Terraism E-Book

Ted Ganten

• Herausgeber: Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 145

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022

Beschreibung

We currently live in the best of all worlds. Yet, if we continue as is, we will soon put an end to the success story of Homo Sapiens - and perhaps to life on our planet. So now is the time for a fresh start. A start that will turn some of our well-beloved perspectives upside down. For the survival of humanity, it is crucial to no longer place humans at the center of our thinking, but rather our planet. New ethics must be developed that focus on the preservation of earth as a habitat for all existing and future forms of life. Such a change of perspective will only happen if we have a common goal that goes above and beyond the preservation of the planet. A goal that inspires us, a human dream that motivates us to give our very best. And finally, to pursue this dream of mankind we need an organization that offers more efficiency, continuity, and identification potential than nations or associations of states. Dr. Ted Ganten in "Terraism" asks the right questions and offers solutions. The booklet is neither a scientific treatise nor an academic, philosophical discourse. It is a call for action. It wants to be questioned and discussed - by people who recognize the destructive potential of Homo Sapiens - but decide to turn their attention to the creative potential. People who do not want to stop progress but shape it. Are you with us?

Leseprobe

Table of contents

Prologue

What is the purpose of this book and who should read it?

1. Will Homo sapiens survive?

1.1 Ourchallenges

1.2 Looking ahead

1.2.1 War

1.2.2 Homo deus

1.2.3 Happiness

1.3 What we can change?

1.4 Good and evil reimagined

1.4.1 Spaceship “Earth”

1.4.2 Earthlings enter space

1.4.3 Terraism

1.5 Denial of utopia is totally utopian

1.6 The journey is not the goal

1.6.1 Collective actions

1.6.2 Asgardia

1.6.3 The journey

2. How do we balance democratic elements versus efficiency?

2.1 President

2.2 Council of Elders

2.3 General assembly

3. What is mission critical?

3.1 Mission: “Planet Conservation”

3.1.1 Committee for education

3.1.2 Committee for population control

3.1.3 Committee for green technology

3.1.4 Committee for collective action

3.2 Mission: “Ethical Handling of Progress”

3.2.1 Committee for cyborg technology

3.2.2 Committee for genetically modified organisms

3.2.3 Committee for longevity

3.2.4 Artificial intelligence committee

3.2.5 Committee for the pursuit of happiness

3.3 Mission: “Colonization of Space”

4. How do “terraists” communicate?

5. You get what you pay for! Really?

5.1 Rights for individuals

5.2 Rights for organizations

5.3 Rights for states

6. Epilogue: 100 pages of hot air?

Prologue

This book was written before Trump, Corona, and Afghanistan showed the inability of nations and their alliances to deal with crises. It was written before space flight as commercialized by Space X and Virgin Galactic showed the superiority of private enterprises to achieve technological leadership in such endeavors.

President Trump triggered a renaissance in state egoism with his battle cry “America First.” He made state egoism acceptable once again in public and across international borders. Of course, countries like China and Russia had never taken a different approach at any stage. It could also be argued that the United States, too, was always very rigorous at pursuing its own interests, even before Trump. There are plenty of examples of US military interventions that went against the international laws that they helped to create. Nevertheless, it affects us when the nation that has influenced so many international issues clearly says: “From now on, we do not care about world peace or anyone else. We will only take care of our own people and our own interests.” The withdrawal of its military from Syria, without even bothering about the consequences is one example. Another is the destabilization of the world through starting an uncoordinated, unilateral trade war. Of course, one must admit that it was and is high time to question the established state of world trade. A preliminary alliance might have helped, and a more diplomatic tone might have increased the chance of an agreement. Since then, the nation-state system has become more toxic than ever.

The coronavirus pandemic was another warning shot across the bow. Nations have closed their borders again and have concentrated ruthlessly on saving their own populations – blind both to the economic context and to the well-being or woes of other people on this planet. Are we talking about Russia, China, and the USA? No. Even Germany temporarily banned the export of masks and other protective clothing to other European countries at a time when our Italian friends were suffering from the first wave and Germany was miraculously well off. European solidarity was only gradually re-established, mostly driven by Brussels. Thankfully. COVAX, the only initiative that has showed a little international solidarity, came from Brussels. However, it has so far essentially failed and will hopefully now be given serious attention. Of course, currently, vaccination coverage in industrialized countries is at a high level and the danger of coronavirus variants for the rich countries is now coming from the poorer countries. Not selfless. During the crises in the Northern Hemisphere, the rich countries outbid each other and drove the prices of vaccine doses to dizzying heights. Even today, vaccination protection is not available to medical personnel in many countries.

