Monetary Economics, as Depicted in The Zeitgeist Movement: Activist Orientation Guide

            I’m sorry, I must apologize for my recent digression, but I’ve come to realize that, aside from my first post, I haven’t really been addressing the overall issue of this blog, and while my other posts are related to this issue, they do not tackle it directly, or in any great depth. So let us take a closer look at what I began to touch on in my first post, the false resources which we so blindly rely upon. The first of which, perhaps the greatest, and certainly the least questioned, is the monetary system.

            Almost all economies in the world today use a monetary system. This system uses an “intermediary exchange medium, known as money, as the means for facilitating employment, production, distribution, and the consumption of goods and services” (AOG 5). There are differential forms of this system however, varying according to governmental control and regulation upon the system itself. There are three main versions of the monetary system in use today. They are Communism (maximum state control), Socialism (partial state control), and Capitalism (little to no state control). It is important to note that Communism in this sense is the realistic, historical form of Communism, not the idealistic vision outlined by Karl Marx, which held all citizens as equals and removed money from the equation.

Capitalism is the most popular and widespread system in today’s world. In this social system, the means of production are privately owned and operated strictly for profit. This system operates under a theoretical concept known as the “Free Market.” The “Free Market” is an “unregulated trading orientation” (AOG 5) where the prices of goods and services are determined by the supply and demand inherent in the system, driven by the interaction, and thus consent, of the buyers and sellers, without government intervention. The most extreme interpretation of the “Free Market,” in practice today, is the Austrian notion of “Laissez-faire.” This concept condones absolutely no state intervention on economic issues; from this perspective, state sponsored, “social,” programs would be considered inappropriate.

In this economic system, the “value” of a product or service is derived from its availability (or scarcity) and the amount of human labor involved in the production process, or service rendered. We now understand today that there are plenty of natural and renewable resources out there, that are practically infinite, and with our current technologies, these resources can be more easily mined or harvested. Furthermore, with the implementation of the machine, during the Industrial Revolution, the labor involved in the production process has steadily declined. As a quick and effective example, farmers can now work 1000+ acres of land, on their own, through use of industrial machines. As I previously said, in my first post, this is also how we have been able to increase our food supply to the point of providing for billions and billions of people.

Now, what if we modified our current economic system to apply to our modern understanding of resources and our modern level of technological innovation? We could rid ourselves of this idea of scarcity altogether, and reduce the need for human labor as well. Renewable energy theorists have already declared that there is really no limit to how much power we could draw from the sun, as well as another equally powerful, but almost unknown, source, in geo-thermal energy. As far as a practical elimination of manual labor, we have to look no further for an example than a modern day automobile manufacturing plant. This production line has been totally automated. The only human involvement consists in the technicians and operators who work on or with the machines. If we would simply adapt our technologies to our economic system, in a sense, we could evolve our society.

“Regardless of your opinion, the fact is, the pattern of constant technological improvement coupled with automated machinery can theoretically create an economic environment where the abundance of materials and production mediums are so high and efficient, most humans will have little need to ‘purchase’ anything let alone ‘work for a living’, in the traditional sense” (AOG 7).

--- All of this information can be found in, and has been taken from, The Zeitgeist Movement, Observations and Responses: Activist Orientation Guide, which can be found on http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/ and http://www.thevenusproject.com/.

"Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%," "Robin Hood in Reverse," and Arrested at the White House

I just want to share a few links real quick that relate to the topic of this blog and the current crisis here in the "freest country on earth," "the land of democracy and opportunity," the good old United States of America...

This first video is from Democracy Now; it is an interview with Nobel prize winning economist, author, and professor at Columbia University, Joseph Stiglitz, to discuss his recent article in Vanity Fair, entitled, "Of the 1 Percent, by the 1 Percent, for the 1 Percent," wherein he addresses the growing class divide and social inequality in the United States. During the interview they talk about, among other things, the current assault on social spending, the pro-rich tax cuts, and the incentive the wealthy have for carrying themselves the way that they do, with, what seems, little or no concern for the masses. The interview also promotes Joseph's new book, Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy, which obviously deals with this same topic.

