aeroponics, which also reduce nutrient and water requirements by up to 75% of our current usage. Food can now be organically grown on an industrial scale in enclosed vertical farms, such as in 50-story 1-acre plots, virtually eliminating the need for pesticides and hydrocarbons in general. This is the future of industrial food cultivation: efficient, clean and abundant. So, such advanced systems would be, in part, what comprise our agricultural belt, producing all the food required for the entire city’s population with no need to import anything from the outside, saving time, waste and energy. Energy: The Energy Belt would work in a systems approach to extract electricity from our abundant renewable mediums—specifically wind, solar, geothermal and heat differentials—and if near water poten- tials-tidal and wave power. To avoid intermittency and make sure a positive net energy return occurs, these mediums would operate in an integrated system powering each other when needed, while storing excessive energy to large super capacitors under the ground, so nothing can go to waste. And not only does the city power itself, particular structures will also power independently and generate electricity through photovoltaic paints, structural pressure transducers, the thermocouple effect, and other current but underutilized technologies. But of course, this begs the question: How does this technology and goods in general, get created in the first place? Production: The Industrial Belt, apart from having hospitals and the like, would be the hub of factory production. Completely localized overall, it would, of course, obtain raw materials by way of the global resource management system just discussed, with demand being generated by the population of the city itself. As far as the mechanics of production, we need to discuss a new, powerful phenomenon which was sparked very recently in human history and is on pace to changing everything. It’s called Mechanization or the automation of labor. Well, if you look around, you'll notice that almost everything that we use today is built automatically. Your shoes, your clothes, your home appliances, your car and so on... they are all built by machines in an automatic way. Can we say that the society has not been influenced by these major technological advance- ments? Of course not. These systems really dictate new structures and new needs and they make a lot of other things obsolete. So, we have

147 been going up in the development and use of technology in an exponen- tial way. So, definitely automation is going to continue. You cannot stop technologies that just make sense. Labor automation through technology is at the bottom of every major social transformation in human history. From the agricultural revolution and the invention of the plow, to the industrial revolution and the invention of the powered machine, to the information age we live in now, through essentially the invention of advanced electronics and computers. And with regard to advanced production methods today mechanization is now evolving on its own: moving away from the traditional method of assembling component parts into a configuration, into an advanced method of creating entire products in one single process. Like most engineers, I’m fascinated by biology because it is so full of examples of extraordinary pieces of engineering. What biology is—is the study of things that copy themselves. As good a definition of life as we’ve got. Again, as an engineer, I have always been intrigued by the idea of machines copying themselves. RepRap is a three-dimensional printer— that's to say it is a printer that you plug into your computer and instead of making 2-dimensional sheets of paper with patterns on, it makes real, physical, 3-dimensional objects. Now there’s nothing new about that. 3- D printers have been around for about 30 years. The big thing about RepRap is that it prints most of its own parts. So, if you’ve got one, you could make another one and give it to a friend as well as being able to print lots of useful things. From the simple printing of basic household goods in your home to the printing of an entire automobile body in one swoop, advanced, automated 3-D printing now has the potential to transform virtually every field of production, including home construction. Contour Crafting is actually a fabrication technology—the so-called 3-D printing—when you directly build 3-D objects from a computer model. Using Contour Crafting, it will be possible to build a 2000 square- foot home entirely by the machine, in one day. The reason that people are interested in automating construction is that it really brings a lot of benefits. For example, construction is pretty labor-intensive. And although it provides jobs for a sector of the society it also has issues and complications. For example, construction is the most dangerous job that there is. It is worse than mining and agriculture that has the highest level of fatality in almost every country. Another issue is the waste. An average home in the United States has 3 to 7 tons of waste. So this is huge if we look at the impact of construction, and knowing about 40% of all materials in the world are used in construction. So, a big waste of energy and

148 resources and big damage to the environment as well. Making homes using hammers and nails and wood with the state of our technology today, is really absurd and will go the way of our labor class in regards to manufacturing in the United States. Recently, there was a study by economist David Autor of MIT, that states that our middle class is obsolete and being replaced by automation. Quite simply, Mechanization is more productive, efficient and sustainable than human labor in virtually every sector of the economy today. Machines do not need vacations, breaks, insurance, pensions, and they can work 24 hours a day, every day. The output potential and accuracy compared to human labor, is unmatched. The bottom line: repetitive human labor is becoming obsolete and impractical across the world. And the unemployment you see around you today is fundamentally the result of this evolution of efficiency in technology. For years, market economists have dismissed this growing pattern which could be called “Technological Unemployment,” because of the fact that new sectors always seemed to emerge to re-absorb the displaced workers. Today, the service sector is the only real hub left and currently employs over 80% of the American workforce with most industrialized countries maintaining a similar proportion. However, this sector is now being challenged increasingly by automated kiosks, automated restaurants, and even automated stores. Econ- omists today are finally acknowledging what they had been denying for years: Not only is technological unemployment exacerbating the current labor crisis we see across the world due to the global economic down- turn, but the more the recession deepens the faster the industries are mechanizing. The catch, which is not realized, is that the faster they mechanize to save money—the more they displace people—the more they reduce public purchasing power. This means that, while the corporation can produce everything more cheaply, fewer and fewer people will actually have money to buy anything regardless of how cheap they become. The bottom line is that the “labor for income” game is slowly coming to an end. In fact, if you take a moment to reflect on the jobs which are in existence today which automation could take over right now if applied, 75% of the global workforce could be replaced by mechanization tomorrow. And this is why, in a Resource Based Economy, there is no Monetary-Market system. No money at all... for there is no need. A Resource-Based Economy recognizes the efficiency of mechanization and accepts it for what it offers. It doesn’t fight it, like we do today.

149

Why? Because it is irresponsible not to, given any interest in efficiency and sustainability. And this brings us back to our city system. In the center is the Central Dome, which not only houses, the educational facilities and transportation hub, it also hosts the mainframe that runs the cities’ technical operations. The city is, in fact, one big automated machine. It has sensors in all technical belts to track the progress of agriculture, energy gathering, production, distribution and the like. Now, would people be needed to oversee these operations in the event of a malfunction or the like? Most probably: yes. But that number would decrease over time as improvements continue. However, as of today, maybe 3% of the city population would be needed for this job when you break it down. And I can assure you: that in an economic system, which is actually designed to take care of you and secure your well-being, without you having to submit to a private dictatorship on a daily basis usually to a job that is either technically unnecessary or socially pointless, while often struggling with debt that doesn’t exist just to make ends meet. I guarantee you: people will volunteer their time left and right to maintain and improve a system that actually takes care of them. And coupled with this issue of “Incentive” comes the common assumption that if there isn't some external pressure for one to “work for a living” people would just sit around, do nothing and turn into fat lazy blobs. This is nonsense. The labor system we have today is in fact the generator of laziness, not a resolver of it. If you think back to when you were a child—full of life, interested in new things to understand, likely creating and exploring. But as time went on, the system pushed you into the focus of figuring out how to make money. And from early education, to study at a university, you are narrowed. Only to emerge as a creature, which serves as a cog in a wheel in a model that sends all the fruits to the upper 1%. Scientific Studies have now shown that people are, in fact, not motivated by monetary reward when it comes to ingenuity and creation. The creation itself is the reward. Money, in fact, appears only to serve as an incentive for repetitive, mundane actions a role we have just now shown can be replaced by machine. So when it comes to innovation—the actual use of the human mind—the monetary incentive has proven to be a hindrance, interfering and detracting from creative thought. And this might explain why Nikola Tesla, the Wright Brothers, and other inven- tors who contributed massively to our current world never showed a monetary incentive to do so. Money is, in fact, a false incentive and causes 100 times more distortion than it does contribution […].

150

Victims of Culture: As stated before, a Resource Based Economy applies the Scientific Method to social concern and this isn't limited to simply technical efficiency. It also has the consideration of human and social well-being directly and what comprises it. What good is a social system if, in the end, it doesn’t produce happiness and peaceful coexist- ence? So, it is important to point out that with the removal of the money system and the necessities of life provided we would see a global reduction in crime by about 95% almost immediately—for there is nothing to steal, embezzle, scam, or the like. 95% of all people in prisons today are there due to some monetary related crime or drug abuse and drug abuse is a disorder—not a crime […]. Very simply, it is time to grow up.83

Growing up is another way of saying we need to continue our human development through higher levels of consciousness. The good news is that potentially 80 million Cultural Creative Americans are poised to make the leap to the integral worldview and comprehensive modes of change. The In- tegral Neo-Transcendentalists’ (Metamodern) approach to mend the fragmentation of progressive forces through the generalization and linking of Bob Hopkin’s Transition US (TUS) movement vision re-designated as S3K 1.0, with Jeremy Rifkin’s post carbon Third Industrial Revolution (TIR) of the Hydrogen Energy Web (HEW) for an Empathetic Civilization as S3K 2.0, and Jacques Fresco’s Resource-Based Economy (RBE) of the Venus Project (VP) advocated by Peter Joseph’s The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM) designated as S3K 3.0. These “Three Transformative Thresholds” for the Society of the Third Millennium (S3K) are critically link through a common worldview, values and culture. However, to fulfill the promise and potential of this an awe-inspiring vision we need a grand unified strategy based on a new integral theory of social change.

(Image courtesy of Integral “WHAT NOW” Conference, 2017-18) 151

EPILOGUE THE end of the BEGINNING ENACTING THE EMERGING EDGE OF THE FUTURE NOW

(Image Courtesy Of Wiki Commons) 152

S3K 1.0—The Short-Term Vision Of Community Resiliency Through The Post Carbon Relocalization Of The Transition U.S. Movement

“Our vision is that every community in the United States has engaged its collective creativity to unleash an extraordinary and historic transition to a future beyond fossil fuels; a future that is more vibrant, abundant and resilient; one that is ultimately preferable to the present,” from the Transition US Network website. As of 2018 there are 164 official U.S. initiatives in 37 states and 1199 initiatives worldwide in 50 countries that include 13 languages [not bad considering the movement in the U.S. began a decade ago in 2008].84 The following excerpts are examples from different “Transition Towns’ Vi- sions” and my own proposed timetable synthesized to provide a general overview of alternative possibilities in the future, although each geographical location will have unique considerations due to available resources but the same overarching principles and goals of community resiliency apply.

The following… will create a groundswell for change; a catalyst for communities across the world to see an energy-constrained future as the motivator for creative change, rather than as a disaster. But without Transition thinking being embraced by national government and business, and becoming central to the national infrastructure, it will remain marginal. The [following] ingredients imagine the stepping up of Transi- tion thinking to the national stage—imagining what it might look like if every settlement had vibrant Transition initiatives setting up food networks, energy companies, growing food everywhere and catalyzing a new culture of social enterprise.

Food & Water

Farming has experienced a remarkable transformation, undergoing a renaissance that few in [2019] could have thought possible.85 Local food […] created a more resilient food chain…and consuming local food created a multiplier effect in the local economy, supporting jobs and creating community viability […].86 What would have ordinarily taken 20 years to achieve, instead, in just a few short years there has been a food and farming revolution across the United States with the advent of 50 million new farmers. The oil price volatility that began in [2020] focused the nation’s minds; rebuilding the nation’s food security became urgent. Just as in the early days of the Second World War, there was a national crash-training in intensive food gardening, with free courses across the country. Most colleges and schools made food growing a central part of the curriculum, 153 and lots of self-organized groups trained and supported each other in learning how to grow food, sharing tools and saving seeds. Food hubs popped up all over the country, which helped small-scale growing viable. It is a golden time for farming, and farms are quite different from how they looked in [2019]. The landscape has more forest cover and more land uses. While livestock still graze on grassland, there is far more fruit production, more small-scale grain growing, and more land put aside, especially in the peri-urban area, for intensive vegetable production. The high price of liquid fuel means farms have adapted as businesses. They now tend to be run as an umbrella for a range of small land- based businesses that support each other and specialize in local markets. Gourmet mushroom production, for both food and medicinal production, on the farm adding of value to dairy produce (cheese, butter, etc.), fruit and a range of other produce, and the production of natural building materials are among the businesses now common on farms, which have been designed mostly to supply local markets.87 […F]arms are now highly diversified, producing more than just food, and are also providers of local-scale renewable energy, building materials, and organically grown medicinal plants, among other things […]. Rising natural gas prices and disruptions to supply exposed the vulnerability of farming’s dependence on nitrogen fertilizer (which was made from natural gas). The building of organize matter in soils due to their increased ability to lock up carbon is now a priority, a key aspect of the Govern- ment’s carbon reduction strategy. The integration of perennial tree crops is a central feature of agriculture, both for their crop yields and for their carbon-sequestering abilities. Stands of specially bred varieties of walnut, sweet chestnut and hazel have been integrated into most farms, offering protein-rich annual crops for a variety of food uses as well as for producing oils for biodiesel for local consumption. With the changes in climate, a wider range of tree crops is now grown, as well as vines and other per- ennials. Farming has learned to compensate for its reduced oil consumption through the partial reintegration of working horses, alongside locally produced biofuel-powered machinery, and by employing more people. The average farm size is now much smaller than in [2018] and the countryside is substantially more populated. Farms are now host to a diversity of enterprises, not just food production: some now produce materials needed by a building industry now using more local building materials, such as clay plasters, cob and hemp/lime blocks, as well as local timbers.

