When looking at the world of today and looking at the differences that exist between Human beings on earth, one could ask if there is a particular reason as to why a specific ‘race’ or ‘country’ or ‘continent’ ended up holding a more favorable position of ‘power’ in comparison to other ‘races’, ‘countries’, or ‘continents’.
Where through economic principles of debt, entire Nations have ended up being enslaved to western creditors with no way out.
Where entire populations are left to starve without regard from the Western countries.
Where one half of the world is actually working to feed the other half that live in better conditions and enjoy more wealth, health and better education.
Was there a pre-programmed advantage involved? And if so – did it have anything to do with the Human?
Since the times when ‘modern civilization’ came into contact with the ‘forgotten parts’ of the world, the west was faced with a peculiar question: how come populations such as the Aboriginals in Australia had virtually made ‘no progress’ since the Stone-Age?
People of ‘Modern civilization’ saw themselves as superior in knowledge, science and culture – giving them a ‘Divine Right’ to either exterminate, convert or enslave the indigenous populations. Ultimately the reason as to why one part of the world came to hold the more fortunate position is then attributed to the particular evolution of knowledge, science and technology within that society.
This is how history is being taught in schools and how it is recorded in the history books. History books will typically emphasize the superiority of the West in terms of philosophy, religion, science and technology, and they will meticulously trace the ‘evolutions’ thereof. Within that, the core belief of the Western world is reinforced - that knowledge is the actual drive of ‘evolution’, ‘change’ and ‘progress’. Recent historical research has uncovered that this is not so. In fact, the role of knowledge, science, technology, religion and even culture in itself are quite irrelevant factors in the journey of Humanity that has resulted in the extreme inequalities that we witness today.
So, then what are the relevant factors?
The biggest factors that have in fact determined the inequality between and within Human societies of today, are Plants, Animals and Germs.
To place this into perspective we will consider the startingpoint of when – according to the historical record - ‘Human civilization’ started. This is said to be between 13 000 and 10 000 years ago, which is after the beginning of a new climate cycle on earth – where it basically became warmer on earth from that point onwards. (With 'Human Civilization' I refer to a new type of 'living together', thus I'm not talking about the beginning of Humans 'living together' as such, which existed much earlier.)
If we look at the basics of Human Life on earth, we can ask: what do Humans primarily require to be able to exist?
According to ‘standard archeological research’, Human Beings had typically been living as nomadic hunter gatherers, where they would settle and move according to a temporary favorable environment. Studies of hunter gatherers in recent centuries have shown that such people lived in what is termed an ‘egalitarian’ form of social organization. ‘Egalitarian’ implies nothing more than that every member of the group is equally responsible for obtaining food, because otherwise there will simply not be enough for everyone. Hence there will be no ‘social classes’ of any significance in such a small society. Even the one regarded as ‘generally more or most responsible’ looks and lives exactly the same way as every one else, simply because they cannot afford to be or look like ‘more’ than another.
Such societies are typically very limited in their ‘cultural products’, because they moved a lot and their only means of transport was their back.
To put it extremely simplistically there existed two basic types of human societies: nomadic hunter gatherers and sedentary farmers. It is quite relevant to make that distinction because all the current societies that are regarded as ‘more advanced’ originated from sedentary farmer societies. So the ‘step’ from the hunter gatherer type of society to sedentary farmers appears to be the decisive ‘step’ in the course of Human history. The history of Farming is said to have started 10 000 years ago - thus marking the beginning of 'Human civilization'.
Let’s look at this point then.
What changes had occurred as a result of humans becoming sedentary farmers?
What generally happens is the following: at one point on the band / tribe will find a vegetable that it can cultivate in a controlled area of soil, which will cause the available food resources to increase. Everywhere where the circumstances have allowed for it man has discovered that he could manipulate certain plants to become suitable for cultivation. A direct consequence of a heightened food production is that the population will be able to grow and a situation will emerge in which some are discharged of their food producing duties. A new ‘class’ is able to emerge. In all societies where farming occurred, hierarchy and social stratification have resulted from it. It seems to be part of the Human program.
