How to save the world?

[Alexander Nicholi]

Have you seen any of George Carlin's stands before? He's well respected by the internet community, because his jokes make sense and should be taken into consideration on what to do. Listening to fictional characters isn't a bad thing, because they usually share the same opinions as the creator and used to spread his or her voice to the readers.

because I'm sure these people are incredibly reliable sources. one of them is fictional, for christ's sake.

George Carlin was a really amazing individual in and of himself, who had the thought to translate profound ideas into layman's terms so as to be seen and noticed. His thoughts on environmentalism and human nature lead into an apparent misconception ITT about "saving the world" and what the context of that really is. Are we talking the planet, or the people, here? The planet is fine, the people are fucked. That's all I have for that.

well, the global death of capitalism would be a wonderful starting point in 'saving the world', regardless of what you think saving the world is exactly
but that might as well be an abstract thought for our generation and the next couple of generations after us
i certainly don't bloody know how we'd ever dismantle that machine

It's really important to keep in mind that communism has never worked and will likely never work because of human's innate nature about those seven traits mentioned above. Capitalism is great because it takes those so-called 'negative' traits of ours and brings positive traits such as productivity and wealth to the table out of them. It works wonders out of something a lot of humans really don't like about themselves - what else do you want to do? You can't change human nature, and nothing short of that is going to make communism anything short of a wet dream. Another thing, since pure capitalism is also impossible and has always been inevitably cut with socialism, be sure to mix appropriately. Protip: the Yanks are a great example of how not to mix those two political systems.

well
go on
explain your thoughts rather than making an almost useless post

But it was funny, wasn't it? I thought so.

I think you're reading too much into my post. I didn't insult your age.

Someone's age is an attribute and isn't really insultable in and of itself, though. If you mean insulting me through my age I could go on about the differences between types of ad hominem attacks but that's not really appropriate here. My age has zero bearing on my intelligence and for all humans after a point it doesn't either. There's people in their 30s wearing diapers, and 13-year-olds writing operating systems. It's ridiculous to think intelligence has any consistent relatability with age.

 

[Sir Codin]

Protip: the Yanks are a great example of how not to mix those two political systems.

Except, the Yanks aren't really mixing Capitalism with a trace of socialism, because if it really was like that, things wouldn't be as bad.

The problem is, the system is catering mostly to two people: 1) politicians and federal officials and 2) big corporations. This is why I can not say that America has a free market system, because the government is actively putting out big business subsidies, bailouts, bans on certain products (look up Tesla cars and you'll see what I mean) and other things that ensure oligarchies and stifle the very competition that leads to more innovation. Their in each other's pockets, benefiting each other, whilst leaving small-to-medium businesses and other people with what they can scrounge up.

It's called cronyism.

 

[twocows]

well
go on
explain your thoughts rather than making an almost useless post

I'll explain what I think since he didn't explain what he thought.

I think the major problem with our version of capitalism is that what we're getting doesn't match what we're being sold in the slightest. In the ideal capitalist system, at least as I understand it, your economic success is supposed to be determined by how much effort you put in and how much you accomplish. The harder you work and the more you get done, the better off you are. But our system actually enforces the opposite concept: it's incredibly hard to work your way up if you start at the bottom and it's incredibly hard to lose your position if you start at the top. That's not how it's supposed to work.

I don't propose to know where it's broken or why, or how to fix it. I'm not an expert in economics, and plenty of people who are experts in it spend a lot of time bickering about it and don't seem to get any closer to an answer. I do think that it is fixable, though. I don't think getting rid of capitalism altogether is the right way to go. I think that the idea at its core can work as intended, it's just that there are too many people invested in having it not do so. But I don't think other systems would necessarily work better. I don't think there's any evidence that other economic systems are any less open to abuse. The grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence.

I do think there are good ideas in every major economic system, though, and I think that we shouldn't be so obsessed with being purists, adhering strictly to the tenets of one or the other system. I don't see any reason why we can't take good things from every system and come up with something a bit better.