154

This in turn has enabled the creation of small-scale industries to process and produce these materials often based on the farms. …Some specialize in growing hemp for fabrics, or producing wood pellets or biofuels such as biodiesel or ethanol for the local market. For some farms, the installation of a methane digester means that they are able to supply heat and power to the neighboring community. This newly found diversity of enterprise, alongside food production, has led to a much regenerated local economy, with the major part of each community’s wealth being cycled locally rather than being leached out into the wider economy. A new generation of young farmers is now driving food and farming forward, enthusiastic about local markets and supported by a public keen to be part of the production of their own food. New variations on the Community Supported Agriculture model mean that people identify with ‘their’ farm or ‘their’ brewery, and, as shareholders, they are more involved in how the business operates. During the 20 years to 2030, much research went into agroforestry, the combining of multi-layered tree planting with other farming practices. Most farms now include an element of agroforestry, which, as well as being very productive, is very effective at locking carbon into soils, storing water, building biodiversity and providing shelter to the rest of the farm. The acceleration of agroforestry, supported by a change in payments of farmers, grants and free trainings, has contributed to the arboreal landscape.88 Urban agriculture is now a priority for urban planners and communities. Cities have been redesigned as productive places… A massive program of productive tree planting has brought fruit and new trees into every park and school grounds. Urban market gardeners began to colo- nize land around the edge of the cities, producing a diversity of fresh produce for local markets with extremely low food-miles (leading to the use of the term ‘food feet’). The keeping of small livestock, particularly chickens, has become the nation’s favorite pastime. What were large parks now feature a diversity of allotments, market gardens and horticultural training centers.89 In towns and cities, food production has become an integral part of the urban landscape. Most flatroofed buildings now feature a roof garden, and raised beds adorn many of the now-newly-pedestrianized streets. Parks contain community gardens, and urban market gardening has now reestablished itself, with entrepreneurial new growers competing to grow to most unusual or eye-catching produce. Most deliveries are done by bicycle or biogas-powered vehicle around the city, but the need

155 for transportation is low, given that most such gardens serve very local markets. Many immigrant communities find the opportunity to reconnect with the edible plants they grew in their homelands, so the flat roofs of some of the more culturally diverse parts of the [country] now feature a range of the more unusual vegetables and salads, the harvest of which is celebrated in a range of festivals and events. On ground where only short-term access can be guaranteed, or where there is contamination, a booming market in freshwater fish are grown in tanks. Intensive salad production makes use of the fertility in the water. With a population eating less red meat, more fresh and seasonal fruit and vegetables and more fresh fish, as well as exercising more regularly, a number of key health indicators have improved markedly. In cities, urban agriculture has become a key feature of the local economy. Most employers whose premises are surrounded by a significant amount of land, and most schools and hospitals, now have intensive edible landscapes surrounding them. Much of the food produced is available to the on-site kitchens or sold to employees. Very few lawns are now seen in towns and cities unless they can support grazing animals. Lawnmowers now hang from pub ceilings in the same way that old ploughs did 20 years earlier. Increasing food supply resilience in Western nations has progressed alongside the increasing of resilience in the developing world. Volatile energy prices highlighted how depending on either imports or exports leaves a country equally vulnerable. It became clear that refocusing an economy to supply export markets, while dismantling small farmers, results in a major loss of food security, not an increase. This led to a change in international legislation, with national self-reliance in food once again accepted as legitimate national objective. Farming and, in towns and cities, market gardening are now once again seen as ‘cool’ occupa- tions, and there are now not one, but two, TV soap operas set in urban market gardens […].90 Back garden and allotment food production was already a very popular leisure activity in [2019], but in [2021] the [New] Government legislat- ed to make gardening a key aspect of their carbon reduction and health promotion strategies. Now local varieties of fruit and vegetables are highly treasured, and the teaching of intensive organic gardening techniques is a core part of the National Curriculum, as part of the nation’s Food Se- curity program.91

156

Infrastructure (Building/Housing)

The nation’s housing stock, which although it looks to all intents and purposes much like it did in [2019], is today far more energy-efficient. In 2014, the model of the Local PassivHaus became the standard for all new domestic construction across the [U.S.]; based on pioneering research by Rob McLeod in 2007 which combined the technological advances of the European PassivHaus concept with the use of locally sourced biomateri- als. This model allowed the construction of homes which require no space-heating at all, drawing all their heating requirements from solar gain and the occupants’ body heat. In the local version, in excess of 80% of the materials used are locally sourced. This in turn has led to an explosion of local industries producing clay plasters, natural insulation and cob/hemp blocks. The breathable construction and the materials used in the Local PassivHaus has led to buildings that are very healthy to live in, with very low embodied energy; they also contain significant amounts of stored carbon and contribute very few polluting ‘building miles’. All new buildings are designed to be autonomous and off-the-grid for water and sewage needs, as well as producing more energy than they consume collectively (as with a row of ter- raced houses for example) or, for stand-alone buildings, independently.92 The construction industry began to move away from just building performance to also looking at the materials used. The priority was to create homes that reached or came very close to the Passivhaus standard (i.e. they require no space heating other than the body heat of the occupants) but were made from predominantly local, unprocessed, natural or recycled materials that could be used by less skilled laborers, often for self-/community-build projects. This shift, from energy-intensive, imported building materials to local, low-energy materials, revolutionized construction … and made a wide range of local, small-scale enterprises viable once more. Vernacular building styles have once again come to dominate, with architectural designs being dictated by local materials … by [2030] new housing helps to contribute to a strong sense of place and local identity. Materials that had passed into disuse have now gained a new lease of life. By [2030] the existing housing stock… has been retrofitted to a high standard of energy-efficiency, increasingly using local materials, which have helped enhance the look of many of the less inspiring buildings created in the late twentieth century. The rural economy now has stone and slate quarries operating again. Lime kilns produce lime plasters. Wood- lands are managed for a range of building materials with efficient wood 157 drying, grading and processing. Timber-frame buildings are manufactured to high levels of energy-efficiency off-site, and construction projects are designed to involve less-skilled labor and people new to building. The construction of new homes now benefits local economies, creating work for builders and supporting a range of local industries. These homes are not just energy-efficient to live in but also health, life- affirming spaces that invite community. Most development is no longer carried out by private developers but by community trusts, who own land and buildings in the common interest and promote a wide range of other social benefits. This, again, means that new development strengthens and adds to the resilience of the community, rather than hemorrhaging money from the local economy. Builder’s provides now offer a wide range of pigments, timbers, clay plaster and pre-made hemp/clay blocks, and most building projects now start with a look at what materials are locally available.93 New models for inhabiting larger buildings, and new living arrangements—such as co-housing, where people have private units but some shared facilities—have become far more common. While the retreat in house prices of [2019] resulted in hard times for many, they also made home ownership feasible for young people again, as did falls in the rates of second home ownership. The average footprint of new-build homes has fallen, and one of the great arts for architects is now the efficient design of the small home. Years ago, one’s sense of social worth was based on the size of one’s house; now it is based on its compactness and efficient design. In rural areas, in response to the demands of adjusting to the needs of a much expanded agricultural workforce, clusters of small, low-impact buildings, built from local materials, have been created on farms. Agricultural ties have been used to keep these from becoming privately owned, based on the ’15 Criteria for Sustainable Development in the Countryside’, developed by the rural planning reform organization […]. In [2021], the [New] Government initiated the concept of the Great Reskilling in the training of construction industry workers. Added to the skills taught were the skilled use of hemp and lime, cob blocks, and so on—a much broader set of skills than had previously been taught. A trip to the local builder’s merchants today presents the builder with a range of materials vastly different from those of [2019]: bagged clay plasters, straw and clay, reed and clay boards, hemp or cob blocks, lime or clay renders, laths, locally made natural paints, pigments from local clays, and a wide range of locally grown and sawn timbers, as well as underfloor insulating

158 pellets made form expanded recycled glass. Recycling has changed from [2019], when it involved long distance transportation for centralized industrial processing, to being primarily focused on local, low technology reprocessing, and many new innovative building materials are now made from the low-tech recycling of plastics, paper, fabrics and glass.94

Renewable Energy

[In 2030 the U.S.] has reached, thanks to an extraordinary crash program initiated in [2021], a point of near self-reliance in energy. This was achieved through a 50% reduction in energy consumption and a massive scaling-up of renewables to provide the remaining 50% of energy demand. This was brought about partly by the introduction in [2021] of carbon rationing, based on the model of Tradeable Energy Quotas (TEQs) developed by David Fleming, which allocated to each citizen and business a carbon allowance which was gradually reduced each year, and managed electronically with a swipe card, used with every purchase of energy or fuel. Since their introduction, TEQs have rapidly become a fact of life, with some people now actually making part of their income by living simply and trading their surplus quotas. A nationwide crash program of domestic energy efficiency and retro- fit begun in [2021] has [also] brought down domestic consumption […].95 … [E]nergy has been saved through the retrofitting and increased energy- efficiency of schools, homes, offices, public buildings and industrial premises, and increased transport efficiency. Gone are the days office lighting left blazing all night, shops pumping hot air into the street and energy-guzzling appliances. Expectations of thermal comfort are lower. In winter people rightly expect to be warm, but part of that warmth now comes from the jumpers they are wearing rather than from the gas they are burning.96 […] Part of the success of this was the mainstreaming of energy efficiency. While domestic solar panels and wind turbines became seen as ‘must haves’ around [2020], as prices came down and there was increased grant aid, the much less glamorous work of retrofits still needed a push. This was, in part, achieved by engaging local artists, who reconceived the installation of insulation and other energy-saving devices as a settlement-wide art installation, akin to the artist Christo wrapping buildings and islands. The remaining energy demand has been made up form a mixture of wind (as much as half of it), including a big program of off- shore wind projects, as well as biomass-fueled Combined Heat and Pow- er systems and tidal power. Many towns have helped to reduce their de- 159

mand on the grid by creating localized energy mini-grids, often owned and managed by locally owned energy companies using the ESCO model, and approach first tried many years ago….These bodies put in place renewable energy infrastructure which is owned and supported by the community. The mini-grids are powered by whatever has been identified as the most locally appropriate energy sources, be it tidal in coastal areas, biomass in the forest… or wind in the … highlands—usually a mixture of a range of sources. They are connected to the National Grid in order to exchange surplus or obtain backup when necessary, but communities generating their own power in this way have developed an important tool for strengthening their local economies, enabling the money from its generation to be retained in the local economy. It is standard practice now that many homes, especially new-build ones, are net energy exporters, thanks to generous subsidies for solar power (passive solar and photovoltaics). The surplus energy generated is fed into local mini-grids where they exist, or into the National Grid. Eve- ry home is fitted with a smart meter, which allows the occupants to see at a glance how much energy is being used in the house at that moment. Energy companies also use tariffs in imaginative ways, charging less for electricity at certain times so as to encourage less peak demand at other times.97

However, all of this would not have been possible had it not begun first on the community level. “Most communities now have their own community-owned company. It offers a range of energy services, from energy- efficiency advice and insulation to the opportunity to own shares and influence the development of large-scale renewable energy….Given the amount of money that poured out of local economies in [2021] every time energy bills were paid, by 2030 the generation of energy, and the retrofitting of buildings, has become a key way for communities to fund the development of their own relocalization processes, creating employment and a number of spin-off enterprises.”

The exact technologies used by each company are place-specific and represent its best exploitable resources, but the principle is universal. Many people, by around [2022], as the momentum began to pick up nationally, began to see these emerging local energy companies as a better investment for their savings than many commercial opportunities. Some specialize in the creation of anaerobic digestion, turning waste food and

160 other organic matter into biogas and fertilizers. Some, in areas with good forestry resources, focus on biomass. Those with significant hydro resources exploit that, and the majority have turned to wind generation. The level of community support for local energy companies means that there has been a sea change in the attitudes of local authorities to on- shore wind, with significant lobbying coming from the communities af- fected by the developments. In some cases, local authorities have created energy companies in partnership with local Transition and other community groups. Some new developments have been created which have their own ‘off-the-grid’ grids, but the breaking of the national grid into smaller more legalized grids, proposed by some earlier in the century, failed to materialize given the scale of the engineering challenge and the need to be able to balance supply and demand nationally. By 2030, the energy mix that powers the [country] is almost entirely renewable, principally driven by wind. The oil shocks of 2020 accelerated existing work on a national renewable energy grid, after studies showed the huge potential of wind generation and other technologies to contribute significantly to the mix. These include tidal energy, hydro, solar PV, biogas and biomass. Many more wind turbines are now visible in the landscape, but they have become as much of an unnoticed fact of people’s lives as electricity pylons were in [2019]. Most houses sport some kind of solar panel on the roof, and many have installed other renewable energy appliances, such as heat pumps.98 People look back over the last twenty years with a sense of enormous achievement. What looked like an insurmountable challenge in [2019] has been tackled with a unified effort and with great imagination. People look back to the wastefulness of twenty years ago with astonishment and a certain amount of distaste. The new energy economy is leaner, but people now appreciate that one’s degree of personal happiness does not directly correlate to the size of one’s energy consumption.99

Transportation

Private car ownership is now no longer the norm. Other than in some very rural areas, given the extent of the public transport system and the reprioritization of urban streets to favor trains, trams, buses, hybrid autos, full-on electrical vehicles, bicycles, horses and walking while private car ownership is seen as positively antisocial. The idea that one could live in a rural area and live an urban lifestyle has become a thing of the past. Rural communities have reorganized themselves around the rec- 161 reation of local employment, production and community. This has inevitably meant that over twenty or so years the population has changed as those seeking a more active, productive rural lifestyle have moved out of the cities, while those seeking the enhances sociability of urban living have headed in the opposite direction. Car clubs are a lot more common, allowing people access to cars without needing to own them; they also mean that cars are better used. Cheap air flights are looked back on with nostalgia. The inability to travel long distances has had the added advantage that people are more connected to their immediate area, more intimately acquainted with its nooks and crannies…. Sharp rises in fuel prices and Government’s decision in [2021] to tax aviation fuel sent many of the budget airline companies out of business. Although air travel and the private car were the transport sector’s losses, commercial sail-power returned with a venge- ance, and other winners include tram and bicycle manufacturers. Part of the process of relocalization has been a slowing down from the frenetic pace that typified life in [2019]. This has reduced the need to dash off somewhere exotic to ‘relax’. People nowadays are more drawn to long summer days on their allotments, sleeping in their summerhous- es, taking long cycle rides and familiarizing themselves with the ecology and history of their bioregion. Indeed, the transformation of our towns and cities from large, bland places with a few ‘entertainment’ venues, to diverse places with gardens, ponds, artworks, more opportunities for meeting and working with people, and generally more to see and do, has given people less reason to travel to be entertained. In [2021], the advent of ‘peak cars’ (closely following ‘peak oil’) meant that demand for car parking spaces began to fall, leading to councils looking for different uses for their large expanses of underused tar- mac (for whose upkeep they were responsible). Many of these areas were handed back to community control, and became community market gardens and centers for Great Reskilling training. Public transport is now exceptionally well thought out and integrated. Many of the small branch rail lines shut down … in the 1960s were re-opened, to the great benefit of both the communities and local farmers who can use them to send produce to local markets. Urban streets now prioritize pedestrians and cyclists, cars having been designed out of many public spaces.100

Health/Medicine

Today [2040] our idea of health—how to create it and maintain it— has changed markedly from that of twenty years ago. The Health Service 162 had to rethink itself as the oil price made many of its practices and approaches unaffordable, and it faced the very real threat of collapsing completely. The closure of local hospitals in favor of centralized ones— so rampant twenty years ago—has been reversed, and local healthcare centers are now not just about treating illness but promoting health in many diverse ways. They have forged partnerships with local schools, promoting food growing and familiarizing young people with the whole food cycle from seed to salad. The wellbeing of the individual is seen as inseparable from the health of the community. Human biology is now a compulsory school subject, and has expanded to include nutrition and basic herbalism. About half of the medicines prescribed by doctors are now locally sourced, with local farmers growing certain key medicinal plants which are processed in local laboratories. Local chemists also now make over 50% of the medicines they sell on the premises. Doctors are able to pre- scribe a range of complementary treatments, as well as involvement in local community gardens, and access to meaningful work, the rebuilding of social cohesion and an emerging common sense of purpose, has resulted in fewer stress-related illnesses and cases of depression. Conventional and complementary practitioners are seen very much as two sides of the same coin, and the concept of promoting health rather than just treating disease has led to a range of innovative measures. As a result of people’s moving away from being sedentary consumers to becoming more physically active producer/consumers, there has been an increase in musculo-skeletal problems. Doctors are now able to issue prescriptions. It has become more commonplace, as in China, to see free Tai Chi sessions in local parks in the morning. Technology has also enabled certain tests and observations to take place online in the patient’s own home, what is known as ‘tele-medicine’.

