Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

TVP Teamspeak Q&A Seminar - 2012-06-17 - Pondering The Future, Anticipating Change

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
Hello everybody and welcome to The Venus Project, TeamSpeak Seminar for June 17, 2012. Hi, everyone, thanks for joining us today. A lot of people ask about Joel and Larry who also live here. I wanted to mention that Larry takes care of the grounds and Joel works with us on all the projects. He started the Youtube channel, he answers questions there, he answers Emails, as most of you know, he was a narator in Paradise or Oblivion and he works with me on all the audio taping and video taping and everything else we do, so, Joel, do you want to describe what the talk's about? Yes, this lecture is about sort of anticipating the future and pondering the future, some of Jacque's ideas in that area and also has to do, (?)is tied in with semantics and anticipating change. Thanks, Joel. I would say that most of the old philosophers were looking for some kind of formula to live by, some standards, and so they invented different standards. The problem with that approach is that if an environment were fixed, you can work out a set of standards for that environment. But if that environment keeps changing, your standards for one environment will not fit the standards of another environment. For example, let's say that you live in a land where's great scarcity. The laws of that land will be based on scarcity. If there were very few orange trees, very few coconut trees, only royalty would have access to the selected food. But if the oranges and coconuts grew all over the place, no one would care how many you ate. There'd be no laws, you've eaten three coconuts, that's more than the allowed amount. That's in scarcity, but if there's an abundance, no one cares. So if there's an abundance of fish in a given area, there's no price set on it. But if there's rare, if it's rare to catch a big fish, then a price is set upon it. So whatever laws you make it isn't that you're living in accordance with Nature, Nature is a changing process, so any time you find a formula for working with Nature if it continues to change your formula has to be updated. So people say to me, what will the people of the future be like? Well, what are the conditions of the future? Is it great scarcity? Is it military dictatorship? Is it a cooperative society? All of those thing determine what the future could be. Man tends to be a problem solver, but what he considers a problem, or what she considers a problem is not necessarly a problem, it may be a problem in their area. They have words that they use all the time and that's particularly the word "love". And I mentioned that sometimes people when they're together they're very cooperative for different reasons and different backgrounds the notion of love changes because if a girl goes with a guy because he has fifteen qualities that she likes, then she meets a guy with thirty qualities that she likes, her standards change, and the guy feels rejected, or the girl may feel rejected, if a guy meets a girl with different standards. If the standards change sometimes they split up, and when they split up it isn't always smooth. That's why I say what happened to the world "love" when she says "I want the car, the house, the kids and most of the bank account?" Where's the love? What happened to love? Well, if there's lots of stuff around, lots of cars, lots of money, enough if she's worth millions and he's worth millions they may not concern themselves with "I want the yacht or the car." What they pick has to do with their background and scarcity. If the Earth were fixed, so many trees in a given area, so many houses, the standards will remain relatively uniform. If conditions vary, the standards vary. A lawyer can't practice law in an abundant world where everybody has access to whatever they want. You couldn't practice law, but there will be problems unique to those conditions and people would say that's good and that's bad; there's no good there's no bad, there are just different problems that are unique to different social standards, So whenever you design anything a building or a social complex, or a cooperative society, Cooperative means usually there's scarcity and people tend to share the scarcity. There called cooperative or good people. If there's an abundance the term cooperative has no meaning at all. People don't need to cooperate. If there's charitable organizations it means there's scarcity in the world. If there's an abundance of resources and access to those resources there's not need for charitable organizations. In fact a charitable person would be very rare, to meet a person that others consider charitable, unless they have a product that's rare, that they made, like a computer or a laptop. What is a good person or a bad person? There's no such thing. There's behavioral variations depending on what is available. If a person were to sit down and design the ideal society in their heads that would be a society based upon where they're coming from, not necessarly an appropriate design. If you come from an abundant society and you then move to a scarcity society you have to make some kind of adjustments, and the reverse is true, if you come from a scarcity society or an abundant society, you have to make ajustments and the ajustments you make will not be the appropriate ajustments, they will be appropriate to that set of