Here are some enlightening excerpts from the interview:

"Americans have been watching protests against oppressive regimes that concentrate massive wealth in the hands of an elite few, yet in our own democracy, one percent of the people take nearly a quarter of the nations income, an inequality even the wealthy will come to regret."

“There are only two ways to address the budget deficit: raise revenues or cut spending. And with this one percent getting so much, there’s only one place really to get that extra revenue. The good news is it’s relatively easy. You have 25 percent—almost 25 percent of the income in the upper one percent, you raise their taxes by a few percentage points, and you get an awful lot of money. And in many of these cases, we don’t even have to raise the taxes; all we have to do is to say they ought to pay a fair tax rate.”

“If you have a divided society, you start worrying more—if you’re in the wealthy and you have an electorate system that can use your wealth to affect the politics, you say, "I’d rather have a small government that isn’t able to redistribute money, take money away from me. I don’t need public schools; I have private money. I don’t need public parks; I have private—you know, my large land." So, what you have then is an erosion of the kind of collective action, and that makes a society less efficient, less productive.”

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/4/7/nobel_economist_joseph_stiglitz_assault_on

The second link I would like to share is a Truthout article, entitled, "Robin Hood in Reverse in the US: Seven Examples." The title is self explanatory.

Here is a very revealing quote from this article that imparts a disgusting fact about our society:

“Between 1948 and 1979, the richest 10 percent of families in the US claimed 33 percent of average income growth. Between 2000 and 2007, the richest 10 percent claimed a full 100 percent of average income growth in the US.”

http://www.truthout.org/robin-hood-reverse-us-seven-examples

The third link is a YouTube video of the protest I attended down in D.C. a few weeks back. The video documents the reason we gathered as well as the outcome. It is both inspiring and sad, as it shows that people are still willing to gather and protest, and even get arrested if need be, to express their views and be heard; but it also shows how are “benevolent” police force deals with such blatant freedom of expression, which incites not only anger but a kind of hopeless sadness as well...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYhoSjLMKis&feature=player_embedded

Oh, I just came across this one, so I'm going to add it real quick, it's even worse than the last one... and I'm sorry, I'm a pacifist, just like these protesters, but when I see this, It angers me to the point where I feel that each of these riot police should be put down, for their robotic, anti-empathetic, intolerant insolence. How are these men any different than the storm troopers from Star Wars, honestly, how are they any different, and don't tell me they're human, because they're not, they're nothing but machines, mindless robots who possess a singular programming, obey.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUHVOu6X21Y&feature=player_embedded

Wow! A Wall Painted Animation and Tool

Wow is all I can say, this animation is just awesome, and beyond words, for me anyway. As I was watching however, the strangeness of the piece and the look of the animations reminded me of the music videos from my favorite band, Tool. I'll just let the videos speak for themselves.

Here is the Wall Painted Animation:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="960" height="750" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/uuGaqLT-gO4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

And here is the video by Tool:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="960" height="750" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RiV_ue-PbL4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Navel-Gazing Reality TV and "Killing Wolves"