Education

Education in [2019] was woefully inadequate, given the scale of the Transition to come. It became clear around 2010 that young people leaving school were unprepared for the more practical demands that the emerging powered-down world made of them; their school years had left them unable to build, cook, mend, garden or repair, and the Government declared that youth was in crisis and education needed fundamental reform. A new curriculum was approved in [2021] which re-emphasized vocational education firmly rooted on foundations of sustainability and resilience-building. From primary school level upwards, gardening, cook- 163

ing and woodwork skills have become a core part of the program for the first time since the 1950s. School grounds have been transformed into intensive gardens, with many students running their own enterprises. By secondary school age, students now learn construction, as well as creating, installing and maintaining renewable energy systems, alongside social skills like conflict resolution and community leadership. For adults, Colleges of the Great Reskilling are now central to most towns, offering a variety of courses in a wide range of practical sustainability skills for the public as well as restraining for professionals. The number of smaller local schools around the country began to grow around [2019], as the price of liquid fuels made it unfeasible for children to travel long distances to school. By [2021] many of the larger comprehensive schools and universities were no longer able to attract their intakes from large areas and had to rethink how they used their facilities. With unused space on their hands they diversified, and are now also home to incubator units for new businesses, with skilled craftspeople having their workshops and offering apprenticeships onsite. Those schools which have become farms or intensive market gardens also now feature a diversity of value-adding enterprises. Schools are now vibrant, productive, bustling places, firmly rooted in, and key contributors to, the local economy.101

Economic

Participatory budgeting, community land trusts, alternative currencies, financial relocalization, social entrepreneurship, co-operatives, credit unions/ community banking, time banks, bartering, community bonds, community development organizations (CDO)/ foundation/model, community interest companies (CIC), community ownership of assets, charitable incorporated organizations (CIO), climate change fund (CCF), community asset development (CAD), Local Exchange Trading Systems (LETS)—all provided the necessary ingredients for “ecological economics.” Both The Transition Hand- book and The Transition Companion elaborate.

Money isn’t a neutral thing. The decisions we make with our investment choices can either prop up or reinforce an economic model rooted in a past of cheap energy oil prices and climate irresponsibility, or they can help to bring forth a new, revitalized and more appropriate way of doing things.102 The way the economy works, and the way we think of money, has changed significantly since [2019]. The globalized economic model began 164 to run into significant difficulties sometime around [2006] when world oil production peaked. A period of sustained recession followed: a difficult transition, as our over-reliance on foreign investment and perilous levels of consumer debt became apparent. Parallel to this recession was the vigorous emergence of more localized economies. With national currency in short supply and pension schemes in tatters, towns and cities were forced to develop their own economic systems. New forms of trade are now commonplace, with systems such as LETS and Time Banks flourishing. Towns and cities, as they did historically in times of hardship, now produce their own printed currencies, only usable within the town. Local investment models have been developed, whereby people invest their money in ways that support the economic regeneration of the community. As the focus becomes increasingly local, people now find the percentage of their daily transactions conducted in national currency continuing to fall. Money is now more answerable to the communities it serves. These local currencies may be backed by the national currency, but increasingly they are backed by locally produced energy or food production. Each town and city now has its own printed currency used by all local businesses and proudly bearing the heads of prominent local historical figures. As part of national government policies to strengthen local economies, government grants and funding for the community are invested in the local currency and local authorities also accept part payment of Council Tax in local currencies. Shops pay part of their business rates and their local suppliers in them. As globalized business models have begun to unravel, local entrepreneurs have steeped in to fill the gaps. In the 1930s nearly all businesses were owned by local people; a hundred years later this is true once again. The myth that a strong economy can only emerge if it is based on inward investment is now seen as an oddly warped argument for the Age of Cheap Oil. For communities dependent on globalized businesses, the transition was particularly difficult, but led to a firm commitment to building stale local economies.103

Governance

Equality, social justice, participatory decision-making, neighborhood councils, evolving structures, decentralization, open source, collaboration and cooperation, personal resilience and home rule or local sovereignty [facilitated by Crowdocracy].104 165

Art & Creativity

Transition revolves around our imaginations. We can bring a different reality closer by first imagining it. The arts are brilliant way to build confidence in creating new stories to live by. Our initiatives start to come alive with possibilities—many surprising and unexpected […]. By feeding people’s imaginations, the arts created common ground between us, tapping into relationships, place and meaning. At a time when people can narrow their thinking and be fearful of change, the arts created pleasura- ble shared experiences and space to rehearse new ideas. They generated empathy and a sense of belonging. They built bridges across generations, cultures and different sectors of society. They carried all that is resonant about a Transition initiative—lifting the spirits, while space for loss.”105

This short term, mitigating vision of “Community Resilience” from the Transition Movement for a “Post-Carbon Society,” would continue concurrently with the intermediate vision of the “Third Industrial Revolution (TIR)” of Jeremy Rifkin’s proposed Hydrogen Energy Web. Both can be integrated by viewing them as different stages of development of a common unifying theme—Ecological Sustainability through an Enlightened Economy of the next system. And once again, no other designation epitomizes longevity and creates a common integrated agenda that fuses the next two transformative thresholds of my proposed integral vision than the cohesive name—The SOCIETY of the THIRD MILLENNIUM (S3K).

S3K 2.0—The Intermediate Vision Of The Post Carbon Third Indus- trial Revolution (TIR) To Usher In The Era of Expanded Empathy

The ongoing relocalization efforts (from 2010 to 2020) of the Transition Movement (S3K 1.0) would continue concurrently with the start of the next “Transformative Threshold” (S3K 2.0). Both visions overlap with similar goals and objectives that supplement each other. However, in this second transformative threshold (2020-2030) a new acceleration phase would be kicked off with full government backing thanks to the political purge of Congress by the “People’s Party Alliance” of 535 citizen legislators pledging to fulfill the next phase of the S3K vision as spearheaded by Jeremy Rifkin’s writings for a “Hydrogen Economy” of the Third Industrial Revolution.

The world community needs a powerful new economic narrative that will push the discussion and the agenda around climate change and peak oil from fear to hope and from economic constraints to economic possi-

166 bilities. That narrative is just now emerging as industries begin to lay the groundwork for a post-carbon Third Industrial Revolution […]. A new Distributed Social Vision flows directly from the coming together of distributed communication and information technology and distributed renewable energies. We are on the cusp of a new energy era and a new economic paradigm that will literally “empower” hundreds of millions of human beings to create their own energy and share their surpluses with neighbors across regions, nations and continents. The question is often asked as to whether renewable energy, in the long run, can provide enough power to run a national or global economy. Just as second generation information systems grid technologies allow businesses to connect thousands of desktop computers, creating far more distributed computing power than even the most powerful centralized computers that exist, millions of local producers of renewable energy, with access to intelligent utility networks, can potentially produce and share far more distributed power than the older centralized forms of energy – oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear – that we currently rely on. The creation of a renewable energy regime, loaded by buildings, par- tially stored in the form of hydrogen, and distributed via smart inter- grids, opens the door to a Third Industrial Revolution and should have as powerful an economic multiplier effect in the 21st century as the convergence of mass print technology with coal and steam power technology in the 19th century, and the coming together of electrical forms of communication with oil and the internal combustion engine in the 20th century.

(Image Courtesy Of Wiki Commons) 167

The First Pillar: Renewable Energy

Renewable forms of energy—solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, ocean waves, and biomass—make up the first of the four pillars of the Third Industrial Revolution. While these sunrise energies still account for a small percentage of the global energy mix, they are growing rapidly as governments mandate targets and benchmarks for their widespread introduction into the market and their falling costs make them increasingly competitive. Billions of dollars of public and private capital are pouring into research, development and market penetration, as businesses and homeowners seek to reduce their carbon footprint and become more energy efficient and independent. Global investment in renewable energies topped $148 billion in 2007, a 60 percent increase from 2006. Global investments in renewable energies are expected to leap to €250 billion by 2020 and €460 billion by 2030. Today, renewable energy manufacturing, operations, and maintenance provide approximately two million jobs worldwide. A recent study found that the number of jobs created per euro invested (and per kilo- watt-hour produced) from clean renewable energy technologies is 3 to 5 times the number of jobs created from fossil fuel based generation. By becoming the first superpower to establish a mandatory target of 20 percent renewable energy by 2020, the EU has set in motion the process of vastly enlarging the renewable energy portion of its energy mix. Reflecting the new commitment to higher renewable energy targets, the European Investment Bank has ratcheted up its renewable energy investments and is slated to finance loans totaling more than €800 million per year. In Germany, alone, the renewable energy industry boasted an annual turnover of €21.6 billion and 214,000 workers in 2006, and the industry projects to grow to between 244,000 and 263,000 jobs by 2010, 307,000 to 354,000 jobs by 2020, and 333,000 to 415,000 jobs by 2030. The 26 other EU member states are also creating new jobs as they bring renewable energy sources online to meet their objective of achieving a near zero carbon emission policy. Renewable energy in the EU generated €8.9 billion in earnings in 2005, and is expected to leap to 14.5 billion euros by 2010. More than 700,000 jobs are expected to be created in the EU by 2010 in the field of electricity generation from renewable energy sources. By 2050, renewable energy is projected to provide nearly half the primary energy, and 70 percent of the electricity produced within the EU, and account for several million new jobs.

168

The Second Pillar: Buildings as Positive Power Plant

While renewable energy is found everywhere and new technologies are allowing us to harness it more cheaply and efficiently, we need infrastructure to load it. This is where the building industry steps to the fore, to lay down the second pillar of the Third Industrial Revolution. The construction industry is the largest industrial employer in many countries. In the EU, in 2003, construction represented 10 percent of the GDP, and 7 percent of the employment in the EU-15. Buildings are the major contributor to human induced global warming. Worldwide, buildings consume 30 to 40 percent of all the energy produced and are responsible for equal percentages of all CO2 emissions. Now, new technological breakthroughs make it possible, for the first time, to design and construct buildings that create all of their own energy from locally available renewable energy sources, allowing us to reconceptualize the future of buildings as “power plants”. The commercial and economic implications are vast and far reaching for the real estate industry and, for that matter, the world. In 25 years from now, millions of buildings—homes, offices, shopping malls, industrial and technology parks—will be renovated or constructed to serve as both “power plants” and habitats. These buildings will collect and generate energy locally from the sun, wind, garbage, agricultural and forestry waste, ocean waves and tides, hydro and geothermal– enough energy to provide for their own power needs as well as surplus energy that can be shared. A new generation of commercial and residential buildings as power plants is going up now. In the United States, Frito-Lay is retooling its Casa Grande plant, running it primarily on renewable energy and recycled water. The concept is called “net-zero”. The factory will generate all of its energy on-site by installing solar roofs and by recycling the waste from its production processes and converting it into energy. In France, Bouygues, the giant French construction company is taking the process a step further, putting up a state-of-the-art commercial office complex this year in the Paris suburbs that collects enough solar energy to provide not only for all of its own needs, but even generates surplus energy as well. The Walqa Technology Park in Huesca, Spain is nestled in a valley in the Pyrenees and is among a new genre of technology parks that produce their own renewable energy on-site to power their operations. There are currently a dozen office buildings in operations at the Walqa Park, and 40 more already slated for construction. The facility is run entirely by renewable forms of energy, including wind power, hydro, and solar. The park 169 houses leading high tech companies, including Microsoft and other IT companies, renewable energy companies, etc.

The Third Pillar: Hydrogen Storage

The introduction of the first two pillars of the Third Industrial Revo- lution—renewable energy and “buildings as power plants”—requires the simultaneous introduction of the third pillar of the Third Industrial Revolution. To maximize renewable energy and to minimize cost it will be necessary to develop storage methods that facilitate the conversion of intermittent supplies of these energy sources into reliable assets. Batter- ies, differentiated water pumping, and other media, can provide limited storage capacity. There is, however, one storage medium that is widely available and can be relatively efficient. Hydrogen is the universal medium that “stores” all forms of renewable energy to assure that a stable and reliable supply is available for power generation and, equally important, for transport. Hydrogen is the lightest and most abundant element in the universe and when used as an energy source, the only by-products are pure water and heat. Our spaceships have been powered by high-tech hydrogen fuel cells for more than 30 years. Here is how hydrogen works. Renewable sources of energy—solar cells, wind, hydro, geothermal, ocean waves—are used to produce electricity. That electricity, in turn, can be used, in a process called electrolysis, to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. Hydrogen can also be extracted directly from energy crops, animal and forestry waste, and organic garbage—so called biomass—without going through the electrolysis process. The important point to emphasize is that a renewable energy society becomes viable to the extent that part of that energy can be stored in the form of hydrogen. That's because renewable energy is intermittent. The sun isn't always shining, the wind isn't always blowing, water isn't always flowing when there’s a drought, and agricultural yields vary. When renewable energy isn’t available, electricity can't be generated and economic activity grinds to a halt. But, if some of the electricity being generated, when renewable energy is abundant, can be used to extract hydrogen from water, which can then be stored for later use, society will have a continuous supply of power. Hydrogen can also be extracted from biomass and similarly stored. The European Commission recognizes that increasing reliance on renewable forms of energy would be greatly facilitated by the development 170 of hydrogen fuel cell storage capacity and, in 2003, established the Hy- drogen Technology Platform, a massive research and development effort to move Europe to the forefront of the race to a hydrogen future. Re- gions and national governments across Europe have already begun to establish hydrogen research and development programs and are in the early stages of introducing hydrogen technologies into the marketplace. In 2006, the Federal Republic of Germany committed €500 million to hydrogen research and development and began readying plans to create a nationwide hydrogen roadmap, with the stated goal of leading Eu- rope and the world into the hydrogen era by 2020. Chancellor Angela Merkel and members of her cabinet called for a Third Industrial Revolu- tion in public addresses in 2007. In 2008, the European Commission announced a Joint Technology Initiative (JTI), an ambitious public/private partnership, to speed the commercial introduction of a hydrogen economy in the 27 member states of the EU, with the primary focus on producing hydrogen from renewable sources of energy.106 In a hydrogen economy the centralized, top-down flow of energy, controlled by global oil companies and utilities, would become obsolete. Instead, millions of end users would connect their fuel cells in- to local, regional and national hydrogen energy webs (HEWs), using the same design principles and smart technologies that made the World Wide Web possible. […] Unlike its predecessors, however, the new energy regime has the potential to be sustainable, non-polluting, and to provide a decentralized and democratic source of power, thus, for the first time in almost a century, we have a rare opportunity to comprehensively sever the ties of corporate dominance in our society through our energy independence. Think of it, a true form of Democracy at our shores [...]. A decentralized, hydrogen-energy regime offers the hope, at least, of connecting the unconnected and empowering the powerless. When that happens, we could entertain the very real possibility of “reglobalization,” this time from the bottom up, and with everyone participating in the process. The worldwide hydrogen energy web, like the worldwide communications web, will allow us to connect every human being on the planet with every other in an indivisible and interdependent economic and social matrix. The human species can now become a human community fully integrated into the Earth’s ecosystems. Unfortunately, our ideas about personal and collective security are still mired in a fossil-fuel state of mind. In the oil age, each human being’s sense of personal security