Historically, the disaster in Afghanistan is worth only a marginal note. Too few Western soldiers and diplomats died, in the end. However, the events have revealed the ugly face of the “humanitarian” commitment of the international community and the “Western world.” After the English and Russians, this was the third occupation of the country. Actions taken: Support the regime that is open to the Western Hemisphere and trade. Equip them with weapons and teach them how to use these against their own people. This behavior is aimed at war and annihilation, not peace. Dialogue with the Taliban was never sought. No attempt was even made to understand why large sections of the population in Afghanistan were so radicalized. The democratic will of the people was not sought, but our values and, above all, interests were defended on foreign soil. If that is the most humanitarian form of engagement of the Western, liberal democracies, do we want it?

These three crises of the last few years are only symptomatic of the problem caused by national borders and the dangerousness and narrow-mindedness of the pursuit of interests based on states. It is high time for a corrective: for example, a “terraist” association as suggested in this book. From this angle, the book seems more timely than ever before.

Part of the “Terraism” established in this booklet is the idea of the colonization of space. This may seem a little weird at first or like a distraction from the essential goal of humanity – namely the saving of our planet. That’s not really the case, however.

Saving the planet depends not only on the necessary ecological restructuring of our society, but also on the maintenance of peace. One of the potential points of contention between the relevant nations in the near future will be the colonization of space. This could be driven by the goal of accessing raw materials, but more likely the principal motivation will be the technological, strategic, military importance of a base in orbit or on the moon. A race between nations could end fatally.

The colonization of space could, however, possibly serve as an inspiring, uniting vision. It is a simple, psychological fact that mere survival is not an inspiring vision. It does not unite. Asking industrialized nations to make sacrifices and share money, food, and power in order for us all simply to survive is not a unifying and connecting goal. As long as a sufficient number of people in the rich nations wake up in the morning and have enough of everything, they will not be driven to make the right decisions to demand the required changes. The abstract necessity will not work as a driving force, because so far, we are not one planetary team.

The dream of common space colonization, on the other hand, has the potential to change the perspective of our planet. In order to achieve this inspiring, long-term goal, the continued existence and integrity of the planet is required. The belief in attaining such a breathtaking goal will, one would hope, create a sense of solidarity on a personal level. Ideally, the goal of colonizing space would be pursued through an alliance of private law companies, the “terraistic association.” Space X and Virgin Galactic have shown that space is indeed open to private ventures. The US and NASA no longer possess the technology themselves. Russia has publicly complained that price competition from Space X and Virgin Galactic is pushing them out of the market. I think that’s a good sign. If just two US companies have already achieved this, then imagine what a merger of leading technology companies around the world could do. Such an interaction could well end national claims to and demands for technical supremacy peacefully, through efficiency and purposefulness.

With the centralization of capital and economic power in individuals, it is more important than ever that such ventures are not left in a vacuum. A binding legal platform is required which makes it possible to work in cooperation over the long term. There must also, above all, be a strong ethical basis, a basis such as that offered by “Terraism” as presented below. Let me reiterate: What has happened in the last three years shows that this book is more relevant now than ever before.

Let me end this introduction with some thanks. Last year this booklet was “emotionalized” by Susanne Gold with 52 digital graphics. This was for the publication of the booklet on the blog: Utopiensammlerin.com. My sincere thanks go to the Utopiensammlerin e.V. and the artists behind it, the “Collec.tiff.”

What is the purpose of this book and who should read it?

Everything started with a big bang 13.8 billion years ago. The Earth has existed for about 4.5 billion years. Life came to our planet 3.5 billion years ago. The earliest ancestors of mankind developed about 7 million years ago, and Homo sapiens, which prevailed over all the other human races, is just about 200,000 years old. The way we humans currently live and love – although some consider them-selves/us eternal and divine – is only a snapshot in the long chain of evolution. We are continuously evolving, if in very small steps, into something new. We hope.

Where are we heading? If we do not blow the Earth to smithereens, evolution will continue – despite the destructive behavior of Homo sapiens. Someday, likely without us. We ourselves are creating environmental conditions in which we can no longer live. Other life forms are more robust. The spark of life will probably be carried on. That, in itself, is somewhat comforting. But not entirely comforting. Life today can be so much fun, and I see so much potential in human beings that I am greatly inclined to work for the preservation and further development of Homo sapiens. I do not expect everyone to agree with me about this. It can be and is argued that our lovely planet would be better off without us. That may be, but even if you agree with me, you will have realized by now that we will have to do some things differently. Otherwise, it is highly unlikely that Homo sapiens and his successors will survive for the next 10,000 years.

Of course, I do not have the solution, the single magic bullet, and yet I see a way to contribute to a solution. In this essay, I detail a concept to create a better future. It won’t solve all our challenges. The intrinsic charm of it is that we can start implementing the idea tomorrow and thus very probably begin to move things in the right direction, at the very least. I do not want to spend much time and effort detailing the problems and challenges that we face. We are flooded with catastrophes, drama, and suffering on all media channels every day.

