Outside the Proverbial Box
Over the course of the years of this ongoing work, we have been called virtually everything one can imagine … including derogatory terms that even elevate us to the status of human forms from time to time. (Yes that is a joke, but we have also in reality, been referred to as much less than human in virtually every way imaginable as well)
Mostly these come in the form of political attacks. We have been labeled as communists, extreme right wing conspiracy theorists and a host of other names far too unmentionable to be printed here for all the world to see.
Therein lies the crux of the problem though, and that is exactly what needs to be changed.
Not that we ever worried about being called names, but the average person is so caught up in the current dialectic that they are quite literally incapable of thinking outside of the proverbial box, even to the extent of blatant displays of cognitive dissonancei. The concept of systemically sustainable community developments cannot be approached from an ideological standing with any real hope of success. Neither can the people be ruled, led or otherwise manipulated.
The purposes of governance must remain few and well defined, and serve the people, not rule over them. "Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." The people must always have the means to retain the ultimate oversight and the ability to keep the corporations and the foundation and even the government in check.
The current economic and financial systems have their roots in ancient Babylon, though it is challenging to trace anything back much further than that historically. The more centralized financial and economic systems that currently have the world in such a stranglehold have effectively been around since around the middle of the sixteen hundreds. Economics, finance and politics are now and have always been tied at the proverbial hip. To believe otherwise is delusional at best, and dangerous at worst.
Unfortunately, people tend to be so caught up in the current sociopolitical and socioeconomic cycle that they are incapable of rationalizing the fact that there may be other concepts which do not fit within their preconceived notions based on the more limited historical viewpoint that they utilize to approach the problem. This is not a left-right paradigm, but the introduction of a new paradigm based on systemic, symbiotic relationships.
Granted, such a system will not very likely be allowed to exist within the current political morass that we currently “enjoy”, but this is why the negotiations and ongoing work with the indigenous and aboriginal tribes are also so important. If the truth were to be told, the persons involved with the design and planning for the Community Developments extend across the entire spectrum of political and/or ideological beliefs, but this is not overly relevant in regards to the construction of the Community Developments or the driving principles behind their purpose and effect.
Rather than trying to focus on any singular aspect of the Community Developments, they need to be viewed as Complex Systems outside and completely independent of the governing agencies as we know them today … though certainly not without some limitations by the proverbial powers that be.
It is inevitable, especially during the early phases of construction and operations, and even with the full and complete support and cooperation of the (supposedly) autonomous and semi-autonomous rule of the indigenous and aboriginal tribes around the globe, that the existing governmental bodies will have a very direct impact on the operations as set forth and established herein. Governments may claim benevolence, but at the end of the day, those who seek power and control, will generally use whatever power and control that they gain, to seek larger amounts of power and control.
Inevitably, there will be areas wherein the Community Developments both clash and blend with “society” as we currently perceive it to be … socially, economically, environmentally and even politically. This however, should not be conflated to presume that the concept of the community developments fall under any singular aspect or political ideology currently in use today.
Many of the selected and approved locations for the establishment of community developments have also been negotiated in regards to being classified as “Special Economic Zones” and/or “Freeports” in order to lessen the liabilities involved with such systems and wherein they may otherwise clash with current (and more limiting) political constructs. Furthermore, under the Incorporated Model for the Community Developments, the Corporations are structured in such a way so as to demand the payment of any and all requisite taxes in full and complete accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Practices or GAAPii.
Like any incorporated structure, the Incorporated Model Community Developments will certainly seek to reduce their tax liabilities through standard accounting practices, but those funds that are owned, by and large by the local people, even if disbursed through a Private Hedge Fund Account, will not be written off as tax deductions. (See the section on the Organizational Structure of the Incorporated Model Community Developments here for more details)
If the Incorporated Model of the Community Developments were to be labeled as anything, there probably is not a readily or easily definable term in the current vernacular. What it is however, is not communist or capitalist or any other ist or ism, though it may have limited characteristics of all of them when everything is said and done. It has a full governmental structure, but this is held in check by an enforceable voice of the people … hardly a communist or capitalist idea in practice.
It has corporate entities the same as any capitalist society, though largely owned by the people of the community, not through some bloated and inefficient bureaucracy, so certainly not a communist, fascist or in any ways a Statist system either.
In short, what is presented is in some ways a move back to the tribal methodologies and in some ways an evolutionary leap forward in the transformation of humanity and “civilized” society … or what we have at least deemed to be “civilized” (regardless of how inhumane it may be in practice) in the world today.
The community development has rules and laws, but again, through an enforceable voice of the people, government is still largely restricted in what it may or may not do or even regulate … as are the additional members of the community … thus while a Jewish Bakery would not be forced to sell a ham sandwich, neither would they have the capacity to force the doughnut shop next door to cease and desist cooking and serving bacon or ham sandwiches on its breakfast menu. The Community Developments are all, regardless of their organizational structure, complex and systemic solutions to the problems facing society today.
It should be noted, that the ideal governing body or organization structure of the Community Developments would not be recognizable as currently defined by any of the schism of “isms” ruling the world and lording over the people at their own expense and to their own detriment today.