171 came to mirror the organizational values of the larger institutional framework that managed the flow of energy and economic activity. Au- tonomy and mobility became the undisputed social virtues of the era, in both personal and institutional life. In the coming hydrogen economy, the sheer density of human interaction, as well as the speed of engagement, will give rise to a new sense of security, bound up in embed- dedness in multiple commercial, social, and environmental networks and in global interdependence. Our individual security and the well-being of the Earth’s diverse human, biological, and geological communities will become seamless. We will come to see ourselves as part of a single Earth organism. The divisive geopolitics that so permeated the fossil-fuel era will give way to a new sense of biosphere politics in a hydrogen age. The window of opportunity is closing creating a new sense of urgency to act now before the corporate monopolization of hydrogen solidifies. The worldwide hydrogen energy web (HEW) will be the next great technological, commercial, and social revolution in history. It will follow on the heels of the development of the worldwide communications web in the 1990s and like the former, will bring with it a new culture of engagement. While the HEW is potentially a revolution in energy design that could decentralize and democratize energy and recast commercial and social institutions along radically new lines, there is no guarantee that, in fact, it will. Here, the history of the Internet and the World Wide Web is instructional. The Internet contains the promise of empowering billions of people, giving everyone on Earth potential access to everyone else and making communication and exchange of information between people truly democratic. The ‘Net’ activists of the 1990s argued that information ought to be freely shared. While community nets and free-nets were established early to make good on that vision, they were too few, too weak, and too devoid of meaningful content to withstand a better-financed more highly organized campaign waged by companies like AOL and Microsoft to gain control over the new medium. Com- mercial forces have conspired, from the very beginning, to gain an unbreakable hold over the portals of cyberspace so that they could become the gatekeepers and arbiters of the Information Age. A similar threat and challenge face the hydrogen energy web. The global energy and utility companies will make every effort to control access to this new, decentralized energy network just as software, telecommunications and content companies like Microsoft and AOL Time Warner have attempted to control access to the World Wide Web. It is critical that public institutions and nonprofit organizations—

172 local governments, cooperatives, community development corporations, credit unions and the like—become involved early on in establishing distributed-generation associations (DGAs) in every country. Again, the analogy to the World Wide Web is apt. In the new hydrogen energy era, millions of end users will generate their own "content" in the form of hydrogen and electricity. By organizing collectively to control the energy they produce—just as workers in the twentieth century organized into unions to control their labor power—end users can better dictate the terms with commercial suppliers of fuel cells for lease, purchase or other use arrangements and with virtual utility companies, which will manage the decentralized "smart" energy grids. Creating the appropriate partnership between commercial and noncommercial interests will be critical to establishing the legitimacy, effectiveness and long- term viability of the new energy regime. We are talking about a potential energy source, which its only emission (aside from heat) is life’s most precious commodity— water. And in a world of depleting natural resources due to overcon- sumption, overpopulation and global warming, the worldwide Hydro- gen Energy Web stands to provide one solution to remedy to the impending global crisis of water shortages, especially for the billions of people in the third world. After enough fuel cells have been leased or purchased, and installed, mini energy grids can connect urban neighborhoods as well as rural villages into expanding energy networks. The HEW can be built organically and spread as the distributed generation becomes more widely used. The larger hydrogen fuel cells have the additional advantage of producing pure drinking water as a byproduct, an important consideration in village communities around the world where access to clean water is often a critical concern. Were all individuals and communities in the world to become the producers of their own energy, the result would be a dramatic shift in the configuration of power: no longer from the top down but from the bottom up. Local peoples would be less subject to the will of far-off centers of power. Communities would be able to produce many of their own goods and services and consume the fruits of their own labor locally. But, because they would also be connected via the worldwide communications and energy webs, they would be able to share their unique commercial skills, products and services with other communities around the planet. This kind of economic self-sufficiency becomes the starting point for global commercial interdependence, and is a far different economic

173 reality from that of colonial regimes of the past, in which local peoples were made subservient to and dependent on powerful forces from the outside. By redistributing power broadly to everyone, it is possible to establish the conditions for a truly equitable sharing of the earth's bounty. This is the essence of reglobalization from the bottom up. Now, on the cusp of the hydrogen era, we have at least the "possibility" of making energy available in every community of the world— hydrogen exists everywhere on earth—empowering the whole of the human race. By creating an energy regime that is decentralized and potentially universally accessible to everyone, we establish the technological framework for creating a more participatory and sustainable economic life—one that is compatible with the principle of democratic participation in our political life. Making the commercial and political arenas seamless, however, will require a human struggle of truly epic proportions in the coming decades. What is in doubt is not the technological know-how to make it happen but, rather, the collective human will, determination and resolve to transform the great hope of hydrogen into a democratic reality.107

The Fourth & Fifth Pillars: Smartgrids and Plug-in Vehicles

By benchmarking a shift to renewable energy, advancing the notion of buildings as power plants, and funding an aggressive hydrogen fuel cell technology R&D program, the EU has erected the first three pillars of the Third Industrial Revolution. The fourth pillar, the reconfiguration of the European power grid, along the lines of the internet, allowing businesses and homeowners to produce their own energy and share it with each other, is just now being tested by power companies in Europe. The smart intergrid is made up of three critical components. Mini- grids allow homeowners, small and medium size enterprises (SMEs), and large scale economic enterprises to produce renewable energy locally— through solar cells, wind, small hydro, animal and agricultural waste, garbage, etc.—and use it off-grid for their own electricity needs. Smart me- tering technology allows local producers to more effectively sell their energy back to the main power grid, as well as accept electricity from the grid, making the flow of electricity bidirectional. The next phase in smart grid technology is embedding sensing devices and chips throughout the grid system, connecting every electrical ap- pliance. Software allows the entire power grid to know how much energy is being used, at anytime, anywhere on the grid. This interconnectivity can be used to redirect energy uses and flows during peaks and lulls, and 174 even to adjust to the price changes of electricity from moment to moment. In the future, intelligent utility networks will also be increasingly connected to moment to moment weather changes—recording wind changes, solar flux, ambient temperature, etc.- giving the power network the ability to adjust electricity flow continuously, to both external weather conditions as well as consumer demand. For example, if the power grid is experiencing peak energy use and possible overload because of too much demand, the software can direct a homeowner’s washing machine to go down by one cycle per load or reduce the air conditioning by one degree. Consumers who agree to slight adjustments in their electricity use receive credits on their bills. Since the true price of electricity on the grid varies during any 24 hour period, moment to moment energy information opens the door to “dynamic pricing”, allowing consumers to increase or drop their energy use automatically, depending upon the price of electricity on the grid. Up to the moment pricing also allows local mini-grid producers of energy to either automatically sell energy back to the grid or go off the grid altogether. The smart inter-grid will not only give end users more power over their energy choices, but also create significant new energy efficiencies in the distribution of electricity. The intergrid makes possible a broad redistribution of power. To- day’s centralized, top-down flow of energy becomes increasingly obsolete. In the new era, businesses, municipalities and homeowners become the producers as well as the consumers of their own energy—so-called “distributed generation. Even electric plug in and hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles are “power stations on wheels” with a generating capacity of twenty or more kilowatts. Since the average car, bus and truck is parked much of the time, they can be plugged in, during non-use hours, to the home, office, or the main interactive electricity network, providing premium electricity back to the grid. Electric and fuel cell plug in vehicles thus become a way to store massive amounts of renewable energy that can be sent back in the form of electricity to the main power grid. In 2008, Daimler and RWE, Ger- many’s second largest power and utility company, launched a project in Berlin to establish recharging points for electric Smart and Mercedes cars around the German capital. Renault-Nissan is readying a similar plan to provide a network of hundreds of thousands of battery charging points in Israel, Denmark and Portugal. The distributed electric power charging stations will be used to service Renault’s all electric Mégane car. Toyota

175 has joined with EDF, France’s largest power and utility company, to build charging points in France and other countries, for its plug-in electric cars. By 2030, charging points for plug-in electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles will be installed virtually everywhere— along roads, in homes, commercial buildings, factories, parking lots and garages, providing a seamless distributed infrastructure for sending electricity both from and to the main electricity grid. If just 25 percent of drivers used their vehicles as power plants to sell energy back to the intergrid, all of the power plants in the US and the EU could be eliminated. IBM and other global IT companies are just now entering the smart power market, working with utility companies to transform the power grid to intergrids, so that building owners can produce their own energy and share it with each other. Centerpoint Utility in Houston, Texas, Xcel Utility in Boulder, Colorado, and Sempra and Southern ConEdison in California are laying down parts of the Smart Grid this year, connecting thousands of residential and commercial buildings. The new EU energy plan is preparing the way for the intergrid, with the demand that the power grid be unbundled, or at least made increasingly independent of the power companies that also produce the power, so that new players—especially small and medium size enterprises and homeowners—have the opportunity to produce and sell power back to the grid with the same ease and transparency as they now enjoy in producing and sharing information on the internet. The European Commission has also established a European Smart Grid Technology Platform and prepared a long-term vision and strategy document in 2006 for reconfiguring the European power grid to make it intelligent, distributed, and interactive. The central question that every nation needs to ask is where they want their country to be in [12] years from now [2030]: In the sunset energies and industries of the second industrial revolution or the sunrise energies and industries of the Third Industrial Revolution. The Third In- dustrial Revolution is the end-game that takes the world out of the old carbon and uranium-based energies and into a non-polluting, sustainable future for the human race.

The 10 Key Building Blocks For A New Distributed Social Vision in the 21st Century

Without a well-thought-out plan to usher in a Third Industrial Revo- lution, the hope of a new Distributed Social Vision will begin to fade. The Third Industrial Revolution, therefore, is the beginning point for a 176 new Distributed Social Vision. Indeed, a new Distributed Social Vision flows inexorably from the Third Industrial Revolution narrative and is impossible to achieve without it. Together, the Third Industrial Revolu- tion and a new Distributed Social Vision offer a compelling game-plan for the next 50 years of global development. What is needed now is a strong political vision capable of joining the two together. By articulating a clear political agenda to advance the Third Industrial Revolution and the accompanying programs for a new Distrib- uted Social Vision, today’s political leaders will set the stage for the next phase of human development, and, in the process, bequeath a powerful legacy for future generations. The new politics will also serve as a beacon of hope for the rest of the world in the 21st Century. The new Distrib- uted Social Vision is made up of 10 key building blocks, each erected on top of a Third Industrial Revolution framework:

1) A Sustainable Standard of Living

The long term rise in the price of oil on world markets and the increasing real time effects of climate change on commercial sectors ranging from agriculture to tourism are already having a dramatic impact on the standard of living of millions of people. Food prices are sky rocketing as well as the price of consumer products and services and home heating and petrol cost, threatening the economic well-being of families around the world. These conditions are only going to worsen in the years ahead, imperiling the dream of advancing a quality of life society. Government, the business community and civil society need to join together in an unprecedented mobilization to turn the corner on the sunset energies and industries of the second industrial revolution and usher in a renewable energy regime if the human race is to enjoy a sustainable standard of living in the 21st century.

2) The Economic Multiplier Effect

The transition to the Third Industrial Revolution will require a wholesale reconfiguration of the entire economic infrastructure of each country, creating millions of jobs, and countless new goods and services, with an economic multiplier effect that will stretch to the second half of the 21st century. We will need to invest in renewable energy technology on a massive scale; redesign millions of buildings, transforming them into positive power plants, embed hydrogen and other storage technology throughout the national infrastructures, transform the automobile from 177 the internal combustion engine to the fuel cell car, and lay down an intelligent utility network across every nation.

3) New Jobs and Business Models for the 21st Century

The wholesale remaking of each nation’s infrastructure and the retooling of industries is going to require a massive retraining of workers on a scale matching the vocational and professional training at the onset of the first and second industrial revolutions. The new high-tech workforce of the Third Industrial Revolution will need to be skilled in renewable energy technologies, green construction, IT and embedded computing, Nano technology, sustainable chemistry, fuel cell development, digital power grid management, hybrid electric and hydrogen powered transport, and hundreds of other technical fields. Entrepreneurs and managers will need to be educated to take advantage of cutting edge businesses models, including open-source and networked commerce, distributed and collaborative research and development strategies, and sustainable low carbon logistics and supply chain management. The skill levels and managerial styles of the Third Industrial Revolution workforce will be qualitatively different from that of the workforce of the second industrial revolution.

4) Advancing Energy Security

In the next [decades], every nation will need to create a self-sufficient, distributed renewable energy regime to ensure energy independence and the ushering in of a post carbon future. A fully integrated intelligent intergrid allows each country to both produce its own energy and share any surpluses with neighboring countries in a “Network” approach to assuring global energy security. When any given region enjoys a temporary surge or surplus in its renewable energy, that energy can be shared with regions that are facing a temporary lull or deficit.

5) Empowering the People

The Third Industrial Revolution leads to a new Distributed Social Vi- sion where power, itself, is broadly distributed, encouraging unprecedented new levels of collaboration among peoples and nations. In the new era, businesses, municipalities and homeowners become the producers as well as the consumers of their own energy—so-called “distributed generation.” Just as the distributed communication revolution of the last

178

decade spawned network ways of thinking, open source sharing, and the democratization of communications, the Third Industrial Revolution follows suit with the democratization of energy. We began to envision a world where hundreds of millions of people are “empowered,” both literally and figuratively, with far reaching implications for social and political life. The democratization of energy becomes a rallying point of a new Distributed Social Vision. Access to power becomes an inalienable social right in the Third Industrial Revolution era. The 20th century saw the extension of the political franchise and the broadening of educational and economic opportunities to millions of people around the world. In the 21st century, individual access to energy also becomes a social and human right. Every human being should have the right and the opportunity to create their own energy locally and share it with others across regional, national and continental inter-grids. For a younger generation that is growing up in a less hierarchical and more networked world, the ability to share and produce their own energy in an open-access inter-grid, like they produce and share their own information on the internet, will seem natural and commonplace. [It here that “Crowdocracy” could emerge and flourish to become next form of human governance through a true direct democracy of based on new distributed social technology platform].

6) Education for the 21st Century

The first and second Industrial Revolutions were accompanied by vast changes in the educational system. The Third Industrial Revolution will require equally innovative educational reforms if we are to prepare future generations to work and live in a post-carbon world. The new curriculum will focus increasingly on advanced information, bio and Nano technologies, the earth sciences, ecology, systems theory, collaborative and distributive education, open-source learning models, and social capital. We will need to educate our children to think as global citizens and prepare them for the historic transition from 20th century conventional geopolitics to 21st century global Biosphere politics. Education will increasingly focus on both global responsibility to preserve the health of the planet’s Biosphere and local responsibility to steward regional ecosystems. Living sustainably will become the anchor of 21st century learning environments.