 

[Her]

It's really important to keep in mind that communism has never worked and will likely never work because of human's innate nature about those seven traits mentioned above.

i never advocated for communism as i don't believe it's a viable system, but i digress

Capitalism is great because it takes those so-called 'negative' traits of ours and brings positive traits such as productivity and wealth to the table out of them. It works wonders out of something a lot of humans really don't like about themselves - what else do you want to do? You can't change human nature, and nothing short of that is going to make communism anything short of a wet dream.

productivity is hardly exclusive to capitalism, neither is wealth
that's something you're obviously aware of but you're phrasing it like capitalism was the first system to extract those aspects out of mankind's labour
human nature today is used as a justification for capitalism by capitalism
negative aspects of society have always existed before capitalism, but capitalism perverted it and turned the human nature argument into the ultimate defense mechanism for itself
as you can see, human nature can be changed, it can be exaggerated, it can be changed over time
it can't be changed enough so that greed and jealousy and w/e are eliminated, but it can be tweaked enough to serve a system as need be

on a base level/on paper, turning aspects of life we don't care for (greed, envy, etc the stuff you mentioned) into a profit system sounds nice
who wouldn't want to make money
but as the common argument against communism goes, it only works on paper
you could argue that capitalism has worked as it still thrives, but ultimately it is the pillow smothering the world today
and justifying it makes you the hand pushing down on the pillow

but, i am no better, as There Is No Such Thing As Ethical Consumption Under Late Capitalism
we're all complicit whether we like it or not

Another thing, since pure capitalism is also impossible and has always been inevitably cut with socialism, be sure to mix appropriately. Protip: the Yanks are a great example of how not to mix those two political systems.

america has about as much socialism present in it as grape flavoured cough drops have actual grape
there was a study by princeton released earlier in the year that spells out that america has been an oligarchy for many a decade now
ergo, about as far from socialism as you can get

 

[Livewire]

I don't think "western industrialization" is really an ideal model to be going on. Our crowning achievement, the USA, is rife with problems. One of the main reasons third world countries are experiencing such poverty is because capitalist countries have been exploiting these nations for centuries, but that's a different topic.

Political and economic overhaul is the only solution. What we have is not working, so let's change it. Except the people with power like the way it is, so are doing everything they can to condition society into A) believing there is no alternative B) thinking what we have is good.


Global warming and mass over-consumption of resources leading to the destruction of the planet. A disenchanted society lacking in community values; communities/nations rife with poverty, drug abuse and crime. Systematic exploitation of entire nations/groups of people. Illegal wars across the globe leading to the death of many thousands every year; all for blood money. Take your pick?

Maybe not industrialization in that sense, when I say industrialized or developed I mean developed in a sense that they have commodities and luxuries such as top rate healthcare, tech, education systems, etc. It doesn't have to necessarily be capitalistic, even if the benefits they would reap are ones you usually see in western capitalistic societies.

And if anything "works", it's the Nordic social democracies of northern Europe, incredibly high standards of living coupled with universal healthcare, high social mobility, and welfare. It's a synthesis of a market economy with a "welfare state" and their model works incredibly well - they enjoy more freedoms than most of the western capitalist economies.

 

[Elite Four Grimsley]

I remember replying to this same topic long ago and my perspective still remains the same.

If we're to 'save the world' we need to address its problems at their roots. Poverty? War? To eradicate them we need to deal with their source; lack of food, lack of infrastructure and their own sources. We can forever trim the problems off but they'll always grow back unless we kill them at their stem.

What that stem is though, I don't know.

 

[Kanzler]

I really like how this thread took a broad topic and hammered out what the question really is asking and then pursued the discussion down a certain path, because you can't talk about everything at once.

It looks like we're talking about saving the world by changing the dominant economic system, but I don't think that'll do much. A socialist economic system can be just as industrialist and polluting as a capitalist one. I think Alex is on point, though. Humans are really the only ones with the power to destroy - get rid of us and there'd be no risk of us forsaking our responsibility or failing to rein our power in, would there? And besides, without any humans, there wouldn't even be the question of having a world to save, because who would be here to think it?

It seems that most people in this thread believe what the world needs saving from falls under the umbrella of human misery.

 

[Rogue planet]

Maybe not industrialization in that sense, when I say industrialized or developed I mean developed in a sense that they have commodities and luxuries such as top rate healthcare, tech, education systems, etc. It doesn't have to necessarily be capitalistic, even if the benefits they would reap are ones you usually see in western capitalistic societies.

yes of course, those are all things we'd like to see available for everyone.

And if anything "works", it's the Nordic social democracies of northern Europe, incredibly high standards of living coupled with universal healthcare, high social mobility, and welfare. It's a synthesis of a market economy with a "welfare state" and their model works incredibly well - they enjoy more freedoms than most of the western capitalist economies.

Ah, Scandinavia, the classic example of a "society that works" except it's not exactly the utopia it's made out to be link 1 link 2 Unfortunately they have deep set flaws just as every other European country. I will be the first to admit, whilst USA has the more extreme examples, Europe's model is also incredibly flawed.