Simplistically, inventions such as ‘writing’, ‘the wheel’ and ‘metallurgy’ could only arise in societies where such a thing as ‘free time’ existed, allowing for (some) humans to ‘explore reality’ and to ‘play around’ as part of a new ‘specialized activity’ pertaining to a ‘specialized class’. Thus, farming allowed for heightened food production, which led to population increases, which in turn led to a class emerging that is able to completely be free from food related duties.
Thus agriculture layed the foundation for modern society, in which many are able to never in their lives have to be concerned with food-production. In terms of practical living, farmer-societies would develop a higher level of effectiveness than hunter gatherers. So then why didn’t everyone on earth become farmers?
For farming to really be worth the trouble one needed two things: an effective vegetable and a big mammal to assist with muscle power.
There exist round about 200 000 wild plant species on earth (including non-edible ones, such as trees). Of those 200 000 wild plant species only a few hundreds had been successfully domesticated and of those hundreds only a few dozen are used in today’s world for world-wide production. What does that imply? It means that Human societies did not necessarily have access to effective vegetables for domestication and food production. Within that, bear in mind that none of the vegetables we eat today existed as such in nature: they were genetically modified through a long processes of domestication thousands of years ago. That no significant new plants have ever been domesticated in modern times, suggests that humans did explore all available possibilities already in ancient times. That gives us a pretty sober picture as to the apparent ‘abundance’ of the earths ‘natural resources’.
The big mammals that were used could be seen as the first ‘machines’, with the sole difference that this ‘machine’ wasn’t ‘invented’ and build by the human, but simply existed and walked around in humans natural environment. All Humans had to do was to capture the thing. Though such mammals weren’t readily available anywhere. In fact, very few mammals have ever been available that allowed for effective domestication. (To establish a clear definition, Domestication = an animal bred in captivity, with controlled feeding and breeding, as opposed to ‘taming’ which is capturing an animal born in the wild)
Having a big domesticated mammal constituted quite a big ‘advantage’ because in addition of it offering superior muscle power, it also was a source of fertilizer, a means of transport, a source of meat and some could also produce milk. Mammals were especially utilized to pull plows which allowed for an exponential increase in the surface that could be sown, instead of having to put the grains in the soil manually.
Now, amongst the 148 big herbivorous mammals, only 14 ever proved to be effective for domestication.
- To begin with, one must be able to feed the animal (consider that the biggest percentage of all the grains in the world today are being used as food for cattle).
- The animal must have a fast enough growth rate.
- It must be willing to mate in captivity (which many mammals don’t ever).
- The animal must have a genetic disposition. For instance, while horses had been successfully domesticated in Eurasia, African zebra’s were – and are still today – impossible to domesticate. The animal simply does not submit to the Human. And this goes for all the big mammals of the African continent, such as rhinos, hippos, buffaloes, elands… etc.
Much research, money and effort has been directed towards increasing the amount of domesticated species in modern times – it has virtually amounted to nothing. This suggests pre-programmed conditions in nature, leading to outflows of inequality.
From that perspective different people on different continents simply did not have an equal startingpoint: certain environments allowed for more possibilities than others, either offering the Human ‘many opportunities’ or either limiting him to an extreme degree.
For instance, after the time Humans firs set foot on the Australian continent some 10 000’s of years ago, all big mammals that existed there, went extinct. The same happened in Native America: by the time of the arrival of humans, all big mammals – except for the llama and the closely related alpaca – were either hunted to extinction or perished through the climate shift.
With everything discussed so far, a pattern has now emerged. South America had just one domesticable specie, while North America, Australia, and Sub-Saharan Africa had none. In contrast the remaining 13 mammal species all existed on the Eurasian continent (including North Africa), because the natural environments there were more supportive of those species. Merely by determining the spread of these animals, the course of history already became predictable.