1) A Quality of Life Society

In the new Distributed Social Vision of the 21st century, individual economic opportunity becomes part of a more expansive social vision of 179 creating a quality of life society. The conventional 20th century economic indicators that emphasize gross domestic product and per capita income are now being accompanied by equally important quality of life indicators that measure a good economy in terms of a commitment to social and human rights, an educated citizenry, a healthy population, safe communities, a proper balance of work and leisure, and a clean and sustainable environment. A quality of life economy promotes both the social and market models simultaneously by emphasizing personal economic opportunity along with a sense of social commitment to create a sustainable society for every citizen. In the Third Industrial Revolution, distributive power and sustainable communities provide the essential framework for creating a quality of life society.

8) Rethinking Globalization from the Bottom-Up

The half century transition from the second to the Third Industrial Revolution is going to dramatically change the globalization process. The most significant impact is likely to be on developing nations. Incredibly, over half of the human population has never made a telephone call and a third of the human race has no access to electricity. Lack of access to electricity is a key factor in perpetuating poverty around the world. Conversely, access to energy means more economic opportunity. If millions of individuals and communities around the world were to become producers of their own energy, the result would be a profound shift in the configuration of power. Local peoples would be less subject to the will of far-off centers of power. Communities would be able to produce goods and services locally and sell them globally. This is the essence of the politics of sustainable development and reglobalization from the bottom up. The developed nations, working with industries and civil society organizations, can help facilitate the next phase of sustainable globalization by re-orienting development aid, promoting clean development mechanism projects under the Emissions Trading system, leverag- ing macro and micro-financing and credit, and providing favored-nation trade status in order to help developing nations establish a Third Indus- trial Revolution.

9) European Union’s Special Role in Third Industrial Revolution

European industry has the scientific, technological, and financial know-how to spearhead the shift to renewable energies, positive power buildings, a hydrogen economy, and an intelligent power grid and, by so 180 doing, lead the world into a new economic era. The EU’s world class au- tomotive industry, chemical industry, engineering industry, construction industry, software, computer and communication industries, and banking and insurance industries, give it a leg up in the race to the Third Industri- al Revolution. The EU also boasts one of the world’s largest solar markets and is the world’s leading producer of wind energy. The next stage of European integration is establishing a distributed energy regime that will allow Europe to complete the creation of a unified single market. While the EU is potentially the largest internal commercial market in the world, with 500 million consumers and an additional 500 million consumers in its associated regions stretching into the Mediterranean and North Africa, it has not yet created a seamless logistical infrastructure, with a common transport grid, communication grid, and power grid. In- tegrating the logistical infrastructure so that the billion plus people in the EU region can engage in commerce and trade with efficiency and ease, and with a low carbon dioxide footprint, is the critical unfinished business of the EU.

10) The Millennial Generation’s Legacy: A Sustainable Planet

In 1960, President Kennedy challenged the baby-boom generation in the United States to join him in putting a man on the moon within the decade and exploring the far reaches of outer space. The sequel, in the 21st century, is for the millennial generation to lead the world in saving the Biosphere of the earth. The shift from elite fossil fuels and uranium based energies to distributed renewable energies, takes the world out of the “Geopolitics” that characterized the 20th century, and into the “Biosphere politics” of the 21st century. Much of the geopolitical struggles of the last century centered on gaining military and political access to coal, oil, natural gas, and uranium deposits. Wars were fought and countless lives lost, as nations vied with each other in the pursuit of fossil fuels and uranium security. The ushering in of the Third Industrial Revolution will go a long way toward diffusing the growing tensions over access to ever more limited supplies of fossil fuels and uranium and help facilitate Biosphere politics based on a collective sense of responsibility for safeguarding the earth’s ecosystems. Political parties and governments need to turn their attention to stewarding the Biosphere. At the same time, they need to communicate this mission across the world with the goal of unleashing the vast creative

181

potential of the millennial generation to the task of preserving and re- newing the planet. The story of a Third Industrial Revolution and a new Distributed So- cial Vision is powerful and provides the narrative we so desperately need at this critical point in history if we are to address climate change and peak oil and re-heal the Biosphere of the planet. […]The new biosphere politics transcends traditional conservative/liberal distinctions so characteristic of the geopolitics of the modern market economy and nation-state era. The new divide is generational and contrasts the traditional top-down model of structuring family life, education, commerce, and governance with a younger generation whose thinking is more relational and distributed, whose nature is more collaborative and cosmopolitan, and whose work and social spaces favor open-source commons. For the Internet generation, “quality of life” becomes as important as individual opportunity in fashioning a new dream for the 21st century. We reach biosphere consciousness and global empathy in time to avert planetary collapse.108

S3K 3.0—Long-Term Vision Of The Venus Project For A Resource Based Economy (RBE) As Promoted By The Zeitgeist Movement

“A straightforward redesign of our culture” and “restructuring of our world society” has been achieved through Social Cybernation that abolishes war, the military, poverty, hunger, thirst, credit, debt, barter, servitude, currency, laws, prisons, police and politics and drastically reducing offensive social behavior/crime—achieving the real utopia that most anarchists sought back in the early days of the Occupy Wall Street movement but ironically attained through a Cybernated Industrial System. “The planet is diligently exam- ined and operated from a holistic perspective” and “it was only when the world worked together that sustainability and true progress was achieved.”109

Industry, Production, Labor & Distribution

Technology phased out the role of humans in the economic labor force” and has led to “a new social system which does not require human servitude for income;” instead “society is designed as a whole to benefit itself […]. This new social design is to free humanity from the repetitive, mundane and arbitrary occupational roles which hold no true relevance for social development, while encouraging a new incentive system that is focused on self-fulfillment, education, social awareness and creativity, as opposed to the shallow and self-centered goals of wealth, property and 182 power which are dominant today… Our outdated methods of rationing resources through monetary control are no longer relevant. In fact, they are very counterproductive to our survival. The monetary system was created thousands of years ago during periods of great scarcity. Its initial purpose was contrived as a method of distributing goods and services based on labor contributions. It is not at all related to our true capacity to produce goods and services on this planet. Physical survival and quality of life are based solely on our use, management and preservation of the earth’s resources. Now, with our ever-growing scientific ingenuity to utilize those resources in the most humane, technologically constructive and efficient ways, the tradition of labor for money and money for resources no longer has a logical basis. The intelligent management of the earth’s resources is what is important. In a saner world, we would take account of the dynamic equilibrium within our global ecosystem, and adjust our production process accordingly. The optimization of production methods is about using the most powerful materials and methods, while outputting the most long lasting and effective products…. Industrial productivity increases when machine labor replaces human labor. This, of course, should be no surprise, for a machine does not get tired and it is always more accurate and consistent than a human, mechanically. High-efficiency labor automation, coupled with scientifically managed resources will allow for a fluid, scarcity-less environment which could be operated by only a very small fraction of the population. …Production would be so streamlined, that a product is only created when the request is made by a person in need. However, this was only as a result of the warehouse like distribution centers, along with automated delivery that made it the most simplistic way to start. Also, since there is no money used in this system, there is little need for a person to hoard their items. There is also no reason for a person to steal something that is available to everyone… and they certainly couldn’t sell it. In light of the fact that all goods in a Resource-Based Economy are designed to last as long as possible, the consumer culture values that exist today would also be outgrown. Not to mention the outgrowth of all of the other value distortions imposed by advertising today, which make people feel greedy, inferior or inept due to what they do and don’t own. Advertising would not exist in this new system, outside of general product information available to people who think they might need it. To obtain a product, a person would likely go online, search for the item’s

183 function, select the item and request it. It would be available for pickup or delivery soon after. This step actually begins at the production stage, for each product designed has had incorporated into it the consideration of recycling in advance. Ideally, everything produced would be sustainable and recyclable. This strategic consideration would ensure that obsolete products would be reused, reducing waste, to the maximum extent possible. This combination of machine and computer intelligence (Cyberna- tion) are probably the most powerful and influential inventions humanity has ever created. The possibilities of these tools are on pace to change the entire fabric of society…beginning first with the freeing of the human labor force. In the words of Albert Einstein: ‘Ultimate automation…will make our modern industry as primitive and outdated as the stone age man looks to us today.’ This reality is not something we should fight. We should embrace it emphatically. Cybernation is the Emancipation Proclamation for human kind, freeing us from the drudgery of common labor, opening new hori- zons for human potential and exploration. These Cybernated Machines far exceed the physical accuracy of a human being, while also being able to compute at incredible rates, also far exceeding the computational speed and capacity of the human brain. Now, for those who have been indoctrinated by science fiction to think that these new machines might gain “consciousness” and ‘take over the human race’, it should be understood that this has zero basis in reality. Cybernated Machines are nothing more than creative extensions of human performance. Just as a hammer will help you drive a nail into a strip of wood, a Cybernated Machine will perform complex tasks easing the process to obtain a particular goal. The machines do as they are pro- grammed, and nothing more. In the words of Arthur C. Clarke: “The popular idea, fostered by comic strips and the cheaper forms of science fiction, that intelligent machines must be malevolent entities hostile to man, is so absurd that it is hardly worth wasting energy to refute it. I am almost tempted to argue that only unintelligent machines can be malevolent…Those who picture machines as active enemies are merely projecting their own aggressive[ness]. The higher the intelligence, the greater the degree of coopera- tiveness. If there is ever a war between men and machines, it is easy to guess who will start it.

184

Now, a very common reaction to the idea of machines taking over the role of human labor is to distrust the idea due to our daily problems with technology today. From cars breaking down, to personal computers freezing, society today seems to have a love-hate relationship with technology. Well, first of all, as denoted before, in a monetary system everything produced is designed to break down, for everything is a product. Even NASA with its extreme need for the best materials and technology has a budget to deal with, and must cut corners if need be. Your cars and personal computers don’t stand a chance. Both industries have a massive sub-industry for repairs and maintenance. If computers and cars were not designed to break down, tens of millions of jobs would be lost worldwide in these sectors alone. Ultimately, the first step towards ensuring that the Cybernated Ma- chines we devise are made of the highest quality components and pro- gramming would require that we outgrow the monetary system, for it prevents their efficiency and sustainability. There is no reason why everything in your home, from your refrigerator to your stove, to your television, to your computer, could not last your entire lifetime without physical repair. How can that be said with confidence? Because the best materials available on this planet, such as Titanium, have sustainable properties that far exceed the life span of a person by thousands of years. Prod- ucts made today are made out of the cheapest possible materials in order to increase profit margins. Today you will find that most general products in the consumer industry are created in whole, or in part, out of plastic. Plastic is one of the cheapest synthetic materials available. It has no heat tolerance, is often too brittle and it weathers very quickly—so, of course, everything breaks down… that is the intent. In a saner world, this would not be tolerated and the industrial machines devised would not only have extreme durability and long life spans, the advanced machines will eventually be able to repair themselves. In cars today, there are often warning lights on the dashboard that will alert you to a problem with a particular part of the car. This idea can be expanded to all machinery to the degree where not only is the machine’s on board computer ‘aware’ of a problem, supplemental machines can thereby be directed to replace the broken part in real time. Even more advanced, are material technologies such as ‘shape memory alloys’. These metals can literally remember their shape. In the event that a machine’s physical structure becomes damaged, an electronic current can be sent through that section, instantly correcting the structure. The bottom

185 line here is that self-repairing machines and structures are growing realities. The problem is that the production of such efficiency is not reward- ed in the monetary system, so most people in society have no idea of what is actually possible. In the words of Thorstein Veblen: If the country’s productive industry were completely organized as a systematic whole, and was then managed by competent technicians…to maximize production of goods and services instead of, as now, being mishandled by ignorant businessmen…to maximize profits, the resulting output of goods and services would doubtless exceed the current output of goods and services by several hundred percent. Now, the role humans will play within the high-tech, cybernetic, automated industrial production plant of the future will be that of supervi- sors and nothing more. Once the Cybernated Industrial System is set up, it is simply a matter of updating the system and making sure the system is in order. As time moves forward, we can only expect that the rate of our technological capabilities will continue to increase.

A Non-Corruptible & Egoless Government: The Delegation Of Decision Making To Computers

We must remember that logical reasoning, which is our cognitive ability to think out solutions to problems from a cause and effect stand- point, is entirely a technical process, based on the amount of information we have at any one time. For example, if we have a problem with our car, we would go to a mechanic and he would use his pattern recognition abilities and associative memory to consider the possibilities that might have caused the problem, along with the possibilities for solving the problem, based on reasoning. It is an objective, technical process. …This new human option to delegate our labor and decision making to a highly efficient computerized system is what will constitute the replacement of the institution of traditional “Government.” [The] tremendous and still accelerating development of science and technology has not been accompanied by an equal development in social, economic, and political patterns…We are now…only beginning to explore the potentialities which it offers for developments in our culture outside technology, particularly in the social, political and economic fields. It is safe to predict that…such social inventions as modern-type Capitalism, Fascism, and Communism will be regarded as primitive ex-

186 periments directed toward the adjustment of modern society to modern methods– Dr. Ralph Linton First of all, Government, as we know it, is a byproduct of environmental scarcity. Like mafia tribes, the governments of the world seek to preserve their current positions of power, while aggressively working to strengthen their economic advantage. As far as social management, all a government can basically do is make laws, establish budgets, and declare wars. They are really monetary system creations. Sadly, due to the very nature of their power, history has become one constant chain of governmental corruption, ranging from the genocidal slaughter of peoples in opposing nations, to the deliberate oppression of a country’s own people in order to maintain the established order. The reason why all governments on the planet are corrupt is because they have to be in this system. Remember, they are no different than corporations, trying to survive in the monetary system. They are all in competition with each other, with periodic “world empires” emerging every couple hundred years or so. In order for any traditional government to keep control over its people, it must push a unified value system. If the leaders of a country want the public to support its wars, they will put statues of “great war heroes” in parks and have the media push the ‘nobleness’ of the military. They also very often cite “god” and allude to their wars as being some form of battle against “evil”. This manipulation keeps an uninformed public on ‘their side’ with a narrow worldview. In the words of Albert Einstein: “Patriotism is a disease.” For a person to say something like, “The USA is the best country on earth” is exactly the same as saying “White people are God’s chosen race.” Patriotism is racism with a flag… nothing more. The fact is, Government decisions today are based on the narrow self- interest of an elite, just like the corporations. This is nothing but destructive and unsustainable […]. In other words, the more information taken into account in the process of decision-making, the more accurate that decision will be. As discussed earlier, computerized machines now have the ability to perform better than humans in both physical and mental areas. Our minds do not technically compare to computers that can access trillions of bits of information across vast informational databases, and compute output results near the speed of light. The transfer of decision making to machine intelligence is the next phase of social evolution. It greatly reduces human error, and removes dangerous biases, subjectivity and opinion. Because of the limitations of the sensory and cortical equipment in our body and mind, no one can know everything in this world. Our sens-