After reading the chapter on navel-gazing, in Keep it Real, I realized why I hate reality TV. It is exactly as they describe it, an overdramatic, self obsessed, circus. It serves no purpose other than entertainment and empty pleasure for the mindless masses. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying everyone who watches reality TV is a mindless idiot, I’m just saying that they enjoy mindless idiocy; there’s a difference. I don’t even watch TV, so I’m sure I’m not up-to-date on the current reality fads being perpetuated right now, but I do know of one show that simply irritates me to no end… the jersey shore. This show is the epitome of mindless idiocy. Every night the cameras follow these scumbags around while they flaunt their egotistical views of themselves, get drunk, pick up one night stands, “smush,” sometimes with each other, and most of all, argue and bicker over melodramatic bullshit. Now you may say I’m being a little harsh, I mean, scumbags might be a little cruel, wait, no, on second thought, they pretty much fit the description. Cruel, I know, but honest; this is reality TV, isn’t it? If you couldn’t already tell, I utterly despise reality TV, mostly because it is the farthest thing from reality, but also because it lacks any real value, and serves to propagate an ideology no better than nihilism, which pretty much holds nothing as sacred. While I don’t believe that people are watching this show in order to imitate these “Guidos,” as they call themselves, but I do think that many people are subtly influenced by their less than noble ways. Most of the shows fans, at least I would like to hope, are fairly intelligent people, and as I said before, only watch for a laugh or two, but I’m sure there are many others who are, let us say, not so bright, whose character may be negatively affected by this garbage; not to mention the children who may come across this show and, not completely comprehending that these people are just modern day clowns, take it seriously and begin to believe that this is the way life is. Now you may say “but this is how life is,” to which I would say, no, it is not. This show over exaggerates and, worse yet, glorifies all that is wrong with our culture. Concerning the egotistical nature of this show, and all of reality TV, and its effect on our society as a whole, Terrence McKenna would have said, “Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual, who is a member of a neurotic culture, against the facts of matter. And culture is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable.” This is reality TV.

And this leads into my next rant, haha…

This may be somewhat of a failure on my part, because I couldn’t separate my personal views from the reading, but I couldn’t even force myself to finish “Killing Wolves,” and believe me, I tried. It’s all in the name, there’s just something disgusting about the title, and I’m sure it has its literary purpose; one I’m falling into right now. I just couldn’t take the author’s subtle attempt to justify the trapping and slaughtering of such a majestic creature as the wolf. I know the wolf isn’t some gentle and peaceful creature, I know it’s a killer, but it kills because that’s all it can do to survive. We kill for money. We do not have to hunt the wolf to survive. We do not even have to eat meat to survive. But I know, they’re in Alaska, and I’m sure you can’t grow much up there, but I’m also sure that they hunt plenty of other animals for meat, such as the animals that the wolf hunts, like moose, or reindeer; and I’m sure they get plenty of pelts from these animals too. I’m not saying that moose or reindeer are any less noble, and should be less respected then the wolf, but I am saying that it is unnecessary to hunt and demonize these animals as we do. I don’t know what it is, possibly my spiritual connection with the wolf (As derived from the Native American Spirit Cards, a book about spirit animals), but I was just disgusted with this essay. To quote Herman Melville, I would also say that "There is no folly of the beasts of the earth which is not infinitely outdone by the madness of men." The ruthlessness of the wolf doesn’t even begin to compare to the ruthlessness of our culture, and just like the natives before them, we will continue to work diligently in our systematic destruction of not only their kind, but their environment, and subsequently, all their brothers and sisters as well.

And so I leave you now with a very old quote, from a fifth century Mayan Ruler, K’inich Janaab’ Pakal, which I feel perfectly sums up our current global predicament, and solidifies his far reaching insight as a prophet: “Humanity will become disconnected from the laws of the Natural World and will fall ignorant of our sacred interdependence with nature. Humanity will suffer damage because the technological society will cause a collective divergence from Natural Law in exchange for materialist values.”

The Only Politician Worth Supporting!

Following my previous post, I just wanted to show everyone what a real politician looks like, to show everyone how a real representative of the people speaks. You may be blue, you may be red, but ultimately it doesn't matter, because they are both practically owned by the corporate and banking institutions, and if you don't see this truth, than your hopelessly mislead and virtually blind. This politician isn't however, and he may be the only one left. Just listen, open your mind, and realize the truth in what he is saying. Then please give him your support. He is honestly the only one, that I know of anyway, who is standing up and speaking out for us, the regular people, the people who are being screwed every which way right now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhV5xxCGiIo