standards. So, when people sit back and say "What will the people of the future be like? What will the future be like? What will the environment provide? Will we have destroyed the oceans and the fish and poisoned the land so very few fruits and vegetables grow? The standards will be appropriate to those conditions. That's why it's not possible for people to sit down and design the ideal world, because it keeps changing and so do your values change, I pointed this out many times, when you fall in love at sixteen it's not like falling in love at thirty, or falling in love at forty. Your standards change. So a person may say to you "You have a strange outlook". Where they're coming from you do have a strange outlook. That's why two people from different backgrounds have difficulty merging because each person thinks in terms of their background. Of course, in order to understand what I'm talking about you have to toss these ideas around, so that you become more flexible in your thinking. How flexibile will you become? How much do you toss it around. So those people that call themselves truth seekers would have to have some idea of what they're looking for to call it the truth. In other words if things are relative rather than truth, rather than being a truthful conditional if all things are relative if you lived in relative scarcity and a person lived in relative abundance you would be different and you have difficulty talking to that person, because their values would not coincide with your values, because your values coincide with the environment. People feel that they're part of nature and they feel that if they were an integrated part of nature they'd be better off. You can never be an integrated part of nature, because nature keeps changing. And if nature keeps changing so does our behaviour in relation to nature. So here you have a whole bunch of problems you're trying to resolve from a fixed point of view. If you tell a person or describe to a person an environment that's very different to the one you live in, in order to live in that environment your behavior would have to be appropriate to the conditions of that environment. So it's very hard to design an ideal city, because the ideal city would be based upon the elements that you work with and the environment that you design it for. So when people ask "What will the people of the future will be like?" What are the conditions of the future? These are the questions, "Not how will the future be like?" "What is the probable shape of the future?" Now you can design a planet if you want to out there with everything, like this used to be, like the Earth used to be, lots of food growing, lots of places, lots other words if you caught one dinosaur you could feed people for a long time. But if there's only things the size of a chicken, you can't feed people for months. But if you kill a dinosaur it rots away so you have to figure out a way of preserving that meat. And if you killed a dinosaur and you used salt or other preservatives you can feed people for a month or two. If all that remains is insects and there're scarce then you can only feed people for a certain lenght of time. So our very thoughts on what will the ideal food be, what are the ideal conditions? That's ridiculous because you're working without a frame of reference. You're not talking about dinosaurs are available, lots of them, so you don't, you kill a dinosaur there will be a lot of birds that will pick up the remains, a lot of other animals will survive, but if you devise a method of preserving that dinosaur for a month and you keep it away from birds and other things, you have scarcity of birds. That's why is very hard to say, "What the person proposes is very intelligent," because of changing conditions if the proposals are based on changing conditions, they are more appropriate than proposals based on a fixed system in the environment. Now I would say that is very important way to think about things if you want to think about the future. No one can think appropriately, they can only think appropriately to the conditions that exist. That's why you have so much trouble when people write about Utopia. Utopia in the monetary system would be where the banks flourish, where rich people flourish (?)well and there were no threats to them. Of course, if the rich people were to design an utopia, it would be an utopia where there were no treats to their values. If the working man would design a utopia, there will be a place where there's no threats to his or her values. So you have changing conditions so you'd always have a changing society. Unless man learns to control nature and to control nature to produce abundance of whatever they wanted, then they can design a society that's relatively stable to the conditions that they control. What does man really want? He doesn't know. What his wants are based upon what's scarce. And so that what he always wants. He always wants to marry a girl that understands him. Well if the girl understands him completely she wouldn't want to live with him. If she understands him partially she might want to live with him. So people say they seek knowledge. How much knowledge? These are all serious problems. So if you really want to think about the future is best to take a set of fixed conditions, and arrange your future around the fixed conditions. That's it, in that area; that's to do away with those people in that area that say "If only I knew the answers to those problems". There