Obviously once a particular technique of food production had been found, that method was then able to spread to other peoples/societies – crops and animals could be used outside of the area where the method was first ‘discovered’. Though here again the environments played a decisive role.
If one look at the size and the orientation of the big landmasses of the earth, one will notice that there are differences. For instance the American and the African continents have a smaller surface than Eurasia. If we then look at the orientation of the landmasses we see that America and Africa both have a vertical orientation on the map. The vertical distance between the two remotest points of the continent is called the ‘north-south axis’. Eurasia has a very broad horizontal orientation, which is termed a ‘west-east axis’.
Why is this relevant? It has to do with the climate differences on the different latitudes of the Earth, such as the Equator. These latitudes run horizontally across the globe – on maps this is depicted as horizontal strokes. This implies that on a landmass with a large horizontal axis, the longest distance of that landmass will find itself laying entirely within one latitude or climate. Hence Plants and Animals that are able to live on one area within one latitude, will most likely be able to live in other areas within that same latitude.
However with Africa and America – because of the vertical orientations – the landmasses are more ‘divided’ by different latitudes. One merely need to consider the desert on the equator in Africa, nearly ‘cutting off’ the upper and the lower halfs of the continent from each other. Thus different latitudes will ‘cut up’ the continent, making transfer of Animals and Plants along a vertical axis more difficult. Let’s illustrate this with a practical example: for instance, while the llama existed as a domesticated animal in South America – and while a type of wheel had been invented in Mexico – the two never met. As a consequence of this, the wheel never got any practical application other than being used for small toys. The two area’s were ‘cut off’ from each other through the climate barrier of Central America.
Another point is that one cannot randomly move a Plant from one location on the globe to another. For instance, plants have pre-programmed time-cycles. If one moves a plant with a particular time-cycle from one area on the globe to another area where the days are shorter, the plant will not be able to survive. Similarly, Animals that have become resistant to the germs that live in one particular climate, will become sick in a new climate with new germs. So Animals and plants are bound to their climatic environments, limiting their ‘free movement’.
So from that perspective the Eurasian continent has had the ‘most favorable’ conditions, allowing for the widest and fastest spread of domesticated Animals and Plant-crops. On top of that Eurasia has been the continent with the most available domesticable big mammals in fact. Thus by its very conditions, the Eurasian continent was more supportive of the Human.
Let’s now finally turn to the subject of Germs.
Why would Germs be so important?
When the Spanish conquerors invaded Native America, they had many points that ‘helped’ them in having a certain advantage over the Native people: they possessed fire-arms, were mounted on horses, were protected by metal armors and had metal swords, though they were not in great number. The Spanish killed, conquered and converted many of the natives – but the majority was in fact killed by Germs which the Europeans had brought from overseas. So the cause of the near extinction of the Native Americans was not due to the Conquerors, but the Viruses. So who really conquered America?
Though, where did these germs come from and why didn’t the Native American Germs kill the Spanish instead?
It seems the Europeans got their Germs from their mammals.
In the process of living together with their Animals, farmers took over their Germs and overtime they build a resistance towards these Germs. Amongst the diseases that have been traced to cattle-germs are: the measles, smallpox and tuberculosis.
A second origin of new diseases was the growth of populations in itself due to sedentary living. Because what happens with sedentary living: groups of people start living in their own sewage, causing many bacteria to infiltrate the drinking water. Thus the bigger the populations, the more Germs. Cities typically have had to deal with epidemics. The building of underground sewage systems was the first point that allowed to really break the pattern. And only till the beginning of the 20 th century did European cities become self-sustaining in terms of their populations, whereas before a constant inflow of healthy farmers from the outside was required to compensate for deaths due to crowd diseases.
Another point that has benefited the Germs in Eurasia was the trading routes. Since they were build in Roman times, a more easy transfer to the different parts of the continent became possible. So now the populations of North Africa, Europe and Asia became one large breeding ground for microbes.
Obviously none of these points were ‘intended’ or even understood.