Capital, Corrupiton, and Corbett

So after class I decided to check out Governor Corbett’s Pa state budget address, and right in the beginning he enlightened me as to the problem at hand. He said, speaking of the U.S., we are “a nation that once produced wealth beyond calculation,” which “has now produced debt beyond reckoning.” Thanks a lot Corbett, I hadn’t realized that. Later he states: “I am here to say that education cannot be the only industry exempt from recession. Our public schools do important work and part of that work must include setting an example. I’m calling on the employees of our public schools -- administrators, teachers, support workers, everyone -- to hold the line. If it means a pay freeze, trust me, you’ll have plenty of company out there to keep you warm.” The audacity! Once again we see the republicans asking the average people to bear the brunt of economic hardship, while they simultaneously grant tax cuts to those who are wealthy beyond belief. It simply makes no sense. On one hand the republicans are claiming that there is no money and that we must all make sacrifices to deal with this problem, and yet, on the other hand, their actions are showing that the rich are seemingly exempt from this supposed sacrifice, which is really just another illicit mugging of the people, as none of us can really afford to forfeit what little wealth we have left, or accommodate the price hikes which will be a direct result of this fiscal plan.

Corbett continues by extending his request for sacrifice, to include not only basic education, but higher education as well, stating: “I am also calling on employees in the State System of Higher Education to consider sacrifice. I ask nothing more of our best educated people than to face up to a hard economic reality. The system in which you have flourished is in trouble. We cannot save it by individual efforts. The sacrifice must be collective…” Yes, we must all stop with our greed and surrender our green. It’s not right for us to make 45,000 dollars a year. That’s just an absurdity, especially when there are those who are only making 30,000 a year, absurd I say, we should all be making 30,000 dollars a year; that would only be fair. But nooo, we’re too greedy for that. “Pennsylvania needs to re-think how best to educate our children. We simply can’t work within a broken system. We need to change the whole system. We need a new set of priorities: child, parent, and teacher -- and in that order. What we have now in too many places are schools that don’t work,” he says. And he’s right, I mean, the system is broken… hello… we might as well get rid of it then.

“But, we can’t just get rid of it altogether!”

“I know, I know, that would be too difficult. Well, let’s at least stop spending so much money on something that’s just not working, I mean, c’mon, that’s just basic economics… isn’t it? Or common business practice, maybe?”

“…”

In the end, it all comes back to this, “I’m announcing a new governor’s task force on privatization. This panel will explore what jobs now performed by government might be better done by the private sector. The task force is not there to eliminate government -- it’s there to eliminate unnecessary government. It’s there to make sure that when government can get out of the way, it does so,” which Governor Corbett uttered near the end of his address. Everything that is going on right now points to this, an attack on the public sector, in an attempt to solidify the privatization of pretty much everything. If they can actually pull this off, and by “they” I mean the politicians/governments, the corporations, and the banking cartels, they will have successfully set up a capitalist wet dream and destroyed democracy once and for all. This separation of government may appear as a good thing, but believe me, I’ve recently read a book called Feed, wherein corporations have taken over every aspect of society, and I assure you, it is not a pretty site. Furthermore, when politicians “make sure that when government can get out of the way, it does so,” we get to witness pretty little events like the BP oil spill.

