and thinking about all the suckers / sheep that gullibly believe the mainstream media, and believe that governments exist cos all the people got together and decided that they were a good idea, and that people born in a place (whose ancestors took control of by using violence) have a right to do what they want with the land under their feet, and that companies only get money/power cos they’re doing something that people want.
So is there one place (like say a website) that I can point people at, that explains why all this stuff is insane and wrong and not anything remotely resembling democracy. Explains it in simple language and then has the signatures of smart people saying that they agree and acknowledge these things (e.g. all the scientists / public figures / people famous for being smart/knowledgeable etc etc).
So many people really do think that all this stuff in the world is like that because democracy. There should be an easy way to point them to one place to wake them up and say ‘LOOK. The amount of evil in the world is freaking insane!! The people in power are not there by any consensus or social contract. And all these smart people agree that everything is crazy and that we can do better, do you think they’re all wrong? etc’
Does anything like this exist? If not, could we make it?
i know some german lectures on you tube and many UBI supporters who criticize this ugly worldwide system deeply and thoroughly and i empathize with your wish very much.
but i experienced a further obstacle besides the lack of easy language to explain it to the people and the reference to professors, authorities and smart people: many people don´t want to know the truth about the life they struggled a long time to fit in. even if they are smart enough to understand all arguments against the status quo, they reject it.
I guess if something like that existed, someone here would have heard about that already. Unfortunately, I haven’t heard about a place like that.
What you have in mind sounds like an inherently political project. Even though there are a lot anti-big-government, anti-corporations, pro free self-organization enthusiasts, they are still quite the minority overall. They also don’t seem to have a catchy label that would unite them effectively. What could you use?
Left libertarianism?
True libertarianism?
Anarcho communism?
Anarcho libertarianism?
Free market anarchism?
Anarcho-democracy?
Upwingers?
Voluntarism?
New centrism?
Civil societism?
Collaboratism?
Netern thinking?
Note that you can’t use labels like “common sense”, or “rational”, or “futuristic” because the interpretations of those terms is horribly subjective. Without a strong label that is not horribly demonized and misunderstood like “anarchism” people aren’t eager to come together to powerfully embrace certain messages or reject others.
Could we make a place like that? Maybe. It sounds like a very ambitious political project. The most difficult part would be to get enough supporters for it. So, you would probably need a very good strategy, and excellent execution of that. I could imagine this to be an important project of a caucus of the Transhumanist Parties. Or it could work out as some NGO thing when you are good at finding collaboration partners.
In any case, it needs a much better name than “Howto convince sheeple”! People totally hate being called “sheeple”. If you call them that, you only get ignored or hated. Perhaps something like “exposing big pyramid schemes” might be a better starting point.
Yeah. What would you write? I’m thinking something like this:
There are some actions that individuals can take that affect everyone on planet earth.
We think it’s reasonable/desirable/imperative that these actions should not go ahead without a transparent discussion and the agreement of people qualified to understand the impacts and act within the best interests of humanity.
On the surface it may look as if most of the world is run like this, most countries have elections for their leaders and organisations exist to monitor actions that affect the whole planet.
However, this is largely a sham. It is closer to the truth to say that most of the people making decisions like this are tyrants.
…(examples / more details)…
There is no doubt that these people are NOT in power due to any kind of consensus.
Given modern day technology (internet) it is possible to have a system that is much closer to something based on global consensus.
We think it’s super important for humanity that we get rid of the tyrants and implement a better system.
signed…
Do you think everyone (e.g. Einstein, Chomsky, Dawkins, deGrasse Tyson, Hawking, etc) would agree on that?
*Doesn’t say much for current state of humanity that I can’t think of any famous female intellectuals. Ayn rand? Margaret Thatcher? Hillary Clinton? But maybe they’re all evil and would agree anyway?
Yoko Ono?
Not that being famous matters. It’s just to make it easier to say ‘LOOK, all these people you respect are saying we should change’
I think it would be very important to convince people that a system like that can actually work. And the best way to do that would be actually designing and creating it.
If there is no real alternative to the least bad system that is currently in existence (modern democracy / capitalism), people won’t bother.
Many people would disagree with that claim. You need to be extremely convincing to make them think otherwise.
Only if you are super convincing and people take you seriously. Which is a goal that is quite hard to achieve.
a) There are numerous web pages, articles, youtube videos, etc, explaining how the word works. If someone is looking for that type of information, there is no problem with finding it. If someone is not looking… Maybe they are not at the stage of felling there’s something wrong. Maybe they need to get there by themselves first? I don’t know, but:
b) we’re not here to dislike and talk about the global situation, as it’s pretty clear to everyone reading this forum. We’re here because:
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete”. [Buckminster Fuller]
There’s one more thing here. Subscribing to mentality of “those people are sheep because XYZ” is deceptively unhelpful if you are trying to bring another Enlightenment Age around - you can’t enlighten sheep, you can enlighten only people, and how can you enlighten people when you only see sheep?
to believe, that this is the only way to convince people, is not so far away from the idea that people are sheep that could not be influenced by good arguments and reason.
