Front Page

Our ancestors have made decisions that have put our race into a certain path, one that leads to extinction for us an destruction of our world.

We do not have to go down this path.

There are other paths we can take into the future.

This book is about these other paths.

 

Possible Societies
Chapter One: A New Perspective on the Human Condition

 

Imagine that a group of intelligent beings on another world is monitoring us through media feeds from our satellites. They use this information to reconstruct the realities of existence on earth and put together a picture of the way we live.

They would see that the type of society we have on earth rests on a very specific foundation:

For some reason, the people who lived on this world in the past decided to divide the planet with sets of imaginary lines, creating entities that the people on earth were raised to call ‘sovereign nations.’ They then organized the network of ‘nations’ as though they were teams in a giant game. The rules of the game work like this: If any team can ‘conquer’ any other part of the world, everything inside the conquered territory, everything it can produce, and all rights to benefit from its existence, belong entirely to the conquering nation. Their rights start as soon as they have gained military control of the land and extend until the end of time, or until some other ‘nation’ is able to conquer the land from them.

Each team/nation can gain enormous advantages in this game if it devotes a large part of its income and wealth to weapons and war. The leaders of these teams (on earth, we call them the ‘governments’ of ‘nations’) take this game very seriously: They have reacted to the incentive system this game creates to create killing machines that are so vast and effective that they defy any kind of practical description. (How can one describe a system with the ability to destroy the planet and kill everything on it thousands of times over? How can we compare this to anything that makes sense?) The inherent incentives of these systems are at odds with and conflict with the greater good of every person on earth and the human race as a whole.

These ‘nations’ can gain immense advantages in this game if they enact policies that specifically allow people to rape the planet and spew toxic materials into the air and water and onto the land. They react to these incentives: The leaders of the teams have created networks of laws to protect the destroyers. These laws are backed by the authority of armed police. In case the police should not have the practical ability to protect the destroyers from the mass of people trying to stop the destruction, the leaders of the teams have shown that they were willing and able to bring in their massive militaries to make sure the destruction continues.

If a group of scientists from another world were watching us, we might expect them to think of the arrangement here on earth as insane.

If they had examined a large number of worlds with intelligent life before they came to examine us, they would probably have a category like ‘not fully evolved’ or ‘not totally able to use their intellectual abilities’ to refer to groups that organize the realities of their existence as we do here on earth.

They would almost certainly understand that there are other ways that thinking beings can organize the realities of their existence. (Even we, here on earth, with nowhere near the technology to monitor the satellite feeds of worlds in other solar systems, know other modes of existence are possible: humans have lived on this planet for millions of years; the societies that are deeply engrossed in this horrible game have only existed for a few thousands of years.) If they understand the full range of options (and the full range is explained in this book) they know there are options that could allow us to meet our needs without the horrors they witness every day on their satellite feeds.

Perhaps they feel sorry for us.

Perhaps they wish they could help us.

But if the laws of physics work as Einstein explained them, this is a practical impossibility: it would take centuries for messages from them to get to us at the speed of light and, almost certainly, this would make them too late. All they can really do is wait and hope.

If they have casinos, they may lay odds on us:

Will we figure out the options in time?

If they had monitored many other planets with intelligent life, they would have seen some that are able to overcome these obstacles, while others failed. They would be able to analyze the odds of us making it, based on past experience. The odds makers at their casinos may have an option for ‘planets at risk of destroying themselves.’

What do you think the odds would be for a bet on the planet earth still being habitable and inhabited in 2100, when children now being born will be in their twilight years?

Belief Based Societies

 

 

This book examines a great many different types of societies. It shows that it is possible to build societies around a logical analysis of the long-term needs of the people of earth and an objective assessment of the structures that can help us meet these needs. We will see that societies that are intentionally designed to meet the needs of the human race can do so very, very well.

We will also see that the societies that we were born into were NOT built on science, reason, logic, or an objective analysis of the needs of the people who live on this world. We see this because the basic realities of these societies are driving us to destroy the essentials for our own existence. If we want to understand why we are in this mess, we have to understand that these societies are based on something entirely different than logic, reason, or an objective analysis of the needs of our race. They were built on beliefs:

Beliefs are guesses about matters you can’t prove with objective evidence. (Mental concepts that have been proven with objective evidence are called ‘facts’ not ‘beliefs.’) It is possible for people to make guesses about things that they can’t verify with objective evidence. They can decide that they ‘believe’ certain things that may or may not be correct. Once they have decided they believe certain things are true, they can build structures around these beliefs.