Speaking from my own personal experience (and I know the flaws regarding this kind of data gathering, don't bother pointing it out) living in the Netherlands, consistently ranked one of the happiest nations on the planet; but what actually goes into that calculation, and who determines the levels? NL is a good country, sure; but it still has very deeply entrenched racism, and I'm not just talking about Zwarte Piet. There are many social issues (especially with accomodation) despite the extensive effort provided towards the (seemingly) excellent social benefits.

 

[danielthegamerful]

To save the world, one must ask what is there to save?

We can't use the term "world" for everything, what we really mean is Earth. Of course we are responsible for destroying our Earth, and saving it is a really long term project. We've have so many years of hurting the Earth (of course there are programs and communities that like to stay "green" as you would say it).

The first thing I think we have to create is "Earth Peace" among all current Living things on the Earth (not just humans).
The second thing would have to be saving the Earth from our own destruction (no littering, no smoking, etc.).

Stay safe, stay warn, and most importantly stay happy! Peace!

 

[Livewire]

yes of course, those are all things we'd like to see available for everyone.



Ah, Scandinavia, the classic example of a "society that works" except it's not exactly the utopia it's made out to be link 1 link 2 Unfortunately they have deep set flaws just as every other European country. I will be the first to admit, whilst USA has the more extreme examples, Europe's model is also incredibly flawed.

Speaking from my own personal experience (and I know the flaws regarding this kind of data gathering, don't bother pointing it out) living in the Netherlands, consistently ranked one of the happiest nations on the planet; but what actually goes into that calculation, and who determines the levels? NL is a good country, sure; but it still has very deeply entrenched racism, and I'm not just talking about Zwarte Piet. There are many social issues (especially with accomodation) despite the extensive effort provided towards the (seemingly) excellent social benefits.

Nobody claimed it was a utopia. That being said, the "social" european economies weathered the global recession a lot better than most of the world did, and those social welfare security nets did their job for those who were hit hard. If it's 2007-08, I'd much rather be living in Sweden than England, Greece, etc.

And I'm talking strictly about social and welfare programs, compared with those seen in western capitalist economies. I frankly do not care about Denmark's large carbon footprint, I care about their healthcare and education models more, and what that could mean for other growing countries looking to enhance their own. Those two things can help solve some of the world's problems we've been talking about. Climate change and carbon emissions are a huge problem as well - we need to worry about the United State's and China's emission policies (As the two largest polluters) before we address the smaller offenders. Maybe update or enhance the Kyoto Accords and get the US/China/India on board with tougher emission caps.

 

[Gardevoir the Dragon Slayer]

I wonder if robotics could be the way to improve the world, with an economy where the jobs people don't want do or where workers would normally be exploited would be automated, and the results of the production (i.e. the profit made) put into state funding to fund services but most importantly a citizen allowance (that people would get), meaning that people would only work for their own passion rather than because they need the money.
People could focus on their own interests thus increasing their health and well being.
Also Politics would have to be on a volunteer basis rather than as a means for people to make politics a career.
Also Education could be presented as self improvement rather than a means as an end (i.e. to enter the world of work).
Also an overhaul of the economy to prevent things like decent housing being out of the reach of large groups of society.
Another necessity is to prevent rapid population growth.

 

[lloebet]

The good ol' fourteen points by Woodrow Wilson.

1. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.
2. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.
3. The removal, of all economic barriers and the establishment of equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.
4. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.
5. Free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.
6. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing; and, more than a welcome, assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their good will, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy.
7. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.
8. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.
9. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.
10. The people of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity to autonomous development.
11. Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.
12. The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.
13. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.
14. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

 

[Her]

1. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.
2. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.
3. The removal, of all economic barriers and the establishment of equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.
4. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety.
5. Free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.
6. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing; and, more than a welcome, assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their good will, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy.
7. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.
8. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.
9. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.
10. The people of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity to autonomous development.
11. Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.
12. The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.
13. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.
14. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

given that these 14 points are nearly a century old and refer to situations that have long since been resolved (the ottoman empire, for instance), what do you think should be updated and what do you think should replace the now irrelevant points?

 

[Khawill]

Save the world? Well, the best way is to perfect space cocolonization and head toward the stars, leaving those who wish to mend the earth to stay here. I do not believe in world peace, and I believe wars will happen between humans forever, so why not just but a few light years between us. Don't let different planets interact, and now we have saved the world of earth at least.

It would be great to unite the world under one government, but that won't happen, people are too patriotic, racist, or set in the past.