187 es are limited in range. Our eyes can only see a fraction of the electro- magnetic field… therefore it is only logical that we delegate decision making to machines, for they do not have these restrictions. Computers, used as tools, can/will be able to solve problems, which humans simply cannot due to our physical and mental limitations. It is no different than a person who uses a pair of glasses to see. Glasses are a technological tool…an extension of the human being that helps a person see better than they would normally. Cybernated Machines are nothing different. They are simply extensional tools that expand our abilities. The human species has the powerful ability to improve itself through technological invention. We must realize this and maximize its potential. In a Resource-Based Economy, people do not make decisions; they arrive at them through the use of advanced technological tools that incorporate The Scientific Method. There is no ‘Republican’ or ‘Liberal’ way to design an airplane… so why do we use these outdated worldviews in society today? When we recognize that society is a technological invention, with its component variables really no different than the component variables of an airplane, we then see that our orientation towards so called “government” should be purely scientific. ‘Politics’ is now outdated, for its processes are largely subjective and without scientific reference. Politics is an outgrowth of the monetary system and scarcity. We now must work towards a new, emerging paradigm – moving from a period where the central problem was the sharing of scarcity, to the problem now being one of creating and distributing abundance. Government and the concept of the “State” will eventually be outgrown entirely and replaced by an objective system of global resource management and technological organization. In a system of abundance, the “State”, as we know it, has no basis to exist. Government also becomes a Cybernated System, which is combined with Industry and thus responsible for the production and distribution of goods, along with resource and environmental management. The structural basis for this “government” system is idealized as follows:

1) A central database containing catalogs of every known material and technical understanding for problem solving and invention. As noted previously, computers have the ability to catalog information and logically compute it on a scale much larger than a human can. Only computers will be able to handle the integration of all known knowledge and come up with decisions that will be logically based on the full known range of data. As stated before, the most efficient decisions are decisions that have

188 been arrived at by taking into account all relevant variables. It is now within our grasp today to begin the development of a Central Computer Database that contains all known knowledge, ranging from the properties, combinations and applications of every element on the periodic table, to the complete known history of technological invention. Once the associative system emerges, which will allow computers to contextually cross-relate all the known disciplines, we will have in our grasp a tool of immeasurable proportions. The limitations of our physical and cognitive abilities will no longer be a problem, for the new method of problem solving and invention will be an interaction with this database program. It could even come in the form of a simple website on the Internet, in fact. You would pose a problem or question to the database program and it will give the best feedback that is possible based on the current state of knowledge at that period in time. Again, this process of inquiry and interaction is no different than in- terfacing with a calculator, but this new “calculator” has a powerful associative system and an extensive database of know-ledge that cannot just understand and compute math, it can integrate physics, biology, astron- omy and every scientific field into one concentrated awareness. Most likely, the US Military already has similar database reference and decision making programs that it uses to strategize for war. Regardless, in order for this system to be effective, it must also have real-time feedback input from the planet, in order to understand what resources we have and what we don’t. This requires a worldwide sensory system. In other words:

2) An earth wide autonomic nervous system, with environmental sensors in all relevant areas of the planet, generating “Industrial Electronic Feed- back” regarding resources, operations and other environmental issues. This nervous system is connected directly to the Central Database Pro- gram noted above. This holistic system keeps track of all the resources on the planet, while also monitoring the earth for environmental disturb- ances which humanity should be alerted to, such as earthquakes and other natural phenomenon. This database would include a survey of available resources, production plants, scientific and technical personnel, transportation, research labs, medical facilities, schools, etc. This will not happen overnight, but if we began by constructing regional systems and overtime interlink all of them globally, it could be created sooner than we think. This integration can inform the Central Database Program of what is available and what is scarce, while the Database will in turn constantly adjust industrial methods based around the dynamic equilibrium of the

189 planet. Of course, full international cooperation is the only way to accomplish such a system.

3) Interdisciplinary Teams of technicians oversee the system and orient research projects to continue growth, efficiency and social evolution. In an optimized version of this system, no more than 5% of the population would likely be needed to run the show. The more optimized and powerful our technology and methods become, the more that number decreas- es. Of course, many people often ask, what about democracy? Is this system a democracy? How do I participate in the system? Do we elect the Interdisciplinary teams? In a Resource-Based, Global Economy, where “industry” and “government” are combined into a Cybernated System that incorporates advanced problem solving database computers, coupled with vast planetary wide observation sensors, the traditional concepts of politics, elections and the like have no relevance or basis. While this notion scares a lot of traditionally minded people, it must be reiterated that [most of] our problems in life are technical […]. Democracy in today’s world is an illusion. It always was. People think they have “choice” in our current system because they can press a button on a voting machine and put some pre-selected person into power. Once that person is in power, the public then has no power. Did you vote for the space program? Did you vote for the cabinet of the new president? Did you vote for the tax cut? Did you vote for where highways or power grids go? Did you vote for the war in Iraq? No, you didn’t. The traditional concept of a “participatory democracy” is a cruel joke. The game has been used to give the public the illusion of control for countless generations, while the distorted monetary powers at the top continue to do whatever they please. There never was a true democracy in any country in history and there never will be as long as the monetary system is in operation and scarcity is perpetuated. So how would a person participate within a Resource-Based Econo- my? First, they would interact with the Central Database System program, which would likely come in the form of an advanced Internet web page which every person has access to. They would then input their proposal. The Central Database, with its historical knowledge databases and full integration of all scientific fields, would then analyze the concept for its scientific and technical integrity along with optimizing the materials re-

190 quired based on current understandings and availabilities. If the proposal makes logical sense and the optimized resources to make it happen are available, it would be turned over to the Interdisciplinary Teams that oversee the implementation of the new proposal and orient it into the system. These Interdisciplinary Teams would be selected and organized by the Central Database Program, based on what they have already contributed to the system. This is a true “election”, based on what a person has done, not what they say they will do. Furthermore, the public’s fear of traditional “corruption” will have no basis, for there is no reward for it. The Interdisciplinary Teams do not get “paid” in any way, for their worldviews [second tier-thinking and integral worldview of the Neo-Transcendentalists] have been expanded to realize that their reward is, in fact, the fruits of the society as a whole and they contribute because they want to! While this might be difficult to consider for those who have been fully indoctrinated into the monetary based reward system and feel that money is the only “incentive” there is, let it be known that every day, all over the world, millions of humans volunteer for the greater good. In a 1992 Gallop Poll, more than 50% of American adults (94 Million Americans) volunteered time for social causes, at an average of 4.2 hours a week, for a total of 20.5 billion hours a year! This is an incredible triumph for the collective human spirit, for even with the sickness of self-interest generated by the monetary system, humans still strive to help each other and give to society without reward. In the future, those who choose to work in the Cybernated Industrial System will do so because it is an honor to serve humanity. They will understand that it is in their self-interest to see to it that humanity lives and works together for the greater good. The reward in a Resource-Based Economy would be the continual improvement of society for all. In the words of Margaret Mead: “If you look closely you will see that almost anything that really matters to us, anything that embodies our deepest commitment to the way human life should be lived and cared for, depends on some form of volunteerism. In a Resource-Based Economy, participation is open to everyone, because all issues are fundamentally recognized as technical. The degree to which a person contributes is based simply on that person’s education and ability to create and problem solve. This is why expanded education is critical. In society today, the public is always kept uninformed and as dumbed-down as possible. This way the government can maintain control. In a Resource-Based Economy, the goal of the educational system is

191 to produce the most intelligent and aware human beings as possible. Why? Because everyone can then become a contributor, greatly affecting our social evolution for the better and improving the lives of all. Who makes the decisions in a Resource-Based Economy? No one does. Deci- sions are arrived at by the use of The Scientific Method, utilizing computers that gain real-time feedback from the environment, along with a Central Historical Database of all known technical information, and maintained by evolving Interdisciplinary Teams. This combination could be called the Cybernated Industrial System. This reduces erroneous opin- ions and subjectivity. We don’t want people in control of government. We want to utilize Scientific Methods for arriving at more appropriate decisions. In the end, the only real issues for society in the natural world are (1) the production of goods and services that are equally available to all, (2) research projects and educational systems to expand our know-ledge, understandings and applications, and (3) the constant monitoring of the earth’s resources and atmosphere for feedback and possible environmental problems, enabling us to restore and maintain a pristine environment. Without the wasted energy and resources from going to war and other aspects of the monetary system, we could address true threats to humanity, such as unforeseen variables like tsunamis, earthquakes, illness and disease. The … real problems in life are the problems that are common to all humans.

Cities That Think

Anthropologists often consider the city as our most fundamental social invention. The first known city is thought to have occurred about 5400 BCE in ancient Sumeria. Since then, we have seen vast technological evolution in the processes and materials used to create the components of a city, along with advanced integrations of ‘social’ conventions, such as electrical systems, water distribution methods and the like. How- ever, today’s cities, as modern as they may seem, are in fact extremely outdated in the face of modern technology and scientific ingenuity. It is time that we fully harness a systems approach to our city designs. The term “systems” is derived from the Greek word “synistanai,” which means, “to bring together or combine.” A systems approach thus means that the ‘elements’ of the city, such as houses, power generators and production facilities, be intricately interconnected to the ‘processes’ of the cities, being waste disposal, irrigation, power distribution, goods and services production, etc. In a Resource-Based Economy, the cities are de- 192 signed to be extremely flexible, allowing for constant upgrades and changes. They are emergent, fully integrated systems designed to evolve like a living organism. Jacque Fresco’s innovative, multidimensional and circular city designs would use the most sophisticated resources and construction techniques. However, they require that we start fresh. Trying to fix our current cities is not worth the time, material and effort. It is much less problematic and effective to build newer cities from the ground up than to restore old ones. The design and development of these new cities emphasize the restoration and protection of the environment and efficiently apply resources with energy conservation, ease of fabrication, and relative freedom from maintenance. Many of the old, inefficient cities will be mined for resources, while others will be kept as museum cities.

The Circular City

The circular city permits the most efficient use of resources, travel techniques, and general functionality, with a minimum expenditure of energy. The geometrically elegant circular arrangement is designed to allow for the highest standard of living in the most productive and efficient ways possible. These cities serve the role of extensions of human activity and utilitarian expression; in complete harmony with the environment. The configuration of these cities would be a direct representation of the function they serve. For instance, the outermost perimeter of the city is for nature- oriented recreation, including lush gardens and parks for hiking, cycling, water sports and any other outdoor activity. The next inner section is the ‘agricultural belt’, using outdoor and indoor (hydroponic) agricultural methods so food can be grown all year round. Continuing in, eight green areas provide clean renewable energy sources for the entire city. While these energy sources would be region specific, often these methods will include Geothermal, Wind and Solar technologies, while those cities near water would extend to utilize Wave and Tidal power. The largest of these green areas is also the ‘residential belt’, containing unique homes and apartments. The residences are constructed by extrusion technology and other methods of high-tech prefab- rication. The days of bricks and wood being stuck together are no more. Structures of the future can be near solid units, extruded as a whole. All homes and apartment complexes are also virtually self-contained systems. For instance, the outer surfaces of the structures serve as photovoltaic generators, converting solar radiation directly into electricity. The homes 193 are fire resistant, require little maintenance and are impervious to water and other environmental influences. The effects of floods, earthquakes and hurricanes are also considered and incorporated into the design, respective of the characteristics of the region of the earth employed. Moving in past the residential district are education, science and research centers, along with production and distribution centers. Automat- ed inventory systems would integrate the distribution centers and manufacturing facilities in a highly coordinated and efficient way. Without the problem of money and value, limits on production would not exist. In the center of the city, there is a large dome that contains the Cen- tral Cybernated System , which is the brain and nervous system of the entire city. As denoted earlier in our section on ‘government’, through satellites and sensors placed around the entire city, the core dome electronically monitors the production and distribution of products, while also control- ling environmental factors within the system. For example, in regard to the agricultural belt, electronic probes monitor and maintain the soil conditions, including the water table, nutrient allocation and other attributes. This method of ‘environmental feedback’ is applied to the entire city complex. This way a ‘balanced load economy’ can be maintained, with overruns and waste eliminated. Also, within this central dome is the central transportation hub…more on this in a moment. Surrounding the central dome, are eight smaller domes that are used as culture centers, such a performance venues, conference centers, exhibitions and the like. Waste recycling and other such needs are located beneath the surface of the city, always utilizing the most advanced methods in clean technology. Apart from the Circular City, other city designs would include various ‘land city’ configurations, ‘total enclosure’ cities, along with ‘Cities in the Sea.’ Colonization of the oceans is likely the next stage for humanity in order to relieve land based population pressures. Oceanic city communities will develop as artificial islands, floating structures and undersea observato- ries. The cities on earth, in whatever form they take, are all tightly interconnected within a worldwide system. Just as each city has a central organizational dome which functions as the brain, along with its nervous system consisting of computerized environmental monitoring via satellite and electronic probes, the larger world complex absorbs each city and monitors the broader spectrum of the environment, making sure there isn’t a material resource needed in any of the individual cities, while also regulating larger order processes for all cities and the environment as a

194 whole. This “government,” if that is what you want to call it, is where the Central Database is located, as denoted in the previous chapter, with its nervous system stretching into all city complexes and beyond.

Transportation

Within the city, escalators and elevators, along with conveyers and transveyors, move in all directions and are interconnected with all other transport systems. The transportation system is deliberately designed to reduce the need for any kind of automobile. This system can take you anywhere in the city. If you want to travel outside the city, monorails, streamlined cars, vertical takeoff/ landing aircraft and Maglev trains are used for continental and intercontinental travel. Airports and International shipping systems are also implemented in and around the cities. It is worth pointing out that the prevailing means of transportation in our societies today require fossil fuels to run. In the case of the automobile, the battery technology needed to power an electric car that can go over 100 miles an hour and over 200 miles on one charge currently exists, and has existed for many years. However, due to battery patents controlled by the oil industry, which limit their availability to maintain market share, coupled with the political pressure from the profit based energy industry, the accessibility and affordability of this technology is limited. There is absolutely no reason, other than pure, corrupt profit interest, that every single transport vehicle in the world could not be utterly clean, with zero need for gasoline. As far as traditional airplanes are concerned, Maglev technology is on pace to making them obsolete. A Maglev train uses magnets for propul- sion. It is fully suspended by a magnetic field, and requires less than 2% of the energy used for plane travel. The train has no wheels, so nothing can wear out. These tube based Maglevs could travel up to 4000 miles per hour, in a motionless, frictionless tube, which can go over land, or underwater. They are fast, clean, and efficient with only a fraction of the energy usage we use today for the same means.