There is an old adage that states “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king!” but there is more to this than meets the eye(s) … pun intended … In reality, while the one-eyed man may be the king because he has at least some capacity to see the truth, the majority of the world will be so set in their perception of reality that they consider the one who sees the truth, the actual reality, to be foolish at best or even delusional at worst.
This is relevant here as the economic model being utilized within the Community Developments is often mistaken as a part of the current economic and financial systems rather than being seen for what it truly is. In reality, it is a parallel economic and financial system that is not debt based or reliant on the current methods of finance and economics.
Accusations of Fascism, Socialism and Communism are leveled against the founding members of the community developments on a regular basis, merely because the vast majority of people are incapable of seeing outside of the constraints and parameters that they live in and believe to be the only way of doing things. Still others hurl insults accusing the founding members of being extreme right wingnuts and conspiracy theorists.
The fact remains that all of these views that are so restricted by the more limited and restrictive view, subjected to only those political systems of today, with which people are “personally” familiar, are all off base and incorrect. The system being proposed herein is a mix of conglomerated aspects of some of these systems with historical precedent, and a host of other solutions based on political theory and ideology neither taught nor practiced in the world we live in together as a singular species who should be working together to ensure our collective survival as individuals.
“Equitable distribution of wealth”, “Redistribution of wealth”, “Social Justice”, “Economic Freedom” … all of the terms that are best used and most apt for describing the economic and financial systems will sound to the casual observer as a system that will inevitably fail and burden the producers with the costs of maintaining and supporting the non-producers. In reality, the utilization of advanced economic principles in cooperation with a non-biased and cooperative system, allows for the utilization of the existing wealth in addition to growth that is beneficial to fueling the economic and financial systems and maintaining economic stability.
The principles behind this will be beyond the desired scope of learning for the average person. In short, the average person probably will not care how the system works as long as they can enjoy their life with some modicum of comfort. Indeed, even among many economists, the underlying principles are difficult to comprehend and only people who have studied advanced, global economic and financial systems will be able to grasp the complexities, subtleties and nuances of such a system. It is not by any means traditionally practiced at the public level, but it is a system that is currently in place and heavily utilized. The primary difference will be in the distribution and utilization of funds generated by such a system.
In the case of community developments, the funding will be distributed among the citizenry in a controlled method that is by and large, fully automated. There will not be any need for bloated and inefficient bureaucracies or any other dilution of the funds. Utilization of the funds will be restricted based on their source through other accounting methods again, already in place and being utilized by people and corporate entities alike. Each and every sovereign citizen will receive a debit card that is restricted in nature … in much the same way as EBT cards are currently limited in usage.
Funds that are distributed to the general population will be restricted to these cards which are in turn, restricted as to the means by which they can be utilized. For those citizens who are contributing members of society and/or have other sources of income, those funds will be distributed to a separate card whose use is not limited by anything other than the amount of funding on the cards. This of course, being subject to what they earn.
Also, base supplemental incomes for those that are productive, earning members of society will still be limited in what may or may not be purchased, though any and all monies earned by the individual will never be restricted in such a way.
All of this will take place by Funds, Organizations and/or other entities established under the Foundation in charge of the daily operations of the community development(s). The end result is one in which each and every citizen has an income regardless of whether or not they have a job. However, should they wish to improve their situation in life, opportunities for advancement and for improving their lives will be rewarded, not punished financially as is the case with the social assistance programs currently in use.
Through all of this, both the corporate structure and the governing body or agencies are constantly held to an enforceable accounting by the people. If there were to be a separation of powers for the system of checks and balances to be designated as anything within the proposed system, it would be a separate, though weighted division and voice of the corporate realm, the governing body or agencies and the people, all with a mandatory responsibility and subsequent beneficial incentives, to keep each other in check, each having a weighted and enforceable voice in the overall operations, management and governing oversight and management of the overall societal structure.
Any efforts to label such a system as purely communist, or capitalist or anything other than perhaps idealist, would be blatantly incorrect and a denial of the reality contained herein.
That being said, given the history of (crony-based) capitalism, (totalitarian) socialism or communism and any and all of the other tragic isms that have plagued the rest of humanity throughout the ages, perhaps a touch of idealism and a comprehensive cooperative effort in governance is not such a bad idea.
i One study asked a seemingly harmless question at first … “Do you trust the government” … and the numbers of people who did, were in the single percentage points … less than ten percent of the people fully trust the government. A series of introductory questions followed, leading back up to more pressing social concerns, that so many people believe only government could solve. When reminded of their initial response that they did not trust government, and yet still demanded government do something about their position in life, or that government infringe upon the rights of others, many held on to their own beliefs that government was the only solution … despite historical evidence to the contrary and nearly one half of the population of the world living in daily evidence of the failure of these programs and even their own admission that they did not trust government.
ii Generally Accepted Accounting Practices or GAAP are those rules of accounting by which the average person and/or corporate entity are required to function. Governments are not held to such standards, nor are many Faith Based Organizations or other Non Governmental Organizations. (The overall structure for the Incorporated Model of the Community Developments is ultimately owned by a Faith Based Organization) However, it is believed that such a structure, not only reducing the number of people dependent upon government welfare roles, but also paying its “Fair Share” in taxes, would diminish the likelihood of such an organization coming under undue scrutiny or even a direct attack from the existing governing bodies of the host nations and/or local area governments.
Let us know what you think please!