The real problem here is the concept of profit, which relates to the topic of this blog, as money is a false resource. We’ve created this monetary system, this monster, and now it is running us. We only fund what we consider to be profitable, and at the other extreme we cut anything we think is unprofitable. We cut the arts because we see little profit there. We cut philosophy because we think it no longer serves a profitable purpose. And now we are going to cut education altogether, simply because some jack-ass with a shitty fiscal plan thinks he can save this failed system? Meanwhile, we continue to fund big business through tax cuts! Corporate corruption is the cause of our current financial crisis, but we seem to have conveniently forgotten about that, or rather choose to ignore that fact. Well some of us have not forgotten, and will never forget, so let us reminisce for a second. The corporations take on huge loans from the banks, and then proceed to gamble this money on the stock market. Corruption leads to crooked bets, outright embezzling, and bad decisions… I know… big surprise. Then the corporations demand that the government bail them out, otherwise the economy will collapse. The government, being the benevolent institution that it is, decides to transfer this debt to the tax payers in order to save big business, and wait, it gets better…. Wait for it… THE ECONOMY STILL CRUMBLES! And just when you think it couldn’t get any worse, our great government, in all its wisdom, decides to borrow a huge loan from the Federal Reserve to “stimulate the economy.” WTF!!! Seriously, the central problem is that there is too much money in the money supply, which is causing inflation to skyrocket and the dollar to continue its downward slope of devaluation. What we are currently coming to realize is that we cannot afford this massive, let me stress that again, MASSIVE debt. This is the problem, and bullshit fiscal plans will not solve this. It is a self destructive gene that has been inherent in the capitalist system ever since its conception. It has always been destined to destroy itself. Carl Marx called this an “internal contradiction,” and it is the direct result of our lack of foresight and wisdom.

“COMMUNISM! That’s just communist Ideology, COMUNIST I say!”

“…”

The Nature of Truth

After reading the chapter on fact in Keep it Real, I thought about writing a post on the nature of truth. But, occupied with all of my other work, I let it slide from my thoughts and thus it slipped from my mind. However, today in class we touched on this topic again and so it has returned to the forefront of my focus. First, when I think of the word fact, I think of the word truth. But what is truth? When someone presents something as the truth, what does this mean? When I consider this further, I think of three primary things: how does this truth relate to reality; how does this truth relate to the personal perspective of the one presenting it; and how does this truth relate to those who would refute its legitimacy? The first of these questions addresses truth as it corresponds to itself. Does this “truth” measure up to the idealist vision of the concept of Truth? Does this “truth” pertain to reality; is it real, is it a fact, is it True? If we say that the United States spends more money per year on military expenditures than any other nation, this is true. It is a solid fact.

You can look it up: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

But, if we say that the United states spends more money per year on military expenditures then the next ten countries below them, combined, this is simply not true, for it is only the next six, combined, that we spend more than…

The second question considers truth as a personal belief. For instance, something may be considered true for one person, but not for another. For each person, the viewpoint is their own, as is the truth. From their perspective, they exist in their own world, and so they draw their own conclusions and make their own truths. Who is to say that either is right or wrong? Who, but a god-like being, could even judge these personal truths in terms of right and wrong, in terms of Truth? But, the other side of this coin is that there are some topics, while widely believed to be true, simply do not seem to be so. This is called a myth. Used in this sense, the definition is as follows: a widely held but mistaken belief. Despite this, as I said before, who is to decide what is true and what is not? For example, when we think of terrorism, which I understand is a touchy subject, specifically because of what I am talking about, we see that there are two truths to the term. One, the popular view, is that terrorism is something we must fight, something reserved for those who would serve some evil entity in carrying out devilish attacks on peaceful and innocent people. The second, a less popular view, is that terrorism is any act of violence against any people, period. Under the first point of view, most american citizens believe we are fighting terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan, they see those who would attack our soldiers there as terrorists. Under the second point of view, there are many people in Iraq and Afghanistan who see those who attack our soldiers there as freedom fighters, rebelling against a foreign power's occupation and oppression of their country. Who is to say they are wrong? Who is to say we are right?

The third question asks if those who would deny the truth of a given subject stand to suffer from it being accepted as truth. This also relates to the personal perspective of the previous paragraph. For example, some people will refuse to accept something as true simply because it is too difficult to accept. This is called denial, and it is a very powerful entity. There are also those who may try to disprove what they perceive as myth. Most atheists’ take this stance on Religion. Then there are those who may stand to lose something, like their reputation, or freedom, if the truth is not refuted. O.J. Simpson is one man who is widely believed to have actually accomplished this goal of bypassing the truth, however there is no real way to know if this is true or not. The further you delve into the nature of truth, the more and more you begin to see that it is an intangible and often elusive subject, especially when one tries to discuss something as intangible as the nature of truth itself.