Thus we could push the point even further and ask whether it is really the peoples of Modern civilization that ended up dominating the globe at all. From a certain perspective it is the germs that are dominating the globe. Perhaps that’s why scientists call groups of microbes ‘Microbe-Cultures’ ?
Let’s have a look at how germs operate.
Some will enter the organism and will then start modifying the organism so as to develop what from a human perspective are ‘symptoms’ or ‘side-effects’ of the actual disease. Though from the Germs perspective: this modification of the body is what allows him to spread more effectively.
Some examples.
Influenza, common cold and ‘whooping cough’ microbes induce the human to cough or to sneeze, thereby launching a cloud of microbes towards potentially new hosts.
The cholera bacterium induces massive diarrhea allowing the bacteria to spread through the water supply of which many will drink.
Then there is the rabies virus that on top of getting in the saliva of an infected dog, will drive the dog into a frenzy of biting and thereby spreading the virus.
Other bacteria will induce genital infections to spread through the human act of sex.
From that perspective it becomes difficult to ignore that more advanced species than the Human exist in fact on earth. It is even becoming more and more uncertain whether the human will be able to adapt to the evolution-speed of new emerging diseases. They have been with the human since day one, and while the human’s genetics haven’t changed since the beginning, the germs have been mutating incessantly.
So – within establishing why The Western world has ended up having such an advantage over other continents and peoples, we have found that Human beings have had very little say in their particular destinies. There has in other words been no real directiveness from the Human within his own history, because if one really look at it – as soon as certain conditions were in place the human would start acting in a predictable pattern. At all times the human has been directed by fear, greed and the desire for power. Nothing ‘revolutionary’ has ever happened other than the human acting out his program, which has resulted in the world we see today.
So why have Human beings never applied common sense to their reality?
For instance, with the technology, the resources, the producing-capacity and the knowledge that exists today, one could easily end things like starvation and poverty forever – allowing for every human on earth to live a dignified life from Birth to Death. That would be common sense, because then there would be no more unnecessary suffering through things like war, exploitation and other behaviors that are based on inequality.
Remember that ultimately, the ‘position’, ‘status’ and ‘power’ one currently hold in this reality is a result of conditions that existed on earth 10 000 years ago – and that it has very little to do with one’s individual capacity. It was instead pre-programmed through the unequal conditions of the earth. This implies that equality should be considered, because otherwise humanity will eternally remain a slave of the past. There is no intrinsic reason why Humans should keep ‘following’ the pre-programmed path of inequality that has been set out since the beginning. Therefore all the suffering that is occurring as a result of it – is completely unnecessary and it can actually be ended. It only requires the will to do so and with the possibilities that are currently available, humanity has really no more excuse.
It’s time to stop.
Gabriel Zamora Moreno
zaterdag 19 juni 2010
maandag 10 mei 2010
Natural selection is a Scam
The System is designed in a polarity of have's and have not's through a money-system based on Debt, and the environment you are born into in is what determines your life, be it wealth or poverty - the current system is like a casino, where one's faith depends on luck only, with winners and losers. Many justify the inequality through 'natural selection'. But they forget this casino-reality with its casino rules is a Human creation based on Human agreement - and thus not 'natural selection'. If natural selection really existed then Humanity would already have existed as equals all over the world, working together as one to support each other, because then they would be an effective specie.
zondag 2 mei 2010
The System has no Solution
This quote is from the World Bank website:
“What is poverty?
Poverty is hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not having access to school and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is fear for the future, living one day at a time. Poverty is losing a child to illness brought about by unclean water. Poverty is powerlessness, lack of representation and freedom.
Poverty is a call to action -- for the poor and the wealthy alike -- a call to change the world so that many more may have enough to eat, adequate shelter, access to education and health, protection from violence, and a voice in what happens in their communities.” (World Bank)
To address the problem, the World Bank set out a Poverty Goal, which is the following:
“The poverty goal calls for reducing by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day by 2015. A reduction from 28 percent in 1990 to 12.7 percent in 2015, would reduce the number of extreme poor by 363 million.” (World Bank)
Wait a second?