really are no answers, there are changing conditions. There are people that say "If I was smart enough to know what to do." Well what to do under what conditions? Shortage of water, shortage of food, diseases, pestilence... You have to have research labs that are equipt to handle almost any conditions that occur. That would be very desirable, but very hard to attain. So I'm trying to throw out a bunch of tools that will help you think about things in relation to the Earth and what it could provide. I don't know what conditions will exist during the transition. In other words if you get fascism installed where ideas are frozen, by the in-group, and anyone that advocates ideas that are different would be very rare, because they would manage the news, they would manage publications and all publications would be subservient to the control group, therefore I can't make any recommendations, it depends on what happens. The future will be shaped by conditions of the future, not by intelligent people. Intelligent people seem to work outside of the frame of reference of what exists. Intelligent architects want roofs. What the hell is a green roof? What's that got to do with the way people think? Green architecture is the in-thing now. What does it mean in relation to values? It really doesn't mean a thing. If you found a paint that does the same thing a green roofs do then the green roof (?)would come to an end. Now really, the problem is stability of the organism. And if they find a way to keep the organism stable under varying conditions... It was Walter B. Cannon that came up with the idea of homeostasis that all things seek balance. Well, if that's true it means that things are always in balance. If there's scarcity that would be balance for those conditions. And if people feel a sense of abundance that will be balance for that condition, things are always balanced, whether is scarcity or abundance. So it's very difficult for the average person to change their frame of reference unless the Earth changes every few months, they'd be used to changing their values. The military systems do change. One considers a weapon is no longer a weapon, if a new weapon comes out that nullifies that weapon. So, what's a weapon? What's security, what does that mean? When you sit back and think about it, security is any system that you consider secure. And if you consider the cavalry as the best way to defend your country you would be slaughtered if other systems exist. So there's no such thing as a stable system; all systems are temporarily stable. If your airplanes are equal to your enemy's airplanes the system is relatively stable, but if your enemy comes up with missiles that don't have to be fired, they just take of and destroy the enemy's equipment, then that would become the dominant society. Is it the best society? Well, if dominance is considered best, yes. I can't conceive of a society that solves problems, that assumes that all things are stable, and to solve problems it would have to be within that frame of reference. But I can conceive of a society that has many different evolving changes and making accommodations to those changes to the best of their ability. And if you raise people to make accommodations to those conditions, those people will have longer periods of stability. If you let people go on and evolve on different levels you'll have social disruption. So how should people behave? What kind of environment do they live in. That should determine that. If you bring up your kids, say to be utterly sane, they wouldn't be able to deal with normal kids. So do you want your kids to be rejected by normal kids? Normal means normal to that situation. Or do you want your kids to be superior to conditions that exist? These are serious problems, and you have to ask yourself, what do you want? The answer would be "I don't know". I guess I want my kids somewhere between the systems, maybe. It depends on the rate of change. Now these are the questions that people are always asking, only they don't know that. They say "What would the ideal society be like?" That assumes everything is fixed. Do you know what I mean? The Earth produces so much food, people produce so many people, but if you produced a population far in excess of what the Earth can produce, your system won't work, no matter what system you're in. Unless you have spontaneous food; it depends on where you are technically. I guess I'll leave that alone for people to ponder, they'll have a lot to ponder there. There's a lot of people that are in search of dynamic equilibrium, that things change but maintain some kind of equilibrium. They only retain equilibrium because man intervenes. If there's to many hurricanes, he puts his attention on hurricanes. If there's disease, he puts his attention on disease. If he puts a lots of attention on disease and new changes in the weather occur, while the Earth tilts on his axes, there's a whole bunch of new problems. All the labs have to be changed in accordance to the new problems. Or if the sun has explosions and there's more ultraviolet radiation and threats from radiating energy from the sun, we'd have to wear and live in different kind of houses to avoid penetration of deadly rays. If we get involved in nuclear war, if the people want to survive, they have to alter their conditions, they can't live the same way. So, when you ask the question "What's the right way to do things?" There are many different answers, there's no right way, without