Like the word Truth, which really represents a metaphysical concept, there are other words that share in its obscurity; words and concepts such as Beauty, Love, Death, and Spirit. How does the concept of Truth relate to these subjects? Who is beautiful? What is love? Why is death? How is spirit? These are very relevant questions without certain answers. Furthermore, this desire for Truth seems to stem from the scientific desire for certainty in all things. They say we cannot know unless we are certain. But following this way of understanding, then we can never know anything about Love, Death, or Spirit, for these are intangible things, they cannot be known through science, or understood by the intellect alone, but only with the heart, through feeling. This is what enabled the religious institutions to exist as the single greatest power throughout most of history. They relied on the peoples’ inner intuition and feeling that there was something beyond us, something greater. This is not a matter of Truth, for who knows, I certainly do not. In fact, the only thing I do know for sure is that I don’t know anything for sure, and such is the paradox of Truth. The only thing I know of Truth, is that I know nothing of Truth. Personally I feel that it doesn’t exist, in the higher sense, and yet, I believe it exists for every person. Just as humanity is made rich by its unique individuals, so different and yet so similar, somehow all sharing in a common existence, a common experience, so too is the nature of Truth made rich by its varying levels of being, by its multi-dimensional and multi-colored reality. What is Truth? Who knows! This is a wonderful realization, for Truth is really just another concept to contemplate, a virtuous ideal to inspire our aspiration. Therefore, with this in mind, let us create our own Truth!

Kinetic Typography of Language

I just want to say that I loved the e-mail we received from Dr. Morris, the Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography on Language. It was so creative, and carefully constructed, it was incredible.

It reminded me of the movie V for Vendetta, which actually stars Stephen Fry. Specifically the part where V first introduces himself to Evey (Natalie Portman), a part that Hugo Weaving plays spectacularly. I feel that it exemplifies exactly what Fry is talking about, concerning the creative use of language.

Here is the video from the e-mail, the Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography, for anyone who isn’t in the class and hasn’t received the e-mail:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY

And here is the kinetic typography video for V  for Vendetta:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6Q0dfrbr10

Rethinking Resources: An Introduction

Rethinking Resources is a meditative reflection, asking us to reconsider how we use our resources, what we use as resources, and what alternative sources are out there, seemingly, untapped. During this contemplation, we must rethink our perceptual conception of what a resource is, as well as its relation to us, and the planet as a whole. The most important questions we should be asking during this process of evaluation, relate to the nature of efficiency; are we using our current resources in an efficient way, are these resources even efficient to begin with, and how efficient would the alternatives be, in relation to what we have now? To accurately address the situation, which some would call a growing problem, of inadequate resource use and development, we must eradicate all of our preconceived notions concerning the topic, and start anew. If we are to do this properly, for an effective discourse to take place, we must define exactly what we are talking about. By resources, we mean the amalgamation of materials, tangible and intangible, that a society, and life itself, needs to survive, and thrive. By efficiency, we mean the capability of supporting this massive living network, which is our world, the circle of life if you will, with as little waste, or negative side effects, as possible.

So, where are we now? At first glance, one may think that the largest and most important resource is money, but nothing could be further from the truth, as money is a false resource. It is a man-made construct, meant to represent a means to obtain resources, a kind of secondary resource. But it is not necessary; we do not need money, in a natural sense, to survive. This is expressed by the axiom: “One cannot eat money.” Now of course there is an obvious argument to this: “But I can use money to buy food, water, and other resources?” And this is true, but it is an illegitimate form of resource. It is simply not efficient. This is due to the fact that its sufficiency depends upon your purchasing power, or how much money you currently have, which, for the vast majority of us, is very little. Furthermore, this aspect of our society actually limits us, in terms of growth and development, as we will not fund something unless we find it to be “profitable,” and not in terms of social, environmental, or spiritual profitability, but only monetary profitability.