So what they’re saying is they are going to ‘make sure’ that 363 million more people will be able to ‘live’ on 1 dollar a day, instead of less than 1 dollar a day?
By their own statistics more than 3 billion people (almost half the world population) is currently living on less than 2,5 dollars a day! (Globalissues)
They continue:
“While there has been great progress in reducing poverty, it has been far from even, and the global picture masks large regional differences.
Poverty in East Asia—the world’s poorest region in 1981—has fallen from nearly 80 percent of the population living on less than $1.25 a day in 1981 to 18 percent in 2005 (about 340 million), largely owing to dramatic progress in poverty reduction in China. The goal of halving extreme poverty between 1990 and 2015 has already been achieved in East Asia.
Between 1981 and 2005, the number of people in poverty has fallen by around 600 million in China alone. In the developing world outside China, the poverty rate has fallen from 40 to 29 percent over 1981-2005, although the total number of poor has remained unchanged at around 1.2 billion.
$1.25 a day poverty rate in South Asia has also fallen, from 60 percent to 40 percent over 1981-2005, but this has not been enough to bring down the region’s total number of poor, which stood at about 600 million in 2005.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, the $1.25 a day poverty rate has shown no sustained decline over the whole period since 1981, starting and ending at around 50 percent. In absolute terms, the number of poor people has nearly doubled, from 200 million in 1981 to 380 million in 2005. However, there have been signs of recent progress; the poverty rate fell from 58% in 1996 to 50% in 2005.
In middle-income countries, the median poverty line for the developing world—$2 a day in 2005 prices—is more relevant. By this standard, the poverty rate has fallen since 1981 in Latin America and the Middle East & North Africa, but not enough to reduce the total number of poor.
The $2 a day poverty rate has risen in Eastern Europe and Central Asia since 1981, though with signs of progress since the late 1990s.”
It’s obvious the World Bank is unable to solve the problem and is merely playing on numbers to cover things up.
How is one supposed to eat and drink and have shelter and education with 1 or 2 dollars a day?
The Economic System
What if the World Bank, and the economic system it represents were actually part of the problem?
In the current system inequality is in fact a requirement for the system to be able to function. Specifically: poverty, unemployment and starvation are required, because people existing in such conditions are the ones that can be exploited for profit, having no choice but to surrender themselves to the working-conditions set out by the employer. They are unable to make any demands, because if they don’t accept the conditions and do the job, someone else will and they’ll simply be left to starve. Human beings have become irrelevant numbers. When so many people are forced to accept such debased conditions (here are the World Banks 1,25 and 2 dollars a day) – this will put pressure on all the wages of everyone in the world. So the more extreme poverty exists, the more extreme exploitation can be maintained.
The way we’ve organized our world is based on the premise that one must be able to buy one's right to exist, because only through money can one support oneself to live. Parents buy that right for their children - and social welfare is exactly the same principle. What we’re implying through this agreement is that Life is worthless and merely a resource to be exploited by the system.
Never do we consider that it doesn’t have to be this way and that we have to power to change the system into a world where life is actually valued.
But how?
In this world the issuance of debt-money ensures that inequality is always perpetuated: all money that is placed in circulation is a loan of some kind - this means there is already created interest - as an Added non-existent value to the existing amount of money.
To use a simple example:
If I'm a banker and I give 2 people each 2 dollars as a loan, and i charge each 50% interest - that means that for both to be able to pay off their loan there must be a total amount of at least 6 dollar in circulation. Because each one has to pay me 2+1 dollar. But I put only a total amount of 4 dollars in circulation, as the very loans I made - this means one of both is not going to able to pay off his debt, which will force one of both to steal from the other leading to violence. On a larger scale this results in one group having everything and the other group having NOTHING. This is in a nutshell why in the current money-system there cannot possibly exist basic Equality - you can actually do the math. Yet none of this is being thought to the children in any schools, leading them to believe we have a ‘fair’ system and to grow up blindly accepting the limitations of the system as if it was ordained by God.