taking into consideration existing phenomena. These are the things that people have to ponder that ask those kind of questions. Best thing to do is to leave them for the future, or come up with ideas to handle changes that you haven't anticipated. It's called theoretical changes. You know sometimes you live in a country of great scarcity, hunger, struggle, sometimes if you have the money, you can escape that culture and move to the England, France and United States. If you can leave, not everyone can leave the culture they live in. Not everybody can leave Haiti if the bubonic plague breaks out, they just can't get in and move away, they can't go to the airline office and buy tickets. Although everyone would like that kind of flexibility. But the nations of the world can't afford that flexibility, that is they don't know how to achieve it. I hope that using science and technology will make a future where there are less drastic choices and more opportunities for more people but you have to think ahead to do that. Keep your society ahead of what exists and to anticipate catastrophic changes and be prepared to handle catastrophic changes. So without science that's impossible. That is, I can't conceive of it, without some branch of physical science. Okay, that's it. Joe, can you send over the link for the questions? Okay, there it is. Jacque and Roxanne, if you aren't willing to show the world your design, blueprints how can you expect anyone to follow you or take you seriously on a large scale? Well if you're ready to put up the funding for the blueprints, we'd be glad to do that. We are working on finishing blueprints and we're showing them to people, we're making appointments and meetings with people who can follow it through. These are not prints that we're just putting out there, because we do have a certain agenda. It's like Jacque used to design an aircraft, prosthesis, he used to work on drug addicts in the past and he designed aircraft but they used them to go bomb faster and pollute more and destroy more quicker, and more efficiently. This is not what we did the blueprints and designs for. We live in a war that's extremely abusive and you know Jacque always talked about how the scientists who did the atom bomb should never have given it to the government. Look what happened to it. So we are very protective of the plans and the designs because we'd like them to be followed through to the best of our ability to create a different type of world other than just giving it to the world as it is today. Do you envision Resource Based Economy to adopt behavioral analysis techniques for the benefit of everyone? Yes, yes. Okay What I mean by behavioral analysis is the use of operant conditioning and positively reinforced sustainable behavior. Yes if you use the same reference that Skinner uses, yes. Can you explain more in depth who will make decisions in the transitional period? And when eventually becomes a Resource Based Economy? Well during the transition you have to work on compromise systems because people will not be ready to make an abrupt change so you have to work between the systems which means more pain. The more people know about science in the world and the methods of science, the smoother the transition. The crux of a cybernated Resource Based Economy, The Venus Project's vision is the resource distribution algorithm; this algorithm is man made and man thought. Does The Venus Project intend to begin making the basic distribution algorithm on existing resources and scale it up in time? Yes, that's correct. It is said that suffering isn't a consequence, it's from a lack of propriety. What are some ideal social etiquette for the Resource Based Economy? I've mentioned this many times before, to do a survey first and then have your labs work on overcoming shortages. And they will be allowed (?) for overcoming particular kinds of shortages, so people will be prepared and understand that it might take six weeks or six months to solve certain problems. We will get that estimate from the labs, from people that work on those things. I can't tell you exactly what the conditions will be, because I'm not sure. What's the role of esthetics, meaning talking into consideration the way things look? We'd play no attention to esthetics, the main thing we pay attention to is how well the system works. That's an art consideration which is outside of our frame of reference. Esthetics is really due to the location you're raised in, what they consider pretty or beautiful. When somebody comes along and say they wouldn't want to live in a dome because it's not esthetically pleasing to them, if they understood the efficiency and the consideration of using resources wisely and other things that the dome poses, then that when they have knowledge about that becomes beautiful to them. Just like the example you always use about if you're male and you married a female who was quite beautiful and she treated you very badly, that face becomes ugly. Is there a degree or scale one can use to determine how reinforcing something is? By the health of the people and the wellbeing of people. Not only that but long term effectiveness. In other words, you don't work on a short term basis, you work on a long term basis, if people are content with the changes that are occurring over a long period of time and the condition of health of people is (?)better, and their love life is better, then that system will be installed, but it has to be effective