Here is an example: It is possible for people to believe that the first group of people who come to a part of the world that has not yet been ‘claimed’ may go through certain rituals to ‘claim’ it for themselves and the people who paid for their trip.

They can truly believe this: If they perform the rituals correctly, create the required icons and documents, call the land they control the right name (a ‘nation’ for example), and use the right words for the blessing and approval of whatever deities or gods they believe have power and control over such variables, the part of the planet they have claimed for themselves will belong to them from then until the end of time.

They can believe that ownership of the land is essentially the same as ownership of an apple: if you own it, its existence depends on your whims. If you want to destroy it, say by eating it, you have the absolute right to do so. If you want to crush it so no one benefits from its existence, you have this right: it is your apple. It is possible for people to believe that ownership is ownership and the term means the same thing when refering to land as when refering to apples. The part of the world claimed exists only for the benefit of the group of people who own it (the ‘nation’): If they decide they want to destroy it to gain personal benefits for themselves, they have the right to do this (just as the owner of an apple can destroy it to gain the benefits of its nutrition). If they just want to destroy it on a whim, without themselves or anyone else ever benefiting from that part of the world until the end of time, it is possible for them to believe they have this right: it is theirs.

For the moment, let’s not worry about whether this particular belief system makes sense or is sound and reasonabler. I am not trying to compare belief systems here, I am only trying to show that the societies we were born into are built on something other than an objective analysis of facts: They start with beliefs and build on these beliefs. The people who formed these societies believed that the first group of explorers to a land that has not yet been claimed could claim it. If they went through the right ceremonies and procedures, it would be their land forever.

I claim here that it is possible for people to hold such beliefs.

If a large enough group of people hold this belief, they can organize the realities of their societies around this belief:

They can form schools that teach children that each part of the world belongs to a certain group of people. They can create stories that depict people who happened to have been born inside of certain configurations of imaginary lines (other ‘nations’) as evil monsters who hate everything decent people care about and love; they can teach children that these horrible monsters need to be destroyed to make the world a better place. They can teach children that they have a solemn obligation to protect their sovereignty over the part of the world their forefathers have claimed and passed down to them: if they must kill, maim, risk death, die, or even use weapons that are capable of destroying the world to protect their absolute rights to the land, they have a solemn obligation to do all of these things.

The people with these beliefs can organize economic systems that only allow people to get food if they have special documents the nation has printed called ‘money;’ the people who believe that nations are real things can arrange the economy so that people only get these documents if they participate in the complex of industries that support the war machines in some way.

It is possible to start with a certain belief and then build societies around this belief.

I claim the societies you and I were born into were NOT built on logical analysis of the long-term needs of the human race and an objective assessment of the structures that can help us meet these needs. We were born into societies built by primitive people who started with guesses about things that they did not understand. They guessed that parts of planets were ownable by groups of people who went through certain acts and rituals to become the owners. (You can find these rituals described in ‘The Logs of Christopher Columbus,’ available from this link; he explains what he did to ‘claim’ the land that later turned out to be the two continents of America for his employers, the sovereigns of Spain.) They decided which land they wanted to own, went through the appropriate ceremonies to become its owners, extracted the wealth it produced and contained to raise armies to conquer additional land, and conquered the additional land.

We will see later that it is possible to build societies on many different foundations. Societies built these particular guesses (the ones that formed the foundations for the societies into which you and I were born) evolve in very predictable ways:

You can find a detailed analysis of the evidence we have for the way our own societies evolved in Forensic History, available from this link.

Once people claim they own a part of the world as their ‘nation,’ they will have to use force to defend their claims: a minority of the world’s people are claiming they have the authority to deny rights to a much larger majority. (No nation includes a majority of the world’s people; each nation claims rights for a minority and excludes rights to the majority of the world’s people.) People won’t accept they have no rights just to be nice. The land produces the food and other essentials they need to survive; if they renounce all rights they die. No matter how nice people are, they won’t accept death for themselves and their loved ones just to be considerate to others. Since these people won’t accept otherwise, they must be forced to accept.