 

[Sir Codin]

Save the world? Well, the best way is to perfect space cocolonization and head toward the stars, leaving those who wish to mend the earth to stay here. I do not believe in world peace, and I believe wars will happen between humans forever, so why not just but a few light years between us. Don't let different planets interact, and now we have saved the world of earth at least.

Except, the Earth will inevitably be consumed by the sun expanding anyway, so really your plan isn't good so much for saving the Earth as it is for saving humanity from extinction.

 

[Khawill]

Except, the Earth will inevitably be consumed by the sun expanding anyway, so really your plan isn't good so much for saving the Earth as it is for saving humanity from extinction.

Haha, by the time the sun explodes, there probably won't be life on earth anymore, and perhaps every human in the universe will have forgotten about the blue dot in the milky way. If we think oofsaving the earth as saving the nature on earth, then getting rid of humans is pretty simple.

Everybody is so caught up in the destruction of things. Killing all humans will save the environment, the earth will be engulfed in the suns flames, or all humans die eventually why bother. I personally tthink it should be our goal to shoot off into space and explore.

 

[gimmepie]

Human beings are greedy, arrogant and stubborn creatures. Whether we admit it or not we
1. All want more than we have
2. All think we are right
3. Oppose change and refuse to yield or even acknowledge some of our flaws.

If you disagree see my sources, every war ever.

So if by the "world" you mean human society, then I think that there's no saving it unless somehow you can change human nature, something that we developed over thousands of years as a means for survival. I think the best we can hope for in that regard is to find some temporary peace in the world before all hell breaks loose again. I think the best ways to achieve this are

1. Education - We need to learn more about the world and more about each other. We need to learn more about how political choices affect us and other people, more about different religious and political groups, more about history and philosophy. We also need to start spreading education more evenly throughout the world. Education should also be cheaper to allow more access to higher education throughout the world.

2. Nuclear Disarmament - Nuclear weaponry needs to go away and soon, one day someone is going to press that button and then everyone else will press their and then there will be no human civilisation to sae.

3. Distribution of Resources - Through either socialism or free trade, it doesn't matter so long as everyone has what they need to survive. Then people can do what they wish with their resources and if that makes them more or less successful it is on them.


If by the "world" you mean the Earth -which is a lot more noble than trying to save the problem, but I'm too self-preserving to admit i-- oh... anyway. If you mean the Earth, humanity is finally starting to take steps in the right direction. We are researching alternatives to Fossil fuel, we're making conservation attempts and interfering with the environment less and most people are educated about climate change (YES IT IS REAL. Just take one look at the drastic changes in Australia's weather in recent years... you know that bug continent/country/island right below the hole in the o-zone layer.) We're a long way off but if we continue along that road, especially continuing to research clean energy there's a chance.


Personally I'd love to see a combination of the two things I just mentioned - spend less money on war, political endeavours and out-of-control capitalism and more on education and the environment. Personally though, I don't see any of these changes ever happening and certainly not in my life-time. Most scarily though is that I'm not sure there's any point in trying to save the world, morally I feel like there is but logically I know whatever we do is just temporarily putting off the world's fate; neither our society nor the Earth will last forever regardless of our action.

Edit: Sorry if this is a bit jumbled or rambly, I'm half-awake but can't sleep.

 

[Rogue planet]

Nobody claimed it was a utopia. That being said, the "social" european economies weathered the global recession a lot better than most of the world did, and those social welfare security nets did their job for those who were hit hard. If it's 2007-08, I'd much rather be living in Sweden than England, Greece, etc.

And I'm talking strictly about social and welfare programs, compared with those seen in western capitalist economies. I frankly do not care about Denmark's large carbon footprint, I care about their healthcare and education models more, and what that could mean for other growing countries looking to enhance their own. Those two things can help solve some of the world's problems we've been talking about. Climate change and carbon emissions are a huge problem as well - we need to worry about the United State's and China's emission policies (As the two largest polluters) before we address the smaller offenders. Maybe update or enhance the Kyoto Accords and get the US/China/India on board with tougher emission caps.

Well then here's a more social issue. The headline is bullcrap, I know, but you get the point. I'm not totally disagreeing with you, of course if the whole planet was a bit more like our welfare state friends it would be a whole lot better. I just kind of wanted to make a point because fingers are often pointed to Northern Europe in particular as a "better place", but if you live there you'll see it has plenty of dissatisfaction that inevitably comes about when our society is structured in the way it is; albeit with less murders involved.

 

[Sir Codin]

Eh, I'm still not sure how I feel about social democracy.

It sounds good, but I'm really skeptical.