for the majority of people, not a few people. Do you have the blueprints of language and education for The Venus Project? We only have approximately those conditions worked out. They're not all worked out, it depends on how severely damaged the world is when we begin to install a Resource Based Economy. Depends on how much we damage the oceans by putting toxic material in the oceans, it depends on how we damage the rivers and the air we breathe and the water table, it depends on a lot of things which I can't answer today. I don't know what they will do in the near future. But if I were in control of those things, I could answer those questions. Or if we had a Resource Based Economy the labs can supply those needs. I would be grateful if Jacque would give a five minute example of how it's possible to realize a global redesign in ten years from his perspective, the reason for this is it might be feasible to get much more time than this from busy persons. When Jacque mentioned it would take ten years to redesign the surface of the Earth I wanted to mention that he's talking about after transition, he's talking about it in a technical problem how to feed, house and clothe everyone, how to rebuild cities, he's not so much talking about ten years from now to put in a Resource Based Economy. That's right, that's correct. I think that's often misunderstood. Jacque and Roxanne aside from a working knowledge of a Resource Based Economy and how it would be phased in what are the qualities you would like to see in "ambassadors" of The Venus Project? It's not ambassadors or politicians that we need, we need people that are problem solvers, and they work on solutions to different problems, water contamination, how to clean the air contamination, how to diminish the amount of dust in the air, how to resolve most of the problems, they would have to be technical. Technical people will have to be confronted with those problems. (?) if you're talking about the people who are trying to introduce this direction to other people... - Yes. - Yes, that's important, yes. And I would say read as much as you can about this direction and it's always a good idea to try and present it in any way that you can because that's how you learn about it, that's how you are confronted with things you can't answer, then you can go back and learn more about it, read different books that are recommended on the book list or try and seek more information on the website or on the tapes and the videos or just ask the questions you can't answer to some people. So there's really no specific qualification that were looking out, just go out and practice and work at it. Jacque how much reading have you done of Skinner's work have you read all the materials, if not how much? Which books particular assisted you in the development in the field of human behavior and shaping values? No, I haven't read all of Skinner's work but I do agree with most of the suggestions. What helped you in being able to shape values, it was really working in the fields wasn't it? - Not just from Skinner's books. - Yes, mostly experience. Yes, going out there and trying to change people. I've made all the mistakes that everybody else makes, and that's how I learned how to rephrase things, and change my approach by not attacking different beliefs, but instead showing them an alternative method of dealing with the same problem. Did you come to the conclusion of behaviorism regarding why people behave the way they do before you read Skinner? Oh, yes, long before. In other words, a lot of conditions are visible, but you have to be trained in a way of examining new ideas without personal bias, it's a very difficult thing to attain. I other words, an egocentric person might say "It will never work", rather than point out the specific qualities that won't work. You can't say that that building won't work, you have to point out that the beams are not (?)high up and strengthen properly to support the weight of that building. You have to point out the specifics. If you say "People will always be greedy" that's an ego problem. "How do you intend to solve greed?" is (?)the question. When we move to a Resource Based Economy how will we dispose of the nuclear waste that is left (?)from today? Until we can find a technical solution for nuclear waste should we send it into the sun? Well I would say, I can't answer that question because it depends on what kind of equipment we have in the future. It may take to much energy to propel that stuff to the sun. We'd have to temporarily support it in an enclosed system of material that is not set to wear such as titanium. Titanium rusts one thousand of an inch in a thousand years in saltwater so we might contain it for some period of time in the deep ocean sealed in titanium, but later on, when the chemistry and physics have evolved we might be able to transmute that material in other kinds of material. Is there some corporation interested to build necessary technologies to develop The Venus Project purposes? This person's first language isn't English I assume. No, there's no such thing. No we don't have particular corporations to develop the technologies, but Jacque always mentions that this could have been build in 1927 more of a Resource Based Economy and cooperative society. It doesn't depend on building new technologies, we have the technologies to build the first city right now. The first city will be a research center to work on newer technologies that Jacque and