The people being denied rights may gather and use force to prevent their rights from being taken away. The nations must use superior force to prevent them from succeeding. The people being denied rights may create weapons to prevent them from losing their rights. The nations must have superior weapons to enforce their claims against the majority. The people being denied rights may use extreme measures and commit atrocities in an attempt to avoid losing their rights. The nations must be willing to do far worse to make sure they can enforce their claims.

The land produces food and other wealth and contains raw materials; the more land the nations have, the more wealth the people who control the nations have, the more power they have, and the more tools they have to control the people of their own nations and to subjugate, exterminate, or conquer people outside of their nations, so they can take the land these people live on. At some point, the growing nations will grow together, having taken all land held by people who don’t accept accept the belief that conquering and claiming land makes it belong to a nation.

After all land is controlled by one or another nation, nations can only get additional land by taking it away from other nations. The other nations have tools of forcce too. (All nations must enforce their claims, since they exclude the majority of the people of the world from rights. The majority will not accept they have no rights to benefit from the existence of a part of the world without some kind of pressure that must be ultimatley backed by force.) Other nations will have to have weapons capable of defending their claims to keep their land. Later, we will look at belief-based societies in detail. We will see that there are many belief systems that can support societies. We will see that ALL societies based on this particular belief system must evolve in a very specific way. Eventually, they different ‘nations’ will have to wind up acting like teams in a horrific game: they will act as if the world is a playing field and the team that can create enough misery and agony to get another team to concede can have everything that other team once owned.

The people who run the different teams will want their people to fight hard and fanatically, so they can have a chance at defeating their enemies. They need the people on their team to truly believe they are killing, destroying, risking death, and dying for something other than the success of an arbitrary team defined by people born within certain sets of imaginary lines. If they can’t create this state of mind, they won’t be able to defeat the other teams. They have to make their people think that nations are real things, that there are good nations and evil nations, that their nation is one of the good ones and other nations are evil, and they are fighting to defeat evil or for some other purpose than gaining more wealth for the arbitrary team they were born into. The people who run the teams must work very hard to get people on their team behind them. Often, this means the team leaders (again, the governments of nations) have to lie to people, starting when they are young children. They will have to take advantage of all weaknesses of their people, including their desire to believe in a higher power to make them believe that the higher power is behind them and they are fighting, killing, destroying, and inflicting terror under the direction and to perform the will of the higher power. Sometimes, they have to even create special camps and remove non-believers or those who don’t accept the brainwashing to these areas for orderly disposal, to prevent them from contaminating the minds of the rest.

The team leaders may not want to do these things. But they have no choice: if they want to avoid a devastating loss in this game, and have any chance of giving their team victories in various rounds of the game, they have to do these things.

Team leaders know this also: Teams with better and more destructive weapons will have great advantages over other teams. They will work on more and more destructive weapons for the benefit of their team. They can gain advantages over more environmentally conscious teams by ignoring destruction; they can drive down the costs of weapons for their team, creating greater advantages, by actually encouraging destruction. They have incentives to do these things.

The evolution of societies built on this particular belief system is predictable: At some point, the team leaders on these societies will develop weapons that are capable of destroying the world. They will realize that these weapons have no military value if other teams don’t believe they will be used, so they will deploy these weapons and create battle plans that specify they must be used in certain circumstances.

Eventually, these weapons will be used and the world will end.

It is all very predictable.

We all know how it will turn out.

 

Other Possible Societies

Neither you, nor I, nor anyone now alive were behind the decisions that led to this arrangement of existence. The decisions that led to nations were made long ago by people who have been dead now for thousands of years. We can’t go back in time and get them to make different decisions.

But we are here now. We are able to think for ourselves. We don’t have to think like people in the past thought if we don’t want to. A great many people—including teachers in school and religious leaders—tell us that we are supposed to think the way people thought in the past. But we have control over our minds and can think any way we want to think.

If we want, we can accept that it is possible that the people who built the societies we were born into didn’t think everything through totally. We can accept that they didn’t have all of the information we have now, or the science, or the history and other background.

We can accept that we are capable of more. We have more tools, more skills, more talent, more knowledge than any group of people have ever had in the past. We have the ability to put together scenarios in our minds. For example, what if a group of people were in a situation where they could form any kind of society they wanted? What if they had all of the advantages that we have now, including our science, technology, and skills, but found themselves without the limits that we now face that make change difficult?

What if these people set out intentionally to create a society that could meet the long term needs of the human race?

Could they do this?

If they could, then this means it is possible for humans to build societies that can meet the long-term needs of the human race. If we can accept that such societies are possible, we have made a huge first step in creating them. In fact, once we accept in our minds that it is possible, all of the rest is inevitable and will happen if we simply start working on it. It is like deciding to send men to the moon. If we don’t accept it can be done in our minds, we won’t waste resources trying to figure out how to do it. But once we understand it is possible, all that is left to do is solve the technical problems. We can work through them and get them out of the way, one after the other, until there are no more problems, then we can do it. The same is true for building societies that can meet our needs. The hard part is accepting that such societies can exist under any circumstances whatever. Once we know they can exist, everything else amounts to basically solving technical problems. We have some truly incredible tools to help us solve technical problems. If we are willing to tackle them, eventually we will get them all out of the way.

 

The Book

 

The book explains societies as a kind of science fiction story: a group of people go back 4 million years in time. You the reader and myself the author are in this group. When we arrive in the distant past, there are no countries, no borders, no militaries, no international disputes, no owners, no corporations with protected rights to rape the planet, no ‘traditional enemies,’ and no organized religions in place. None of these things exist for the simple reason that there are no humans when we arrive. We are the first.

We are in a wonderful position: we have all of the tools, knowledge, and technology of the 21st century at our disposal, but we don’t have any constraints or limits that impose certain societies on us. We can form any kind of societies we want.

What if we—you and I and a group of other intelligent people from the 21st century—were in this position?

What might we decide?

One option would be to reconstruct the societies that existed in the 21st century before we left. We can divide the people in our group into different groups based on their places of birth before traveling through time, their skin color, their nose size, or some other marker that we decide indicates their ‘race,’ their religion, or some other factor. We can then divide the land with imaginary lines to form ‘nations,’ and assign each group one of these ‘nations’ to belong to the group and all of its descendents forever.

If we want to do this, we can.

But we don’t have to do this if we don’t want to.

We can organize our societies any way we want.

I will explain the different societies we could possibly form with a story, showing what happens to us if we make different decisions.

At first, we will decide that the majority of the members of the human race (our group is the entire human race in this story) don’t really benefit by dividing the land into ‘nations’ and dividing the human race into different groups to own each nation. We gain more benefits if we don’t even think of the land we live on as belonging to anyone, including a ‘nation.’ At first, we decide that we are better off if we simply consider the land to be the source of the food and other good things we need to survive and want to make our lives better. We can set up some system to have people collect the food and other good things the land produces and put it into storage facilities. We can then have meetings and make decisions about how to divide these things among our members.

This kind of society has existed in the past. We will see that a great many groups in the part of the planet now called the ‘Western Hemisphere’ organized the realities of their existence this way before people from the Eastern hemisphere arrived and began imposing new realities of existence on them. We will see that societies organized this way operate entirely differently than societies that divide the land into parcels called ‘nations’ and assign sovereignty (total ownership) of each parcel to one group of people and its descendents.

Our group in the remote past will start with a very simple type of society, the same type of society that most groups of people in the Western Hemisphere had before contact with people from the Eastern Hemisphere. However, we will have many tools that were not a part of these societies when they existed in the past, including money, electricity, refrigeration and air conditioning, computers, cell phones, and even a basic internet built around the Wig If system that was in our cruise ship. These discussions are designed to give you a frame of reference so you can understand various different societies we may consider forming.

Although our group in the remote past starts with the same kind of society that most Western Hemisphere people had before contact with Eastern Hemisphere societies, we don’t have to keep it if we don’t want it. We can consider the idea of creating nations and accepting that mountains, rivers, lakes, and parts of continents can belong to groups of people who meet the requirements needed to consider themselves ‘nations.’ We all know how these societies worked because we are all from a time when they existed.

By this point in the book, you will understand the basic realities of two different types of societies: the societies that divide the world into nations and accept that nations can own parts of the planet, and the simple society based on the premise that nature is the giver of all good things and that we can’t own things nature made, including parts of the world. You will understand the basic forces that determine wage rates in both societies, as well as business opportunities, and prices. You will be there. You will be able to see how accepting the proposal to create nations will affect you personally. You will see that it really will cause great harm to your quality of life, reduce your opportunities, and make your life worse in many ways. As you will see, the great majority of the people would suffer significant harm and the human race would suddenly find that it had very serious problems that don’t have to exist if we accept this proposal. Our group votes on this measure and, because the great majority of the people would be harmed if it passed, we reject it and decide not to accept nations.

 

Other Societies

 

This book explains a great many different types of societies that humans can create. It is possible to build guesses on beliefs. We can guess about whether the world is ownable and, if it is, who owns it.

It is also possible to build societies on other premises. We may start with the premise that we are ‘the ones in charge,’ even though we may possibly not own. (See sidebar for more information.) As ‘the ones in charge,’ we are in a position to make rules about how the world is used. If we don’t know yet whether the world is ownable, we may set up these rule systems so that people will have the right to use land in ways that make it create wealth for the benefit of the human race, but that they won’t have the right to use land in ways that harm it. If we treat set up these rule systems, we will be able to meet our needs from the land and, if we should ever solve the puzzle of who actually owns the planet we live on, we will be able to turn it over to the rightful owners in good condition. If we should never solve this puzzle, we will be able to turn it over to future generations in good condition.

We will be starting in a unique position, with all imaginable advantages and none of the disadvantages: We will have all of history to work with, all of the technology of the 21st century, all of the records and information about things that were tried and the results in the past iteration of human history. But we will not be bound to accept national boundaries, national conflicts, treaties, debts, corporations who have been granted permanent rights, or any other limitations passed down to us from people in the past, because there were no people in our past. We will have the best imaginable conditions to build a perfect society.

You will see that people in our 21st century world have worked out a great many very powerful tools that can help us in this regard. We will look at these tools in detail and show that, if we use them, we can build societies that truly can meet the needs of the human race.

 

Why Does This Matter?

 

Is it possible to build societies that can meet the needs of the human race?

What if we had all of the advantages discussed above, combined with none of the vested interests and other obstacles that now work against us? Could we do this?

This book provides the proof that this could be done. You will see that these societies are possible. Once we know they are possible, we have a foundation to build on. We merely have to work out the details and solve the technical problems. Then we can move on to a better world.

 

Requests To Readers

Please take your time reading this book.

Although I have worked very hard to make it readable, it deals issues that don’t fit right with many of the things that people are raised to believe about the way the world works. We were taught that the world works as it works now because that is the way things are supposed to work. Those raised with religion are told that this is what God wants to happen; others are told that we live the way we live and do the horrible things we do because it is our ‘nature’ to do these things.

The specific type of society we were born into needs people to think this way. It needs this because societies that are built on certain belief systems need war in order to function and people will not make the sacrifices needed for war to take place unless they truly believe certain things that conflict with things they can see around them. To keep war going, to keep nations in place, and to keep the people vested with power in place requires truly incredible sacrifices by a very large proportion of the people of the world. People would not be willing to do these things if they didn’t believe that this situation existed because of forces that we really can’t control or alter. If they thought there was real hope a better world could exist, they would want to spend time building that better world, rather that making contributions to the industrial complex that supports the war machines. They need to lose hope that anything better is possible to keep them participating in the existing system.

In his book 1984, Orwell pointed out that societies of this type need to keep us ignorant in order to continue to function. (He called the philosophy behind the societies we live in ‘Ingsoc.’) We were taught to think a certain way and raised to believe that we must not use logic and reason in certain areas. To think any other way is both heretical and unpatriotic: We must not do it.

Orwell points out that it is hard to keep people thinking the right way. We need to actually be taught special techniques to help us or we wouldn’t be able to do it. We must be able to turn off our minds when faced with evidence that the things we were raised to believe are wrong, so we are unable to process this evidence and can continue accepting the things we were raised to believe. Here he discusses some of the tools that can help us do this:

 

The first and simplest stage in the discipline, which can be taught even to young children, is called, in Newspeak, crimestop. Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction.

Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.

 

Another technique, which he calls ‘doublethink,’ helps us to reconcile differences between the things that people must be able to believe to make sacrifices and do other things needed to participate in war-driven societies. This mental tool allows us to compartmentalize our minds so we can accept reality in some cases (his example: developing new and better weapons) while rejecting reality in other cases (his example: when analyzing whether devoting time to building the new weapons makes sense). Using ‘doublethink,’ we can split our minds in a way that allows us to do the things that must be done to keep the war-driven societies working without having to accept the evidence that the underlying principles of these societies don’t make sense:

 

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies—all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth. Ultimately it is by means of doublethink that the Party has been able—and may, for all we know, continue to be able for thousands of years—to arrest the course of history.

 

Modern behavioral psychologists have created techniques to teach doublethink and make people think this way in order to deal with a very serious mental problem called ‘cognitive dissonance’ due to something called ‘belief disconfirmation.’ When people see things with their own eyes that conflict entirely with their underlying world view (the set of beliefs that they use as a foundation for understanding reality) they feel confusion, anger, and fear. In some cases, they can’t control these feelings and act on them, committing atrocities. To deal with the problem of cognitive dissonance, psychologists have developed mental techniques that help people split their minds into two parts, one that holds their foundational worldview (the set of beliefs they hold about the way the world works) and the other analyzing reality objectively and logically. If they can put up a strong enough mental wall between these two parts of their brains, they can hold both perspectives simultaneously, the essence of the mental technique Orwell called ‘doublethink.’

Orwell claimed that these mental techniques were taught to us intentionally in order to trick our minds into accepting a system that wouldn’t otherwise be accepted. I have another explanation for this: I think that the techniques are mental defense mechanisms. We are raised to accept a certain worldview based on beliefs. We respected the people who taught us these things and want to believe they knew what they were talking about and provided accurate information. For example, we are raised to believe that the entities we call ‘nations’ are real things that exist for real reasons, not that they may possibly be made-up things that only really exist in the imaginations of people who believe in them. We are taught that nations are the source of all good things imaginable, from freedom, justice, liberty, and brotherhood, to the majesty of the purple mountains and beauty of the sun as it rises and sets over the sea. Then we see reality, with evidence that agents of the supposedly ‘good’ nations having been involved in genocide, torture, destruction, and terror.

How can we remain sane when reality conflicts with our worldview? I think that this is where the mental tools Orwell discusses come in: they help us pretend to not understand arguments when they are ‘inimical to’ the belief system. They help us build mental walls between the reality we see with our eyes and the worldview that we have come to accept because of our upbringing.

I have had many comments from readers. Often, I get conflicting complaints about the same passage. Some people tell me it is overly simplistic and insults the intelligence of readers by presenting information that everyone already knows and understand. Others say, about the exact same passages, that they are too complex for any but the most intelligent people to understand and, while they hope that there are people who are smart enough to understand this, they have great doubts about this. I think that these reactions are the result of our processing of information. If people normally use doublethink to help them deal with cogitative dissonance, they will SEE the points and understand them—they are even likely to think that their intelligence is being insulted because they are so obvious—but they won’t be able to make these points fit with the basic premise or see how they tell us that better societies are possible. If people normally use the technique Orwell called ‘crimestop,’ they will look for excuses not to understand the points and make themselves misunderstand them, even if they are basically self evident.

We all feel cognitive dissonance because the worldview behind the societies we inherited does not make sense and can’t be reconciled with reality. We must all, therefore, work to overcome this dissonance in order to function and remain sane. We use certain mental tricks to make this happen and these tricks are designed specifically to keep us from putting together information that naturally goes together.

I want to ask you to understand that this happens. I am claiming that there is hope for the human race. I am claiming that we can use our intelligence and intellect minds to overcome the belief that we will never have a society that can meet our needs and that we must keep this one until it destroys us. I am claiming that the main reason we have not done this so far is that we haven’t been able to stretch our minds enough to accept that it is possible.

In order to understand the points of this book, you have to be willing to think in ways that we are taught we aren’t supposed to think. You will have to be able to use logic, reason, and apply science to concepts that we were all taught that we are supposed to understand only through faith, introspection, beliefs, and feelings.

If you can do this, you will see that the human race might be on the verge of a new phase of existence, one that will take us to a far better world than people in the past ever thought was possible. You will realize that, even with our great advancements, the human race is, at this time, still at a very primitive level of existence, but that there is a door in front of us that reveals a much brighter future. All you have to do is be willing to reach out and open it.