If the entities that wish to give birth to a more honest and fair era use dishonest and unfair mind control techniques to achieve their goal, why would we assume the resulting society would or could be anything but dishonest, manipulative and eventually result in the formation of a new "1%," within governing bodies, rather than individual governments or corporations? Replacing a corrupted class with another, even more powerful, corrupted robber-baron class seems dangerous.
I just don't see evidence from much more than one major methodological angle, that a synchronized global "lock step" type approach is likely to accomplish much other than to establish a host of new problems while only temporarily "resolving" a few of the old, and valid, issues.
Top-down, centrally controlled, self-congratulatory models eventually implode due to reliance on a set of "approved" criteria from the top, by political tribal justification. Eventually, such a system self-implodes due to the eventual rebirth of internal diversity of opinion or the unexpected introduction of new methodological angles, brought in from the outside. When that happens, it gives the people, outside of the "politburo," permission to lash out again (in my opinion).
There could have certainly been a proposed reset that involved more than one system. Regions could have elected to compete in a global experiment to see which system worked best, over time. Now THAT would be a wonderful experiment and a celebration of culture at the same time! I'd be so happy to participate in such a competition, but it would have to be transparent and with a priori terms of engagement.
Why not have one region invite everyone that believes in the green new deal and another region that says let's try voluntaryism and maybe a third that tries out market socialism, a fourth that tries any number of options and then set a 30-40 year benchmark, at which point the three or four or five systems are compared in mutually agreed upon terms? We all know the current model is not sustainable. So let's play a game together!
I realize that many people desire a leveling of the playing field in order to destroy corporate and governmental corruption. But the end result is not going to be more just or more fair or more free unless it can embrace a pluralistic set of semiotics such is the hidden key to celebratory societies of lost eras.
I don't see anything "plural" happening right now most of what I can observe in society is orchestrated and planned behavior modification as well as highly visible mind control used against the public, to coerce a monolithic, standardized, branded and centralized thought pattern and an obfuscated top-down outcome.
The modern-day robber-barons would be those that monopolize power on a global scale and eliminate all personal "risk" in doing so, abuse the trust of the public by way of eclipsed webs of influence, and refuse to divulge their conflicts of interest in order to retain control of narrative. A real-deal robber-baron, today, would even pay off the media to make sure they are guaranteed that key figures paint them in good light, no matter how their actions impact the world. Such a robber-baron would not care about his or her customers, over profit, or what happens to victims of his or her paradigm if and where it fails he or she would care more about his or her image in the media and how many global entities they can get on board their agenda to consolidate power, than actual responsibility for their initiatives. They could cement that power by lobbying governments to ensure a liability clause that says nobody can shut their operations down therefore, they could influence the government and the public to hand them responsibilities that would otherwise be local or even personal choices in a free society. That would be a global, modern-day, robber-baron..., a baron that robs more than money and influence but also personal agency in all matters.
So ...Gavi, Pepfar, Cepi, WEF, UN, WHO... these are just a few examples of entities connected by the same people now operating not only nationally but globally. These global robber-barons control funding of offshoots in a growing body of countries all over the world and manage, via political and social manipulation, what would otherwise be called conflicts of interest. These people need not be named because we all know who they are and that they come at this from a few different flavors and angles... It seems probable that their monopolies and their abuses of public trust (not to mention government trust by way of coercion) will come back to haunt them as more data eventually surfaces or leaks retroactively. Therefore, I am not at all convinced that any fair model would or could ever allow for such people to be involved at the highest levels and be taken at face value for "honesty" after such profound deception. History suggests these folks might actually be judged harshly.
I'm not saying our capitalist managed market system is without massive, horrific and disgusting flaws. I see the corruption on every level, from individual to corporate to government to globalist governing bodies. But if we simply shift the centre of power away from the current 1% to a different 1% how could we expect a better outcome? I'm all for a "better world," but I don't see a transparent and plausible plan, not to mention anything graceful yet. A viable plan should entertain open discussion and some sort of uncensored input. Censored discussion is not discussion, it's subversion of the very semiotics of the meaning of a discussion.
Further, upward mobility dies the more robber-barons influence government policies because raising wages at the lower levels and taxes at higher levels can have a counter-intuitive impact on upward mobility.