other people propose to make the next city even better. What would you suggest to do when resource that has a greater demand than supply in a Resource Based Economy? We would tell people that it might take another four months to develop sufficient resources if were short we tell them, it might take two years to develop (?)resources, but to (?) put it out there so that people might understand we don't have all the resources to immediately develop a Resource Based Economy. It's going to take some time, that time will depend on how much damage we do before we're ready to install a Resource Based Economy. Depends on how far along we go, how much damage we do, I can't answer that directly. Also how do you allocate resources that are newly discovered, that have great demand? - There's a shortage, I guess he's talking about... - It isn't the demand it's the availability of resources and however long it takes to make those resources available would always be posted on the communication systems. - And if there's scarcity that's when research would go. - Yes. To eliminate that scarcity or find an alternative as (?)J.W. mentioned here. In regard of the promotion of false values, how would you deal with these notions in the transition, could a Resource Based Economy survive with values of superstition and irrational beliefs with no evidence? Fortunately it doesn't take and agreement of all people to change things. Very few people support this economy today. It is really the technicians that make the refrigerators, the washing machines, all the electrical light, all the power systems developed by technology, mass production, those are the people, and it takes very few people to design everything on earth. You don't need to convince everybody. During the transitional process will there be a government? There will be technical advisors and a survey committee. If you want to call that a government; they tell us the state of the world where most of the water is, if it's drinkable and the redistribution of population, to balance out the problems on Earth. In other words, they would have to be technical people, because they are the only people that know how to manage resources. We would manage resources intelligently rather then to benefit a particular group of people. There's no elitism in The Venus Project, technical or otherwise. There really is no government, there's a group of people that are there to carry out the aims and direction of The Venus Project. People are assigned tasks by their background and their ability to perform. How realistic is it really to convince people and governments to redesign society as (?)before it's too late? You can't work with existing governments, they have a fix set. Apparently they don't have the necessary flexibility to understand a direct as distinctly different than the present culture. It's not realistic to go on as we are. What can we do on our part? To learn about The Venus Project as you can, this direction, the values, the aims and start discussing them with people. - Read the books on the list. - Right, Jacque is saying read the books on the list. Given we only have a limited time until various resources run out, oil etc. what's the best way to show the rest of the world that a Resource Based Economy is the best thing for humanity given the world governments are too stupid to see this themselves? You have to point out what are the sources of energy there are other than solar, wind, tidal, temperature differential, between the upper surface of the ocean and the depth of the ocean? The temperature of the atmosphere (?)in the tropics the water is warm, but deep down a mile or so, you have a very cold water and you can generate electricity. Then there's geothermal energy, there's wave power, wind power, all kind of possible solutions to the energy shortage. This person is saying "I have a confusion whether you say that genes do not even contribute to human behavior or is it like the role is insignificant? Please clarify. Please clarify your take in this." I believe that genes are responsible for the color of your eyes, and maybe some reflexes but no values, like a race prejudice is learned, greed is generated by scarcity. Some geneticists were looking for the republican gene. I don't believe there is such a thing. I think that a Republican is raised in a republican environment, and picks up the views. I believe that environment is mostly responsible for human values and behavior. The genes do not control anything except maybe your taste buds, your reflexes, the eyelid reflex or the genetic configuration, yes, but the genes do not control values. Jacque what would you like to see happen when you were gone, as someone who was deeply inspired by your work? Do you have any plans and systems set up when you were gone? Read the book "The Best That Money Can't Buy" and read the books on the list on the Internet. That will give you a better approach to dealing with the problems that lie ahead. That's what I like to see people do, become familiar with technology and the scientific method. Have you made (?) over your plans or thought of any safety measure just in case someone tries to erase your ideas? No, they control the media today, I do not. I'd have no influence whatsoever globally, but I would say that the more you understand technology, the more you can apply technology, the richer the world can become. There's really no shortage of anything except the application of scientific method. Most people do