There is no denying possible this system has to stop – It was never designed in the consideration of what’s best for the whole, but merely to enslave and exploit people. Because people believe there must be a reason why such atrocities exist in the world. No, there isn’t! There is no purpose to the 20.000 children dying of starvation each day – the only reason why this is happening is because we are CREATING it this way as a direct result of the money system.
We require a new system of money-creation that is beneficial to all - where the value of the money is agreed upon to be 'real one on one value' that cannot be manipulated. We need a totally new money and labor system, where everyone is given an equal chance. That’s basic common sense!
Currently the only answer the system has to the greed and inequality - that is creating an increase in exploitation and abuse - is more greed and inequality, which is expressed through the act of adding more and more debt-money and credit to the pool - without even looking at the structural point of where the inequality originates: in the creation of money itself!
In this an institution like the World bank is merely perpetuating the problem, by administering loans to countries that seek economic assistance – which only causes more poverty, exploitation and starvation. (Globalissues)
The money-system is not sustainable for the World
At the moment in the West the money-system still seems to ‘work’ to some degree. People can still ‘earn money’ and live comfortably. Yet with where the system is currently headed, this will not be able to continue, because through the debt-system all the material wealth is continuously being transferred to the wealthiest minorities, slowly but surely. So the majority of the people in the Western countries, which is the middle class, will see their wealth disappearing into the hands of the richer elites. Some of the middle class ‘climbing up’ to the higher elites, and the rest becoming poor. This will eventually cause the middle classes to disappear in every country – and you’ll have third-world situations everywhere. This can go slowly are at a faster pace, but the outcome is inevitable.
America, which is the spearhead of the financial system, is already starting to head in that direction with mass-increases in unemployment, poverty and even people starving.
Since the 1980’s 3/4th of all industrialized nations have in fact been experiencing a widening gap in incomes between rich and poor. In recent years with the financial crisis this gap is widening even faster. (Globalissues)
Many people are starting to accept the possibility that the system might collapse – but they ‘go along’ in the expectation it won’t probably be in their life-time. Still not realizing that none of it is even necessary.
The end of the system will start to become more visible as time progress and many more attempts will be made to ‘save it’ through government bailouts and other measures. The question that remains is, will we go all the way until it is really too late – or will we use common sense and direct ourselves to come up with an actual solution.
Moreover the system is forcing all of humanity into behaviors of greed and self-interest, as it presents a perception of scarcity and where the system is seen as God as the only viable solution that can never be questioned. Obviously as the system collapses, that will be the end of this religion and people will start to realize there has to be another way.
So what’s the Solution?
The key to the problem is equality. Anything we do has to start there, because without equality we’ll simply create a new cycle of harm and abuse. So how do you practically make sure there is equality? Through guaranteeing there is an equal income for everyone – giving every human being equal access to the resources that are necessary to be able to live a dignified life in the physical world.
As I’ve said the only reason why poverty, starvation, exploitation and slavery exist is because we are tacitly agreeing to it - through agreeing on the money-system. Therefore what must be understood is that we have the power to change this reality.
For a change to take place all that is currently required is that we understand what we are creating through the current system, that we agree that it must stop and we agree that a new money and labor system is required. If there are enough that agree on this, than political action becomes possible and we can get real practical.
The Equal Money system that is currently being designed is to show that it is possible to create a new system that breaks with the old, where practical implementation in space and time is taken into consideration and where the goal is to take the shortest route to a situation that is best for all.
So, check out the research that is being done.
www.desteni-money.net
www.equal-money-for-all.ning.com
www.desteni.co.za
Gabriel Zamora Moreno
“What is poverty?
Poverty is hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not having access to school and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is fear for the future, living one day at a time. Poverty is losing a child to illness brought about by unclean water. Poverty is powerlessness, lack of representation and freedom.