This is why oil conglomerates often buy out small companies who specialize in alternative fuel sources. They do not want to lose their stranglehold on the market, they do not want to lose their precious profits, even if the alternative resource would be more efficient and more environmentally friendly. The idea of profit actually feeds off of insufficiency, as scarcity and profitability go hand in hand. A simple example illustrates this concept: the value of a drum of oil is relative to the overall amount of oil in the market; the less there is, the more expensive the drum of oil. This is why the price of oil continues to rise. The more we consume, the more we pay. It is no surprise then, that this fundamental part of our society is based almost fully upon a non-renewable source of energy. The system is designed so that profits continually increase as our supply continually decreases.

Our production of oil, here in the United States, was at almost 10 million barrels a day in the 1970’s. Today we produce only 5 million, and yet we use a little over 20 million barrels a day. Our oil reserves have been running out, and scientists have been warning about this since the 1950’s. This depletion of oil has led to our occupation of Iraq, which possesses the world’s second largest deposit of oil.  This is an illegitimate war, with an illegitimate enemy, for an illegitimate resource… Peak oil is a term which is used to describe the maximum amount of oil that a country will produce during its greatest period of production. Our peak production was in the 1970’s. The world’s peak production is right now. The world is currently producing around 90 million barrels of oil a day! But this cache is quickly expiring. Scientists are warning that oil production will begin to decline as early as 2020. If we use the United States as an example, and apply our drop in oil production to the world, we can expect that the availability of oil will be at least cut in half. What would this mean for us? It would mean that oil would become an unaffordable luxury. For the world, it would mean that the production of food would drastically drop, as we wouldn’t have enough fuel to run the machines that allow us to harvest on such a large scale. The price of food would also sky rocket, along with everything else, for almost every aspect of our global society relies on fossil fuels, foremost among them, oil.

We have built are system with a fatal flaw inherent in its design. It is a system which feeds off of itself, slowly consuming its resources like a virus. It is self-destructive and blind. We have created a world economy that relies on depleting resources that are both insufficient in their production as well as their use. We rely on fossil fuels and money. These are false resources. They are not natural, and they are not efficient. While a wealth of natural resources surround us. Solar energy, wind and water turbine energy, and geo-thermal energy are almost infinite; if we could only learn to harness their full potential. If we would just increase our funding, research, and development of these alternate resources, we might be able to convert to a more sustainable system before our problems become too great to handle. For we must remember, even the most optimistic of scientific reports fail to adequately account for the exponential rate of the given subject, thus losing accuracy in their predictions. For instance, when they say that oil will expire by 2100, they fail to take into account the yearly increase in population, which relates to an increase in oil use, inevitably speeding up the consumption of oil at an exponential rate.

This is not a conspiracy theory. It is not some far off apocalyptic fantasy. This is real, and it is happening now. How many people have felt the social ramifications of our current economic downfall? How many people struggle to find jobs, to feed their families? Our brothers and sisters are protesting in Egypt right now, they're marching in the streets of Cairo, while storm-trooper police attack them with batons and tear gas… as we sit at home, locked in self-constructed prisons of false security, trusting those who've orchestrated the oppression... They’re protesting their government’s neglect of poverty, unemployment, rising prices, and human rights violations. They’re standing up and against corrupt politics, the same oppression which presses us. They are speaking from their own experiences, but how are theirs any different than ours? Are we not struggling with the same issues? Are we not oppressed as well? Yes, maybe theirs’ is worse, but Martin Luther King once said, “Injustice anywhere, is a threat to justice everywhere.” They are not just standing up for themselves, they are standing up for us all!

This is what happens when a society relies on inefficient resources. This is what happens when a people can no longer afford to feed their children. This is what happens when 90% of the wealth is held by 10% of the world’s population. This is what happens when the people grow tiered of the lies, the oppression, and the ignorance of the elite. This is what happens when we stand up!

<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="1280" height="750" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ThvBJMzmSZI" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>