not know enough about it to make a decision in that area. You will have to provide that information. Who are the most significant people which have influenced you? They want five of them. I would say a man named Jacque Loeb, was a major influence and Charles Darwin, theory of relativity, Albert Einstein, all of those basic challenges to how everything works. In other words, I would say that the scientific method is closer than any other system, including all religious concepts which only confuse people and do not provide any methodology for solving problems. Here's one for you Joel: when will there be new video lecture content in The Venus Project media Youtube channel; it's been a long time since a lecture was uploaded. And I think there's still many more topics Jacque can cover. Yes, Joel has been working on that actually, we almost have four more new more lectures ready for the video set from the seventies and eighties and I mentioned we have 140 hours that somebody gave us plus forty more. - So, we will put parts of those up shortly, right? - Yes. - Joel will do that. - (?) the audio is kind of a mess, it's old and very noisy. Yes, there's lots of work to be done on the audio when we get it, because it wasn't professionally done. Jacque would you agree that Skinner influenced most of your ideas in human behavior? No, this is not true. I agree with a lot of the work that Skinner did, but he did not influenced most of the ideas, he had nothing on city planning, he had nothing on how to educate children specifically to become creative. There was never any specific methods laid out for changing people making them all creative in the arts and sciences. There was never laid out in detail. I've worked on that most of my life, how to do it. Yes, he wasn't technical either, was he? Have you read all of the works done by Chase, if not which ones have you read? - You mean Stuart Chase? - Yes, Stuart Chase I imagine. Well, Stuart Chase had some significance in General Semantics. Other than that we was a sort of "I'll go along with some advanced ideas" but Chase never advocated any specific method for attaining certain goals. They're asking if you read all his books. No, but I've read the general views, the overview of Stuart Chase and I would say that he never (?)devised a method of social change. And he never really dealt with the social system. He dealt with mostly semantics, yes. Jacque, if you can summarize what would be the most reinforcing events which shaped you, in your life... Introduction to Science. We have the tour that we sell, our website on the tour, (?) for DVD set and it goes into a lot of the things that shaped Jacques behavior. I saw a question on The Venus Project, the website question 90, that talked about if countries participated in the project called Common Heritage, I'm wondering if you can elaborate more as to what project Common Heritage is about, and how it will advance all nations. By not spending most of our money on military systems, battleships, aircraft carriers, and weapons of war; we spend most of our money on that. If we spend on behavioral science or how to make life better for people, we'd be well ahead. This person is asking "I have noticed on The Venus Project website Frequently Asked Questions question 107 which is "You were once affiliated with The Zeitgeist Movement why did you split with that? Did you think the video is pretty accurate?" Yes, I would say the video was pretty accurate, I'd have people take a look at that. We split because we really didn't have too much influence in The Zeitgeist Movement, it was moving in another directions. And we thought it was best if we promote The Venus Project how we thought was most appropriate and dealt with the things we thought were more appropriate to achieve The Venus Project. The Zeitgeist Movement was supposed to be the activist arm of The Venus Project. Peter Joseph at that time never consulted with us, he went on and did what he thought The Venus Project was, which was far (?)of field. And I asked him many times to come out here and let's discuss it, he never followed through. So I said "Well you go and do your thing your way, we have to maintain The Venus Project's integrity." Has any high ranking politician taking the ideas of The Venus Project or Resource Based Economy and promised you support for this new system? Never. They don't even know it exists, nor do they have the ability to really understand. They don't know enough about the physical sciences to put it together. If The Venus Project were in a position of power to make the transition happen could you elaborate more as to the type of power The Venus Project needs to transition to happen as well as how the transitional period would be implemented? We have to control the media, the broadcasting, the newspapers, the magazines. Without that control of the media, or motion pictures, or DVD's, without control of that media you cannot influence people. The broadcasting companies today are owned by private institutions that make money and have advantage in this system, therefore the broadcasting (?)companies used to make a lot of money advertising cigarettes which produce cancer, but the taxation on it gave the government money so they kept pushing that crap. And you got the same thing with alcohol. They advertise on TV, if I spoke on TV I would talk against that and that would not enable the TV stations to survive. They depend on support from the industry, we don't in a Resource