The New Culture/Lifestyle

In our current system, the traditional family is broken, with both parents having to work in order to survive. Monetary economics undermines family cohesion and childcare. Stress is always high due to medical bills, insurance, education, employment insecurity and living costs. In a Re- source-Based Economy the integrity of the family will be returned. 195

Likewise, the cultural values of society as a whole would also undergo profound change. With the monetary system outgrown and the world working together to produce abundance for all the citizens of the planet, activities we appreciate will expand greatly, for the amount of human freedom would be unlike anything we know today. Some often respond to these possibilities with the question: “What will people do? The answer is, of course, what you like to do. For many in our current society, options in life are very limited due to the scarcity conditioning perpetuated. Within the monetary system, the very idea of freedom is undermined, for a person is only as free and their purchasing power will allow them to be. This stifles the creative outlook of people and today many have an extremely limited frame of reference as to what is possible. For example, if a woman in ancient times had the role of walking from her hut to a nearby creek to fetch water every day for cooking, she would likely feel a displaced sense of responsibility if suddenly there was a plumbing system in the house with a faucet that brought the water to her directly. The fact is, advents in technology can actually change our values and it is important that we ‘update’ our value systems to reflect the modern period. Concurrently, one of the more in depth changes in values and lifestyle will be the way people think about ‘property’. In most of the world today, property is a powerful concept, with people often associating their social status with what they own. As stated before, the monetary system requires ‘cyclical consumption’ to function. This naturally leads to the need for people to be manipulated into thinking they want or need a particular good or service. With the powerful tactics of modern advertising, most in the world support an artificial, materialistic value system that en- tails wanting more and more goods and services, often regardless of their necessity or utility. In a Resource-Based Economy, the monetary system will no longer pollute the human mind via its manipulative arm—“advertising”. The endless sea of billboards, media commercials, magazines and the like will no longer poison the landscape or our perceptions. This will cause a dramatic shift in the human value system and hence lifestyle. More powerfully, in a Resource-Based Economy there is no reason for property. Property is an outgrowth of scarcity. People who had to work very hard to create or obtain a product or resource in turn protect- ed it because it had immense value relative to the labor entailed along with the scarcity associated. Property is not an “American” or “Capital-

196 ist” idea… it is a primitive mental perspective generated from generations of scarcity. People claim “ownership” because it is a legal form of protection. In a system of abundance, without the need for money, the idea of ownership becomes irrelevant. In this new system no one owns anything. Instead, everyone has unrestricted access to everything. Ownership is a massive burden. No longer will a person need to live in one place. One could travel the world constantly. Anything needed is obtained, without restriction. There is no reason for abuse for there is nothing to gain. You can’t steal things that no one owns and you certainly couldn’t sell them. Household items are obtained through central distribution in the cities, while recreational items are available on call or near the location of their use. For example, if you go to a golf course you would select, on site, your clubs from the most effectively designed models available. You use them, and then you return them. If you decide to keep the clubs, go ahead—that is your burden … for why would a person want to transport, maintain and store golf clubs, when they can always have access to them and then return them onsite? Our homes today are full of junk that we hold onto because of the supposed value they maintain. This waste will no longer be needed. In this model, the city complex or, in fact, the entire world, is really your home. Instead of having extraneous items like recreational equipment and vehicles sitting about your physical house, collecting dust when they are not in use, they are stored centrally for everyone’s free access, with products being utilized actively, minimizing redundant waste. If you require an automobile for whatever reason, the car is made available for you. When you get to your destination, the satellite based driving system will automatically make the car available for others to use, as opposed to sitting in some parking lot wasting space and time. In society today, the need for property results in extreme product overlap and redundant waste. There is no reason for every person to “own” a car. Most only drive them for an hour a day. It is much more intelligent to create a universal shared system, for it dramatically reduces waste, redundancy and increases space and efficiency. The cities within a Resource-Based Economy will fully utilize the systems approach, integrating all elements and processes of the city into a self-contained whole as is technically possible. We must start anew and not concern ourselves with the chore of ‘patching’ the old cities, which are intrinsically outdated. While there are many designs possible, including ‘Oceanic’, ‘Full Enclosure’ and, of course, ‘Land Cities’, the Circular

197

City , as designed by Jacque Fresco, comprises one of the most efficient. Its different circular tiers each operate as a component to the overall functionality of the city, with room always for change, upgrades and transition. Lifestyles in a Resource-Based Economy will be very different from the lifestyles of today, for the values of human beings will undergo profound change once the influence of the scarcity-based monetary system subsides. One of the more profound changes will be regarding our sense of ownership and property. There will be no need or reason for property in the future for importance will logically move from ‘acquisition’ to ‘access’. Everyone in the world will have access to their needs, with the entire system based on making that possible [...]. If 120,000 people can come together to build a nuclear bomb, as was done with the Manhattan Project in the late 1930s, there is no reason why we cannot come together and use human ingenuity to accomplish incredible social achievements for the betterment of humanity. It is time we unleash our ‘Weapons of Mass Creation’ (WMCs) unto the world. It is time we take responsibility for each other and ourselves. We have the knowledge, means and initiative to devise an entirely new social architecture that can create a world we actually enjoy and flourish in.110

(Image Courtesy Of Wiki Commons) 198

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Zevin X. Cruz is a “Third Wave Metamodern” philosopher, author, artist and activist. He has been a lifelong advocate of the oppressed and for the past 20 years has fought for economic justice and fundamental social change. As a Metamodern philosopher he founded “Integral Neo-Transcenden- talism,” which is a holistic approach to art and activism (“Integral Artivism”). His “Ten Integral and Neo-Transcendental Philosophical Pillars for Radical Evolutionary Transformation” otherwise known as “The Dynamic Deca- logue” is based on Ken Wilber’s “Theory of Everything—the AQAL Model (All Quadrants, All Lines)—serving as an Integral Operating System (IOS) for humanity. As an artist, Cruz has pioneered a bold and new Metamodern Art movement called Integral Neo-Transcendentalism: Culture Jamming, Trans-Genre Recontextualization, Community Co-Creation, Vision Building and Mission Oriented Strategic Art. The latter consist of guerrilla art projects known as “cultural interventions” on controversial public spaces that received some public notoriety through print and local television media coverage. 199

As an author, Cruz was a newspaper reporter in 2006 for the Dryden Courier, Lansing Ledger and Groton Independent in upstate New York. In California, Cruz wrote freelance articles for the Light Connection and Street Light where he honed his skills to become an ambitious author and an advocate for bold and transformative change. During his college years he went undercover as a homeless person for a week and later in jail as an inmate for 10 days to write about what it is like to live in both worlds if only for a brief moment. He also writes “conceptual poetry” fused with experimental art, which typically begins as a concrete poem that “evolves” (transcend limits and include features) through six other different artistic genres only to be integrated into a grand, seventh holistic piece. As an activist, Cruz was in the Natural Leaders Initiative, former Founder and Director of the San Diego Cultural Creatives (SDCC) in 2002, which in 2005 its steering committee voted to approve his “Grand Unified Theory & Strategy (GUTS) of Evolutionary Transformation.” John Falchi, an elder in the activist community and former steering committee member of SDCC, referred to Cruz’s work as “Genius. Pure genius.” The writer was a member of the World Future Society (WFS), the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), the National Organizers Alliance (NOA), Independent Progressive Politics Network (IPPN) and the Ithaca Unitarian Universalists Church. He trained with the Ruckus Society in preparation and participation for the “2001 Bio- devastation Protest” in San Diego. Cruz has been featured on WS Internet Talk Radio and Blog Talk Radio, community newspapers, a panelist in community dialogues, given lectures and conducted workshops on comprehensive efforts for fundamental social change. Cruz’s formal education consist of two AA’s in Journalism and Philoso- phy, BS in Criminal Justice, Minor in Sociology and Master’s in Human Ser- vices: Organizational Management and Leadership from Springfield College in California, where for his doctoral community project thesis at Springfield College he founded and led the SAN DIEGO CULTURAL CREATIVES (SDCC): A Convergence of Change Agents For Unified Strategic Action that led him to create his “Grand Unified Theory & Strategy (GUTS),” which his academic graduate advisor, Gil Ontai, called such work as a “new take and advance to Karl Marx’s thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis model.” And Jeevan Sivasubramaniam, senior managing editor of Barrett-Koehler Publishers, referred to Cruz’s “Dynamic Decalogue” as “a new activist philosophy for humanity.” Cruz has also participated in the 2012 “Transition U.S. Weekend Train- ing in Kingston, New York,” and the 2010 and 2007 U.S. Social Forum. He formed the "Cognitive Work Group" of Occupy Cortland (a local OWS think tank in upstate New York) and collaborated with Occupy Ithaca. Cruz

200 has visited Zuccotti Park during the early weeks of the occupation and was an active member in the NYCGA's online work groups and think tank. His series of seven books is a synthesis of all of his experiences and work with these various groups and diverse people. Cruz is a bilingual, Mexican-American, born on 1970 in General Hospital at Los Angeles, California and the eldest of three brothers and one sister. Both parents emigrated legally from Mexico in the late 1960s. His father graduated from diesel mechanic school in Baja California before getting a job with Delta Lines in Los Angeles. His father taught himself English through a home course of audio records in the evenings. Zevin’s mother was a house wife and later worked at nursing homes. Zevin grew up in Pico Rivera, Cali- fornia (just a few miles from East LA) for about 10 years (1975 to 1985) before moving to San Diego, California (1985 to 2005) living there for 20 years then strategically relocating with his wife to a more rural and sustainable region of upstate New York in the small town of Virgil in Cortland county for 12 years and counting. At age 12, in Pico Rivera, California, Zevin took his first steps as an activist by leading a school walkout at Miller Junior High for announcing its permanent closure of where he was a seventh grade student. He saw the collective efforts of the students stalled when teachers, administrators and security quarantined the school by blocking all exists and entrances. Seeing that the popular student organizers of the walkout were stumped by such a lock- down, he quickly took the initiative and proceeded to find an alternative exit through the cafeteria and up the stairs and exit stage left onto the outside school parking lot where the entire student population watched and cheered then soon overwhelmed the school staff by climbing over the 18-foot fences and leaped into freedom. A student protest ensued with makeshift signs for a few hours until police showed up and culled the students back to classes, whereas Zevin and his band of “school insurrectionists” left the premises to celebrate. However, months later the school did close. At age 17, in San Diego, California after a philosophical debate with his English teacher as a senior at Montgomery High School, Zevin founded the SEARCHERS FOR TRUTH: A Theological and Philosophical Student Association, to seek out answers with his fellow students to life’s most enduring questions: Who are we? What is a life? What is the meaning and purpose to life? Does god exist? Is there life after death? Is there a true church and religion of god? His spiritual development evolved from being a Catholic to a Southern Baptist and then as a non-denominational Christian in the “Worldwide Church of God.” Then in college his religious beliefs became more ecumeni-

201 cal and finally developing to a spiritual progressivism by a becoming a member of the “First Unitarian Society of Ithaca” in 2007. In his twenties, he was the founder and leader of three other groups in San Diego: 1) TOURING FORCE: A Sports Bike Touring Association to advocate motorcycle safety among young riders of “crotch rockets” and organize a cross country run to attempt a new Guinness World’s Record; 2) DETO- NATION: A Muscle Car Club consisting of young car enthusiasts of classic hot rods to create safe spaces for street racing; 3) The SOCIETY of the THIRD MILLENNIUM (S3K): An Integral Guerrilla Art Collective made up of Gen Xers “artivists” who seized public spaces without permission to erect site-specific art installations without property destruction or graffiti in order to bring attention to often neglected political, social and cultural issues. While working to put himself through college he worked a lot of blue collar jobs as an assistant diesel mechanic, auto parts driver, UPS loader, armed security officer and campus police. As a student of Southwestern Community College he wrote articles for the Southwestern Sun newspaper, published a few avant-garde poems in the school’s literary magazine and as mentioned before, wrote freelance articles for The Light Connection and Street Light. During this time period he went undercover as a both a homeless person (for two weeks) and later an incarcerated inmate (also for two weeks) to write about these subject matters through firsthand accounts in what is commonly known as the New Journalism. In upstate New York (2005 to present) Zevin became a graduate of Itha- ca’s “Natural Leaders Initiative,” which is part of the Cornell Community Extension program. There he introduced his SUM STRATAGEM to Doro- thy Cotton, a leader who talked and marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in the 1960s African-American Civil Rights Movement not to mention a member of the inner-circle of one of its main organizations, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and arguably the highest ranked female member of the organization, commented in class that Zevin’s strategic vision was “beautiful.” In 2009, Zevin helped form a community group to repel the closure of our neighborhood elementary school in Virgil by unit- ing both conservative and liberal neighbors in voicing our disapproval at several local town halls and school board meetings. He even offered and wrote political campaign strategies to two of the three local school board candidates that won. In 2009, during the Tea Party movement, Zevin volunteered to run for one of the New York representative seats for the 2009 Continental Congress sponsored by the conservative-libertarian foundation called “We The Peo- ple.” He was a supporter of the 2008 Ron Paul presidential campaign but

202 voted for Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader during the general election (he has voted for Nader since 2000 and voted for Green Party Presi- dential candidate, Jill Stein, in 2012 and 2016). Zevin has attended the 2007, 2010 and 2015 Atlanta, Detroit and Phila- delphia US Social Forums where activist from all over the country and world converge for movement building workshops and activities. In 2011, he visited Occupy Wall Street in Zuccotti Park during the second weekend of the movement and joined several online work groups of the NYCGA website like the “Vision & Strategy” group and the “Think Tank.” In his local community he formed an activist think tank called the “Cognitive Work Group (CWG)” of Occupy Cortland. In addition, he collaborated with other affili- ates like the “Education Work Group” of Occupy Ithaca and participated in creating their OWS pamphlet by contributing his own writings. In 2012, Zevin attended and participated in both Occupy National Gathering and the 99 Declaration’s Work Groups’ Continental Congress 2.0. (CC 2.0) in Philadelphia, where he worked to co-create a unifying vision with Occupy and a political platform with CC 2.0 over the four-day period. In 2015, he self-published his first book, THE SUM: A Cohesive Vision, Coherent Strategy & Comprehensive Philosophy Of Integral Activism For The Cultural Creatives’ Convergence of Movements, (http://www.48hrbooks.com/Book/13468) and launched it at the 2015 US Social Forum when he presented a workshop to activists called “THE SUMMONING: A 2016 Sum Stratagem Of Unified Mega-Movement Campaign For A Citizen Accountability Purge Of The Economic Oligarchy Through A National General Strike.” In 2016, he self- published his second book, THE SUM II: A Critical Analysis Of The Current State Of Activism To Create A Cohesive Vision, Strategy & Philosophy Of Neo- Transcendentalism, (http://www.48hrbooks.com/Book/7LG6vp3w). Jeevan Sivasubramaniam, senior managing editor of Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., referred to his “Dynamic Decalogue” as “a new philosophy for activists and humanity.” He was scheduled for his book launch at the 2016 LEFT Forum but instead he opted for a more unconventional one month book tour between mid-August and early September of 2016. On Friday, August 12 at the site of first “Women Rights Convention” at Seneca Falls, New York, we launched the “CROSS COUNTRY CHALLENGER QUEST (C3Q),” an art poster campaign in all 48 lower continental states in America to establish a new Guinness World Record. Ideas and actions go hand in hand in order to have any reasonable shot at changing the world. And while most people day dream or talk about doing remarkable things, we do them. Case in point: we travelled 11,600 miles in 21 days to post at least one art poster in all 48