Poverty is a call to action -- for the poor and the wealthy alike -- a call to change the world so that many more may have enough to eat, adequate shelter, access to education and health, protection from violence, and a voice in what happens in their communities.” (World Bank)
To address the problem, the World Bank set out a Poverty Goal, which is the following:
“The poverty goal calls for reducing by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day by 2015. A reduction from 28 percent in 1990 to 12.7 percent in 2015, would reduce the number of extreme poor by 363 million.” (World Bank)
Wait a second?
So what they’re saying is they are going to ‘make sure’ that 363 million more people will be able to ‘live’ on 1 dollar a day, instead of less than 1 dollar a day?
By their own statistics more than 3 billion people (almost half the world population) is currently living on less than 2,5 dollars a day! (Globalissues)
They continue:
“While there has been great progress in reducing poverty, it has been far from even, and the global picture masks large regional differences.
Poverty in East Asia—the world’s poorest region in 1981—has fallen from nearly 80 percent of the population living on less than $1.25 a day in 1981 to 18 percent in 2005 (about 340 million), largely owing to dramatic progress in poverty reduction in China. The goal of halving extreme poverty between 1990 and 2015 has already been achieved in East Asia.
Between 1981 and 2005, the number of people in poverty has fallen by around 600 million in China alone. In the developing world outside China, the poverty rate has fallen from 40 to 29 percent over 1981-2005, although the total number of poor has remained unchanged at around 1.2 billion.
$1.25 a day poverty rate in South Asia has also fallen, from 60 percent to 40 percent over 1981-2005, but this has not been enough to bring down the region’s total number of poor, which stood at about 600 million in 2005.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, the $1.25 a day poverty rate has shown no sustained decline over the whole period since 1981, starting and ending at around 50 percent. In absolute terms, the number of poor people has nearly doubled, from 200 million in 1981 to 380 million in 2005. However, there have been signs of recent progress; the poverty rate fell from 58% in 1996 to 50% in 2005.
In middle-income countries, the median poverty line for the developing world—$2 a day in 2005 prices—is more relevant. By this standard, the poverty rate has fallen since 1981 in Latin America and the Middle East & North Africa, but not enough to reduce the total number of poor.
The $2 a day poverty rate has risen in Eastern Europe and Central Asia since 1981, though with signs of progress since the late 1990s.”
It’s obvious the World Bank is unable to solve the problem and is merely playing on numbers to cover things up.
How is one supposed to eat and drink and have shelter and education with 1 or 2 dollars a day?
The Economic System
What if the World Bank, and the economic system it represents were actually part of the problem?
In the current system inequality is in fact a requirement for the system to be able to function. Specifically: poverty, unemployment and starvation are required, because people existing in such conditions are the ones that can be exploited for profit, having no choice but to surrender themselves to the working-conditions set out by the employer. They are unable to make any demands, because if they don’t accept the conditions and do the job, someone else will and they’ll simply be left to starve. Human beings have become irrelevant numbers. When so many people are forced to accept such debased conditions (here are the World Banks 1,25 and 2 dollars a day) – this will put pressure on all the wages of everyone in the world. So the more extreme poverty exists, the more extreme exploitation can be maintained.
The way we’ve organized our world is based on the premise that one must be able to buy one's right to exist, because only through money can one support oneself to live. Parents buy that right for their children - and social welfare is exactly the same principle. What we’re implying through this agreement is that Life is worthless and merely a resource to be exploited by the system.
Never do we consider that it doesn’t have to be this way and that we have to power to change the system into a world where life is actually valued.
But how?
In this world the issuance of debt-money ensures that inequality is always perpetuated: all money that is placed in circulation is a loan of some kind - this means there is already created interest - as an Added non-existent value to the existing amount of money.