Based Economy. The things we talk about would be detrimental to perpetuation of the same system. I'm not quite sure of what they're saying... We have enough resources to have abundant clean energy for everyone. Do you have statistical data supporting the (?)saying? I don't know if this is a group who is claiming they have enough energy. There saying we have, does The Venus Project have statistical data supporting the same? Yes, if you harness the temperature differential, natural volcanic energy, if you harness geothermal energy, yes. This isn't my opinion, but you can write to the government agency on geothermal energy and they say there's enough energy there to operate anything on Earth for hundreds of years. It also takes reorganizing how you use the resources as well. And how your cities are run. When the future generation is ready to create a Resource Based Economy what can the future generation do to avoid a misinterpretation of The Venus Project? To come here and study The Venus Project or get our book called "The Best That Money Can't Buy" which gives you an overview of The Venus Project. Become familiar with it. Yes, I guess the best (?) is to get the books, the videos, the tapes we put out, come to the tour. - If you can. - Yes, and The Venus Project explained in detail what a Resource Based Economy is, how it will work and how it will make life better for everyone as opposed to our current systemic economic structure of modern societies, I would just suggest, yes we can do that, but that's a long involved thing, I would suggest getting Jacque's book "The Best That Money Can't Buy", reading our website first of all if you want an introduction on what a Resource Based Economy is, I would start there. Jacque can you explain how you arrived at the slogan "Beyond Politics, Poverty and War", why didn't you chose positive words like "Future of more Freedom, Abundance and Peace"? Well, every person comes up with different suggestions, that's only one. And I could say use whatever method you have to in order to get the ideas across. I find that the methods I use seem to work okay. They're not perfect, but they work, so if you find better systems, use them. How will music be handled in a Resource Based Economy, will all music genre will still be allowed to be produced and listen to? Yes, because the music will be used in conjunction with films, events that strengthen the memory of each presentation. Music just presented as a series of sounds so arranged as to produce a pleasing effect is insufficient use of music. Jacque and Roxanne who is Steve (?)Doll, what involvement does he have? Why isn't he part of the project, what is his job? Steve Doll we met about twenty five years ago (?) people come work for us for a while then leave for various reasons. We're still in contact with Steve Doll, he's a good friend and he did work with us, he did a book, that actually we didn't put out, we're going to maybe use portions of it for the film, what else Steve did with us? He did writing with us, he did editing, when I put together some of Jacque's writing for The Best That Money Can't Buy, Steve helped put it together with me and put it in order, and did some editing with it; he was a technocrat when we first met him, he might still be. What do you think of (?) Green? I would say that we can't evaluate what people will do in the future, depends on how severe the conditions are. A lot of times these science fiction films written about the future are done with artists, they really aren't done so much through science or through scientists given possibilities of what the future could be They usually project current value systems which is just a fallacy. Yes, that's right. Somebody here is saying they usually project current values into the future which is a fallacy. What are your thoughts on labels in this case, individual who call other individuals "Internet trolls"? Well, obviously I don't agree with that, and I think there are better methods of describing precisely what a person does, their shortcomings and their contributions. Yes, like Jacque was saying it's a ego problem you would say. - Okay, I guess that's all (?)for this week. - Thank you, thank you for your cooperation and participation. I really appreciate your questions. I hope you consult The Venus Project before you ask questions so you'll know what the answers are. We have them on the Internet, we have them on the Venus site, so look it up first before you ask questions. Look up our answers to questions. Yes, some people did refer to our questions and answers and next week, we like to get back having other people participate more so also. So, thanks again everyone, we'll talk with you next week. Thank you, Jacque and Roxanne, and we'll see you again next week, June 24th 2012.

Video Details

Duration: 56 minutes and 51 seconds
Year: 2012
Country: United States
Language: English
Producer: The Venus Project
Director: The Venus Project
Views: 18
Posted by: ltiofficial on Feb 19, 2016

TVP Teamspeak Q&A Seminar - Pondering The Future, Anticipating Change - 2012-06-17

Note: This is LTI's 'internal working location' for this video, so please do not publicly pass around this URL. All completed and fully proofread 'official' translations can be found at the Repository location at, which we highly encourage you to embed &/or pass around.

To join/help with these translation efforts: (LTI Forum)

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub above to caption this video.