203 lower continental states of America—living out most people’s fantasy vacation, while driving in many American’s dream hot rod. However, this was no vacation and the modern American muscle car—the Dodge CHAL- LENGER—served as a fitting symbol for setting up the future dominos for nonviolent resistance, revolt and revolution against the corrupt, exploitive, self-destructive, status quo system and surveillance state of American Em- pire. During this quest, we’ve met people we would not ordinarily meet and felt things we would probably never feel again. We’ve seen things most people will never see like the velocity blur of a Nebraska landscape, while driving a predominantly phantom black Challenger SRT8 over 175 mph before running out of road on our way to poster junked-vehicles at the outdoor, art installation “Carhenge.” We’ve done things most people will never do like overlooking three states while hiking along the rim of a dormant volcano only to descend into its charred, molten, cooled rocky center in New Mexico. We’ve experienced the extremes of living out one’s passionate purpose in collaboration with the unconditional love of a life partner, while at times during intense difficult moments in the trip also experienced contempt for each other and yet coming out the other end as stronger steel, forged from the fires of triumphs and tribulations (perhaps in preparation for more grandiose and ambitious projects yet to come). On top of everything we have unofficially established a new Guinness World Record (review of our records is still pending) by being the first guerrilla artist to place at least one art poster in every state in the continental U.S., documented by credit card statements and receipts; along with pictures, video and a log book filled with witnesses’ names, signatures and contact information to confirm our whereabouts. 268 art posters were placed in 48 states, 60 cities at 106 sites in 3 weeks’ time. All posted in different locations without authorization, permissions or permits—guerrilla art at its simplest, speediest and grandest. Placement of posters ranged from the conventional like college bulletin boards at Yale Univer- sity, all variety of power and electrical traffic boxes (tall vertical ones to short wide ones and different colors: green, pink, salmon, stainless steel, black, white and beige) to strange sites like statues, busts, dumpsters, gas stations (trash cans, fuel pumps and pillars), signs (state visitor centers, pedestals, back of billboards), utility rooms, abandoned shacks, sheds and buildings, baseball stadiums, outdoor art projects, graffiti-ridden junked cars, a green plastic dinosaur, in front of a police department, behind of a fast food chain order speaker board, on a freeway overpass, highway bridges, pillars and pedestals, a steel train bridge, a Grand Canyon gift shop, a cowboy straddling a rocket on top of a firetruck, a giant water tank on a Montana hilltop that can be seen for blocks, inside the largest book store in the country at Port-

204 land, Oregon, in the foyer of a Denny’s in Indiana, and behind a national park sign like John Brown’s at Harpers Ferry in West Virginia—an American abolitionist who believed armed insurrection was the only way to overthrow the institution of slavery in the United States. In July, 2017, he attended the 1st National Gathering of Transition US (www.tranisitionus.org). For four days he participated in intensives, workshops, general assemblies, leadership retreat and strategic sessions to expand this movement for community resilience through post-carbon relocalization. On August 21, the day of the “Great American Solar Eclipse, he will be conducting a bi-partisan performance art happening called the “Path to To- tality Project (PTP).” He describes this artistic endeavor on his Facebook page: “The cross-country trip of the century—for celestial bodies” will take place, as “the moon will pass completely in front of the sun” and “for the first time in nearly 100 years, its shadow will traverse the U.S. from coast to coast, making this eclipse one of the most highly anticipated and widely visible total solar eclipse in history,” this according to TIME magazine’s July 10, 2017 article, “The Great American Eclipse.” The article goes on to say, “Alt- hough the entire country will be able to see at least a portion of the moon glide across the sun, the sweet spot (known as the ‘path of totality’ where 12.2 million people lie within some 70 miles wide along with 47 million or 15% of the U.S., are within a two-hour drive) will be along a route that stretches from Oregon to South Carolina. This is where the moon will block all sunlight, leaving the ground below in darkness. Only during this period will it be safe to view the eclipse with the naked eye. If the weather cooper- ates, stars will appear in the sky in the middle of the day. Complete darkness will be brief, lasting only about two minutes, depending on location […].” This is the celestial canvass on American soil, which we integral artists and activists (Metamodern Neo-Transcendentalists) or “artivists” wish to “paint on” as a “performance art happening” in an effort to tap into “unity consciousness” as the first major collective step in 2017 towards healing us by mending the political and cultural fragmentation of America. How? By turning a cosmic event in the U.S. into a cathartic collective experience to begin releasing the fear, anger and hatred between conservatives and liberals among the rural and urban, the coast and inland, religious and scientific, atheists and believers through a two-fold process: 1) those outside the “path of totality” will collectively pray, chant and meditate upon 2) those lighting and letting go the red and blue sky lanterns (representing the divisive Democratic and Republi- can political camps) with the written words often used to disparage each other on the internet and mass media. We intend to create a positive, contemplative and transcendental collective experience as not only a symbolic gesture

205 and psychological exercise but also as a “National Unifying Purpose (NUP)” to activate the surrounding morphic fields—“the view that there are collective subjective effects on reality that influence the actual direction of development and events. An academic discipline, modern discursive theory, suggests this in the simplest of ways. When humans project ideas in writing or other media, these can become game changers for the behavior of entire cultures. We need only think of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf or Thomas Paine’s Common Sense,” this according to Kurt Johnson and David Robert’s 2012 book, The Coming Interspiritual Age. “In 1979, Princeton University scientists formed the influential Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) program to investigate paranormal phenomena. In one of their most well- known announcement, they published evidence of non-random field effects surrounding the half-billion people watching the 1995 O.J. Simpson verdict. After 28 years of work and over ten million tests, PEAR concluded that scientific evidence exists for consciousness affecting or interacting with surrounding phenomena.” If our collective consciousness can affect our physical reality than why not in a positive way with this project and begin to heal our divided and diseased country? In 2018, Cruz was the first write-in “Congressional Crowdocracy Candi- date” for upstate New York District 22. He ran an unconventional guerrilla art poster campaign to bring attention to his social media platform to promote a new system of governance in the United States called—Crowdocracy —as a true technological direct democracy that would eventually eliminate the need for a representative Republic (like congress) and fundamentally redesign the Presidency and the Supreme Court to accommodate this new form of decision-making process the enfranchises everyone everywhere! In the 2019, along with finishing the rest of his series of seven books, Cruz will be creating a “Cultural Creatives’ Convergence Colony (C-4)” at his home in order to recruit interns for his S3K Institute (“integral activism” think tank), Convergence Leadership Initiative, Community Convergence Centers and The Last Party: A Th3rd Millennium Coalition of independents and political third parties to enfranchise the over 100 million non-voters in the United States. It will be the first Crowdocracy party that will do away with career politicians and divisive political parties through IT, direct democracy and AI cybernetic governance. As such, Cruz is seeking people to participate in an exciting and epic endeavor. He is offering an unlimited free residency to all Cultural Creatives and Metamodernists from the following fields as: poets, philosophers, play- wrights, screenwriters, novelists, nonfiction writers, essayists, visual artists, painters, guerrilla artists, sculptors, performance artists, musicians, dancers, choreographers, photographers, filmmakers, documentarians, homesteaders,

206 landscape architects, environmentalists, activists, engineers, web designers, computer programmers, graphic designers, printmakers, fashion designers, journalists, storytellers, scientists and scholars. In other words, the cultural, intellectual and artistic vanguard of Cultural Creatives and Metamodernists. In exchange for an “unaccredited internship/unofficial residency” consisting of free utilities, room and board would be to donate 4-to-5 hours of labor per day, 5 to 6 days a week, in and around the house and property and as personal assistants/protégés to Cruz who lives on site with his wife. Some of the duties will include assisting him with his literary and artistic endeavors like proof reading and editing his books/manuscripts, social media platform management, website development, arranging book tours and speaking en- gagements, mass media exposure and promotion. In addition, help create a prototype for a “Community Convergence Center (C-3)” at the residence to design a model that could eventually be exported to other communities to create “Geographies of Geniuses—a future “Rural Renaissance” of ecological sustainability in the countryside and a “Second Enlightenment” in cities and urban areas, otherwise to be known as “Nexus Nodes” for community change agents. This nascent Community Convergence Center (C-3) at the residence will “house” several incubation enterprises: 1) “Community Convergence Insti- tute (CCI)” (an “integral activism” think tank) to convene discussions and debates to develop Left-Right visions, strategies, policies, goals and objectives for whole-system change and publishing the ideas in books, articles and blogs. 2) Assist in creating a curriculum for a community “Convergence Leadership Academy (CLA)” to begin creating “Crowdocracy Citizen Legis- lators (CCL)” (a true “Direct Democracy” that empowers and enfranchises everyone and eliminates the need for a representative republic of career politicians, lobbyists and political parties) see (www.crowd.ngo) and (www.everyoneintheworld.org). 3) Create a “Grand Unified Alliance (GUA)” by unifying most if not all political third parties for the 2020 Presidential election to create “Crowdocracy.”4) Produce three documentaries (based on Cruz’s life, books and guerrilla art projects) and one feature film. 5) Assist in the development and construction of outdoor, site-specific art installations, galleries and exhibitions that creates a new art movement. These are just a few of the future epic endeavors we will be engaged in over the next few months to years. Ultimately, Cruz hopes this all leads to creating the necessary foundation for an activist infrastructure to create a sustainable Unified Mega-Movement Campaign for an enlightened economy from a new green deal, reinventing government with Crowdocracy and mobilizing the entire world through a global marshal plan against the Metacrisis of climate catastrophe.” 207

ENDNOTES

1 Daniel Howe, What Hath God Wrought, Oxford University Press, NY, 2007, pp. 5-9 2 Jeremy Rifkin, The Third Industrial Revolution, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, pp. 23-25. 3 Ibid, 27-30. 4 Ibid, 31-39. 5 Paul Ray & Sherry Anderson, The Cultural Creatives, Harmony Books, NY, 2000, p. 43. 6 James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras, Built To Last, 1994, pp. 34-39. 7 Allison & Kaye, 1997. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Zachary Karabel, A Visionary Nation, Harper Collins Publishers, 2001, pp. 39-41. 11 Paul Hawken, Blessed Unrest, Penguin Books, NY, 2006, pp. 24-25. 12 Ibid. 13 Kim Bobo, Jackie Kendall, Steve Max, Organizing for Social Change, Seven Locks Press, CA, 1999, pp 2-7. 14 Zachary Karabel, A Visionary Nation, Harper Collins Publishers, 2001, pp. 41-43. 15 Gordon Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution, Vintage Books, NY, 1991, pp. 190-192. 16 Ken Wilber, A Theory Of Everything, Shambhala, Boston, MA, 2001, pp. 51-52. 17 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp.31-36. 18 Ibid, pp. 37-38. 19 Ibid, pp. 39-40. 20 Ibid, pp. 40. 21 Ibid, pp. 40-42. 22 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 23-24. 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid, pp. 43-45. 25 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 133-134. 26 Ibid. 27 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 30-31. 28 Ibid, p. 31. 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid, 62. 31 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 62-72. 32 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 76-77.

208

33 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, p. 79. 34 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, p. 80. 35 Ibid. 36 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, p 34. 37 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, p 97. 38 Ibid, pp. 86. 39 Ibid. 40 Ibid, pp. 152. 41 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 133-134. 42 Ibid. 43 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 56-57. 44 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, p 57. 45 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 135-136. 46 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 136-137. 47 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 128-131. 48 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 131-132. 49 David C. Korten, Change The Story, Change The Future, Barrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., California, 2015, pp. 84-86. 50 Ibid. 51 Bill Moyers, Doing Democracy, New Society Publishers, Canada, 2001, pp.183-185. 52 Mary Clark, Ariadne’s Thread, St. Martin’s Press, NY, 1989, pp. 240-242. 53 David Korten, The Great Turning, Berrett Koehler Publishers, Inc., 2006, pp. 14-17. 54 Ibid. 55 Jan Lunberg, Culture Change Column, “A Culture of Sustainability,” 2005. 56 Ibid, p. 55. 57 Ibid, p. 44-45. 58 Ibid, p. 55-56. 59 Ibid, p. 45. 60 Ibid, pp. 51-53. 61 Ibid, p. 53. 62 Ibid, 94-103. 63 Ibid, 134-136.

209

64 Ibid, 140-141. 65 Ibid, 141-143. 66 Bob Hopkins, The Transition Companion, Green Press, Devon, UK, 2011, p. 28. 67 Ibid, pp. 290-291. 68 Jeremy Rifkin, The Empathetic Civilization, “An Address Before The British Royal Socie- ty For The Arts,” March 15, 2010. 69 George Lakoff, Don't Think of an Elephant, Chelsea Green Publishing, Canada, 2004, pp. 29-32. 70 Jeremy Rifkin, The Hydrogen Economy, Tarcher Penguin, NY, 2002, pp. 8-12. 71 Ibid, p. 21-23. 72 Ibid, p. 29. 73 Ibid, 31-33. 74 Ibid, 47. 75 Ibid, 65. 76 Ibid, 59. 77 Ibid, 89. 78 Ibid, 91-94. 79 Ibid, 101-104. 80 Ibid, 199-201. 81 Ibid, 230-239. 82 Peter Joseph, The Zeitgeist Companion Manual, 2010, pp. 9-15. 83 Ibid. 84 Ibid 85 Rob Hopkins, The Transition Handbook, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008, 104. 86 Ibid, p 59. 87 Rob Hopkins, The Transition Companion, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2012, 79-84. 88 Ibid. 89 Rob Hopkins, The Transition Handbook, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008, 109. 90 Rob Hopkins, The Transition Companion, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2012, p. 121. 91 Rob Hopkins, The Transition Handbook, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008, 111. 92 Ibid, 116. 93 Bob Hopkins, The Transition Companion, Green Press, Devon, UK, 2011, p. 128. 94 Rob Hopkins, The Transition Handbook, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008, p 116. 95 Ibid, p. 114 96 Bob Hopkins, The Transition Companion, Green Press, Devon, UK, 2011, p. 28. 97 Bob Hopkins, The Transition Companion, Green Press, Devon, UK, 2011, p. 29-31. 98 Ibid. 99 Rob Hopkins, The Transition Handbook, Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008, p 112. 100 Ibid, p. 113. 101 Ibid, p.114. 102 Ibid, p. 287. 103 Ibid, p 112. 104 Ibid.

210

105 Ibid, p.280. 106 Jeremy Rifkin, The Third Industrial Revolution, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, pp. 33-35. 107 Ibid 108 Jeremy Rifkin, The Empathetic Civilization, “An Address Before The British Royal Soci- ety For The Arts,” March 15, 2010. 109 Peter Joseph, The Zeitgeist Companion Manual, 2010, pp. 15-29. 110 Ibid.

211