My approach is to focus on possible solutions. However, I cannot avoid presenting common, basic assumptions about how our environment will develop in the short and medium term. These assumptions are shared without extensive discussion. Temporal variances of a few decades or slight deviations in the various causal chains and future scenarios are not relevant or essential for the conclusions presented. Time will tell to what extent the implementation of the ideas and basic ethical principles of Terraism will influence the probable future scenarios. As we all know, the flap of a butterfly’s wings in China could trigger a hurricane in the USA. If this booklet is such a flapping of wings, I hope it will provide a tailwind for the continued existence of Homo sapiens and its further development as a species.

Two groups of readers may be disappointed: (1) Anyone expecting a scientific paper or a comprehensive depiction of the underlying philosophical landscape, theorems, or history; that is not the aim of this work. The objective is to create a constructive, pragmatic proposal to address challenges. (2) Readers who would prefer a concrete opportunity for contribution or a clear roadmap for implementation of the idea; such recommendations are not presented here. The idea and concepts suggested need to be discussed prior to implementation. There are plenty of pitfalls to be avoided. The ideas must reach a degree of maturity and generate resonance that will lay fertile ground for their implementation. I do offer some considerations on how the ideas can or could be turned into reality. But there are a thousand ways to do this. These pages will hopefully serve as a seed, but they are not the tree and certainly not yet the fruit.

1. Will Homo sapiens survive?

Let’s start by describing reality. What are our biggest problems? How will technology and humanity develop? Which of these developments can be influenced so that we can focus our energy on them? And in this new world, how should we distinguish good from evil? Are the laws of the market, the Ten Commandments, or Kant’s categorical imperative enough for us? Only after these topics have been addressed do I introduce the new concept and ideas to help save the planet – a path that can help us face the great challenges of the future.

1.1 Our challenges

Growth and resources: We are now 7+ billion people, and that number is growing every day. Forecasts predict 10 billion by 2055, and per capita consumption of energy continues to rise. The resources of energy, raw materials, food, and water are limited. Of course, one could argue that that the primary issue is resource distribution. And that may be true for now. But projections over the next hundred years do not look encouraging. Moreover, arguing from the perspective of an industrialized nation, it would be problematic to assert that people from other countries do not have the right to consume a comparable amount of resources. So, in addition to the number of people, per capita energy consumption will also multiply. The irritating fact remains that the pure coincidence of one’s place of birth, combined with the legal invention of ownership, determine when, how, and why we may use the resources of our planet that have been around for and developed over the course of millions of years. The battle for water, rare earths, and minerals has long since begun. We are only just beginning to discover air as a resource. We still live in a world of abundance. That will change.

War and peace: We are an aggressive species. Although the last 70 years have been extremely peaceful, at least in larger parts of the world than ever before, the trend is again moving in a critical direction. Economic protectionism, as currently practiced by many eloquent – or at least loud – presidents and heads of state, is the precursor to nationalism. The UN is losing support. The EU is struggling with its first withdrawal. The legitimacy of supranational alliances, including NATO, is being publicly questioned. This destabilization, although often driven by ostensibly justified economic reasons, endangers peace in the medium term. Ironically, the lack of esteem for peace at present is likely a consequence of the basic predisposition toward peace that we currently enjoy. Large sections of current generations know nothing else and therefore take peace for granted.

The search for happiness and religion: The religious sphere is polarizing. In the Western industrialized nations, religious beliefs have dissolved due to a lack of interest. Consumption has risen from the ashes of religion as a “raison d’être.” The drive to increase individual happiness, as promoted in countless courses and workshops from yoga and meditation to NLP (neuro-linguistic programming), is becoming a spiritual business sector. I do not mean to deride these practices. Many of these spiritual paths are embedded in a world view that also encourages ethical behavior. However, most of these practices are not in demand because of their ethical component, but because they are “good for you.” That is not wrong either. The quest for individual happiness is an evolutionary given, but focusing an entire industry sector on this aim does not help in the search for social consensus and does not contribute to forming a common, basic, cross-border conception of ethics.

At the same time, in other parts of the world, there seems to be a return to fundamentalist religious values, e.g., in some Muslim communities. In some regions, states, and denominations, this goes so far as to lead to segregation between people of different faiths and ignorance of the findings of science. This tendency is not at all limited to Islam. The “intelligent design” movement of predominantly American Christians holds the view that man cannot descend from apes because God created us in his image and likeness. Adherents take that point quite literally. This is not a small group of sectarians, but the predominant opinion in many Southern states (the so-called “Bible Belt”). Here, it is taught in public schools – and the teachers believe it, too. The influence of marginalized Christians in the USA who base their worldview on the literal wording of the Bible, such as those passages thought to define the “family,” is also increasing. This has little to do with Enlightenment thought or scientific education.