Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!brl-tgr!wmartin From: wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: GOALS - Planning for a future Message-ID: <8118@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Thu, 7-Feb-85 17:36:29 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.8118 Posted: Thu Feb 7 17:36:29 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 13-Feb-85 02:26:31 EST Distribution: net Organization: USAMC ALMSA Lines: 80 In all the public pronouncements of governmental spokespersons, in the debate over forms of government, and in the press or news media, I do not recall ever seeing what seems to me to be the most important thing in our material lives -- a GOAL toward which we should be moving. I can't recall a Presidential speech, for example, outlining what we want the lives of future generations to be like, other than in general platitudes or short-term specific programs ("man on the moon by the end of the decade" or the like). It seems like we spend all our collective effort thrashing about, busily designing products to sell to each other and then throw away, stave off the current enemy, or changing the names of the groups holding political power, but never aim toward anything. Individually, we amass wealth, or fritter it away, grow older, have offspring or not, and maybe move from one place to another, with little more in mind than existing from day to day. We seem to reserve to religion any aspects of transcendental goals -- we'll be saved and go to Heaven, or move up in the eternal cycle and gain good karma, or otherwise reach some higher level. Our mundane lives are spent just getting by, which for some is a struggle taking all their efforts, while for others it flows almost unnoticed. We never even DISCUSS a larger aim, much less plan for it, or channel our efforts into a path that will facilitate achieving that goal, while at the same time satisfying our own needs. I don't mean some great collective 10-year-plan to put a tractor in every field or whatever; I mean something transcending nationality and which could be defined in material terms. Ask any governmental leader what they would ask for if they were granted "three wishes" or some other magic solution; they might say "the elimination of communism [or capitalism or whatever]", "eliminating poverty", "peace", etc. These are all short-term things, though, with no concrete definitions. I posted a response (over on net.politics), in which I outlined the kind of world I want. To summarize that here, it is one with a small human population, supported by automated systems providing their material needs, allowing undisturbed natural environments, where a human may exist in isolation if he wants to, and do whatever he wants. This situation would exist on other terrestrial planets, and there would be a technology to allow space exploration and travel. I DON'T want a world with giant floating or land-based arcologies, crammed with millions of people, or a world covered with highways and endless suburban housing, or a non-technological world of subsistence farming, etc. That is, there is something I do NOT expect to live to see, but which I would prefer to be working toward. Instead of people spending time and effort "treading water", as they are now, they could be swimming toward somewhere. Your goal may not be what I want, but we don't ever talk about it, so I have no idea if I am alone, one of the majority, or whatever. Not only do we never vote on where we want to aim, we don't even have any idea that multiple directions EXIST! The topic is totally ignored, except maybe by "futurologists" or "think tanks", whose ideas are given a magazine article somewhere and thereafter forgotten. This looks to be a good place to discuss this. Do any of you have any conception of what you WANT for the future? Do the Libertarians want a specific form of world to live in (though I'm sympathetic to that philosophy, I cannot see it being viable in a society with a population density of America today, much less one with the density of many other countries, or what is projected for the near future)? Do the Socialists have a specific form in mind (do they want the world to be just like Sweden all over, for example [with climatic variations, I hope!])? Or do individuals out there have anything specific in mind as to what they want their great-great-great-grandchildren doing or how they will live? (As I mentioned in my net.politics posting, I've worked toward my goal by having no children and being sterilized; if your goal is akin to mine, you'll have to envision somebody else's grandchildren, as few of us will have any descendents in that world, by definition. They might have a few of our genes, though...) Post your concepts of specific forms we should be working toward. You want extended families? No families, with children produced in creches? Few people? Lots of people? High tech? No tech? Religious leaders overseeing happy multitudes? No religions at all? Etc... Regards, Will Martin USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA