Unpublished blog I decided to discontinue this "web log" for lack of real world results (no political power forming (such as making inroads in established (establishment?) science (economics/law), petition not growing, no evidence of people coming to understand fundamental economics, party not growing, DAVID investment fund not growing, social justice sister movements showing no signs of being willing to even debate real economics and practical lawful solutions in proposed direction, people I know are positive but remain relatively inactive: all meaningful indicators are at a near stand still). The 298 messages (most not adding much or anything to the system) still exist as unpublished. One message failed to delete, probably because it was too big: the world population, every person one dot. Nice and symbolic, what it is all about isn`t it: humanity (better version). My idea is to put the system pretty much on the shelve to sit and relax. To see how it ages with time, and how you age with it. Good for relaxation. The messages on this "blog" are also not always a good introduction, although often they are just that. When they are not, this might scare people away. The main site http://www.socialism.nl contains an introduction. Apparently it is the will of the world not to solve its problems right now. Maybe the world wants to go further with capitalism, maybe build further at the global super state, or maybe the world wants another attempt at marxist revolution. That is all fine of course, as long as it is the will of the people. Which in my opinion it has now become one way or the other, since there is an option that could alternatively be explored. Long term the future of society seems extremely problematic, but I guess everyone can easily see that. On the other hand maybe it will all not be that bad, in theory a possibility, although that presumably would require some changes. Changes such as http://www.socialism.nl for example, perhaps ... posted on Saturday, May 09, 2009 9:58 PM Comments // The same can be said about the list of messages here www.socialism.nl/post. // There are some anti-idolatry benefits of throwing all this on the shelve // to age. It is really you who is aging of course, and who will react // differently to an in your perception aged system then a non-aged system, // even though nothing has changed except your perception. That is how your // psychology works, I guess. Maybe you ought to give hard logic a try, // rather then relying on all kinds of circumstantial elements; just a // thought. You will assume that if something has been around for longer, // that there is a greater chance it will have merrit, which can be true. // But that isn't really important (certainly not scientifically speaking), // as it could be false as well. Age does not prove correctness, but you // are probably going to assume it does, which might make the system more // attractive to you. If you do a thorough research, you would notice // nobody has been able to have an argument against my entire system that // makes much or any sense (IMHO). The best up to now I've heard is: // "you are very optimistic," referring to the fact that I believe the // various sovereign nations won't go to war with each other in my system, // at least not so much war that the world would collapse from it. That // was someone who was a proponent of the EU, and working on its laws, // a system which I see as promoting war and misery. Another relatively // good argument is "people do not want power, people do not want to be // involved in running the companies, or state." It is not that good an // argument however, since people who want no part of the power simply // don't get involved - there is no forced being involved. Point that // makes me doubt most, land distribution and the ability of people to // maintain voter groups thus maintaining the state at a minimum strength // or credibility: I don't think I've ever heard a reasonable argument, // or any argument, against it (except my own). // If it is this difficult to get through with so many clearly true // theories and even working technology, then how will other people // break through this shell of ignoring when other important matters // must be dealt with by the Government(s) or their company ? There // isn't even a debate (about my proposals) ! Simply ignored wholesale. // In a way that is very promising though, hehe. Things that become // widespread are often first utterly ignored, since I guess nobody even // knows any argument against it, but nobody dares come out in favor yet // either: wait and see if someone else has good arguments for this or // that. That gives room for people to vent some ignorant comments. // Then that falls through and it becomes apparent who has got the better // theory (A. Smith ? K. Marx ? J. Boersema ?). At any rate, A.Smith // and K.Marx have had their grand experiments, as have many other people // in history. Maybe it is just good fun to try my model for some time: // it is different, we haven't done things this way yet, so why not. // Has a lot of things that have worked in the past, or that make common // sense I think, so it isn't that unreasonable an experiment I hope. // It can of course fail. Even if the system is correct it can still // be wrong: the measure of success is essentially subjective. // Please resist religious crazyness: it is all science, nothing more, // nothing less. What I know I wrote down, some things I felt I had // to say and that can not be proven, but it was done and this is the // way it came out. Sorry if some parts aren't to your liking. Waste // no time in cutting them out, and keep what you like only! Believe // me when I say that few people dislike religion as much as I do. // This is also a war against organized religion (ideological brainwashing // for profit).