Edo, Japan, had no trade unions but it did have an inherent social agreement with one of the fastest upward mobility rates observed merchants were primarily self-governing and developed a sense of responsibility to their local communities (they even shaped the "rules" of local society). This approach resulted in roughly 260 years of peace, economic growth, decentralized education and a literacy rate of between 70-90% (at a time when the centralized Europeans achieved between 2-20% literacy), and almost unprecedented prosperity (second fastest economic growth in the world at the time and the largest city in the world, complete with a unique plumbing system that provided running water for all 1 million residents, and a general high standard of living). It was the longest period of peace, prosperity and artistic and cultural explosion of any country in history (note: you'll need to get Japanese sources for accurate data, not outside sources). Toward the end of the era, merchants experienced the beginning of riots that were destined to become a civil war but merchants engaged with mobs, directly, and found a compromise that actually resolved the conflict and returned society to a peaceful state, before the rioting and looting could metastasize into a full-blown civil war this highlights the power of a self-governing, artistic, and [locally] spiritual society. The merchants functionally established an adjusted social contract out of instinct, a strong will and out of duty to their communities. The merchants did not turn to government or third party unions to solve their problem instead, they met with each other and immediately set out to build infrastructure to house food silos and fed the needy, at no charge. The merchants could afford to do this because even though merchants were, technically, the lowest class, they had the fastest upward mobility.
The same years that all this happened, France experienced a similar divide between rich and poor. The result was 180 degrees different though, because "let them eat cake" meant the people could not rely on their government to resolve their problems. Two mentalities, same problem, two different outcomes. Of course the arrival of globalism by way of Colonel Perry changed everything and introduced centralized education, for example, and expansionism to Japan, which is precisely why they changed course from isolationism to expansionism.
Centralized power, standardized education, centralized spirituality, all pave the road to self-congratulatory expansionism, unbridled abuses of power and, ultimately, war.
Switzerland of recent years seems to have enjoyed a wonderful social contract without a clear, singular, leader and a fractured health care system that is not bankrupt and yet highly privatized. I get this info from Swiss friends that I used to talk to. I also traveled through 11 towns in Switzerland and my sense of the country is that it is (or was) a society built upon trust and self responsibility. My friends confirmed that citizens are tasked with being public militia, should the country ever be invaded. Gun ownership is one of the highest in the world and yet I can't think of any Swiss mass shooting, probably due to what has been a more practical social paradigm than other regions and the lack of big pharma and psychiatrist lobbying to deliver massive doses of drugs to the public. Maybe there are elements of Switzerland that contradict my angle. I'd love if anyone could highlight them. Of course, Switzerland may also be changing for the worse. I suspect it will be used as a "safe space" for global governing bodies while they continue their plan for a reset (Davos...etc). And I fully expect the British to reveal their central role in this at some point. (Just my own hypothesis, based on things I can come back to in a future discussion...)
The very conflict we may be hoping to avoid could be fueled inadvertently by consolidating too much influence into a small number of hands above governments. They will betray the project eventually, inadvertently, directly or by way of unexpected differences of opinion and other confounding factors. The lesson, if I can say there is one, is that there are always multiple paths to be taken and spirituality is the freedom to make a choice at that fork in the road rather than to have it negotiated on your behalf by an outside governing body. I realize this statement aligns me more with certain sects of libertarians or anarcho-capitalists, but really I'm flexible and not set in any given ideology. I like a lot of what the Fabians said. I also recall loving Sir Thomas Moore... I kind of love bits and pieces of everything and try to apply elements of them all to see if, how, and where things might fit. The more angles the better :)
As for misery, so long as upward mobility is enabled and envisioned by any given class, the misery vanishes faster than people realize. I'd say the lack of a viable dream or being held down is true misery, more so than undesirable circumstances. If the Edo class system had held the lower classes down while it propped higher classes up, there would have been enough misery to establish cyclical inner conflict that approach would have judged behavior of lower classes and involved Samurai (which were well armed) but this did not happen. Instead, the lowest classes, which were Oiran (prostitutes) and merchants were permitted to run their lives as true artists would the Oiran developed the most highly sophisticated prostitution system every invented, which is precisely how the tea ceremony grew into something loved, at first by Samurai and eventually the world over (instead of going to battle, Samurai went to tea houses to meet Oiran...). Instead of government throwing them all in jail or judging them for their [mis]behavior, they turned the art of prostitution into high art. Oiran are still celebrated to this day for their artistry. I might also add, Oiran were the ones that chose their men! At any rate, so long as lower classes move up without hindrances, without government interventions, their strength of will is what forges new paths and literally creates ways of living, new professions, new art and new science. I still have faith in the inherent human spirit to strive and grow and explore. A society that avoids personal and public discovery is not a society, it's more like a pig farm. Let's break out of the Zoo!