To use a simple example:
If I'm a banker and I give 2 people each 2 dollars as a loan, and i charge each 50% interest - that means that for both to be able to pay off their loan there must be a total amount of at least 6 dollar in circulation. Because each one has to pay me 2+1 dollar. But I put only a total amount of 4 dollars in circulation, as the very loans I made - this means one of both is not going to able to pay off his debt, which will force one of both to steal from the other leading to violence. On a larger scale this results in one group having everything and the other group having NOTHING. This is in a nutshell why in the current money-system there cannot possibly exist basic Equality - you can actually do the math. Yet none of this is being thought to the children in any schools, leading them to believe we have a ‘fair’ system and to grow up blindly accepting the limitations of the system as if it was ordained by God.
There is no denying possible this system has to stop – It was never designed in the consideration of what’s best for the whole, but merely to enslave and exploit people. Because people believe there must be a reason why such atrocities exist in the world. No, there isn’t! There is no purpose to the 20.000 children dying of starvation each day – the only reason why this is happening is because we are CREATING it this way as a direct result of the money system.
We require a new system of money-creation that is beneficial to all - where the value of the money is agreed upon to be 'real one on one value' that cannot be manipulated. We need a totally new money and labor system, where everyone is given an equal chance. That’s basic common sense!
Currently the only answer the system has to the greed and inequality - that is creating an increase in exploitation and abuse - is more greed and inequality, which is expressed through the act of adding more and more debt-money and credit to the pool - without even looking at the structural point of where the inequality originates: in the creation of money itself!
In this an institution like the World bank is merely perpetuating the problem, by administering loans to countries that seek economic assistance – which only causes more poverty, exploitation and starvation. (Globalissues)
The money-system is not sustainable for the World
At the moment in the West the money-system still seems to ‘work’ to some degree. People can still ‘earn money’ and live comfortably. Yet with where the system is currently headed, this will not be able to continue, because through the debt-system all the material wealth is continuously being transferred to the wealthiest minorities, slowly but surely. So the majority of the people in the Western countries, which is the middle class, will see their wealth disappearing into the hands of the richer elites. Some of the middle class ‘climbing up’ to the higher elites, and the rest becoming poor. This will eventually cause the middle classes to disappear in every country – and you’ll have third-world situations everywhere. This can go slowly are at a faster pace, but the outcome is inevitable.
America, which is the spearhead of the financial system, is already starting to head in that direction with mass-increases in unemployment, poverty and even people starving.
Since the 1980’s 3/4th of all industrialized nations have in fact been experiencing a widening gap in incomes between rich and poor. In recent years with the financial crisis this gap is widening even faster. (Globalissues)
Many people are starting to accept the possibility that the system might collapse – but they ‘go along’ in the expectation it won’t probably be in their life-time. Still not realizing that none of it is even necessary.
The end of the system will start to become more visible as time progress and many more attempts will be made to ‘save it’ through government bailouts and other measures. The question that remains is, will we go all the way until it is really too late – or will we use common sense and direct ourselves to come up with an actual solution.
Moreover the system is forcing all of humanity into behaviors of greed and self-interest, as it presents a perception of scarcity and where the system is seen as God as the only viable solution that can never be questioned. Obviously as the system collapses, that will be the end of this religion and people will start to realize there has to be another way.
So what’s the Solution?
The key to the problem is equality. Anything we do has to start there, because without equality we’ll simply create a new cycle of harm and abuse. So how do you practically make sure there is equality? Through guaranteeing there is an equal income for everyone – giving every human being equal access to the resources that are necessary to be able to live a dignified life in the physical world.
As I’ve said the only reason why poverty, starvation, exploitation and slavery exist is because we are tacitly agreeing to it - through agreeing on the money-system. Therefore what must be understood is that we have the power to change this reality.
For a change to take place all that is currently required is that we understand what we are creating through the current system, that we agree that it must stop and we agree that a new money and labor system is required. If there are enough that agree on this, than political action becomes possible and we can get real practical.
The Equal Money system that is currently being designed is to show that it is possible to create a new system that breaks with the old, where practical implementation in space and time is taken into consideration and where the goal is to take the shortest route to a situation that is best for all.
So, check out the research that is being done.
www.desteni-money.net
www.equal-money-for-all.ning.com
www.desteni.co.za
Gabriel Zamora Moreno
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
