Iconoclast: Ascension

Now that we’ve examined the world through the lens of critical thought and have seen that many of the social institutions we’ve been raised to accept as is are in need of serious change, where do we go from here? Up until now, it would seem that each entry of the Iconoclast series has been nothing more than a rant, but I assure you that it has all led up to this moment. An Iconoclast in its basic definition means someone who attacks institutions of tradition or beliefs in such institutions. This doesn’t have to mean physical attacks. Each entry has been an attack against societal systems that have oppressed the individual, not freed them. As I stated in the “reclaiming our mind” entry, we have been neglected in our education of free thought. We believe that because we can freely speak on matters such as politics, weather, ideas, and concepts that we are free thinkers. However, if our ideas are trapped inside of the box that is not allowed to be broken without shame and scrutiny, then our minds are not free. If you bring a different viewpoint into the world that offers to better our way of life, but that viewpoint is heavily attacked and you are labeled with an undesirable title simply because it’s rejected by the masses, and these attacks force you to revert to the old ways, you’re not a free thinker.

Society tells us that we are free thinkers because we can discuss politics, so long as those political views are within reason. You must either be red, or blue. Anything outside of this then you are a reprobate who is unamerican. Society tells us that we are free thinkers because we can discuss ways to improve our economy, so long as our ideas fit within the spectrum of capitalism. Anything outside of that parameter means you are a socialist and therefore unamerican. You can be religious so long as that religion fits within what the culture deems appropriate.

I’ve refrained from talking about religion within the iconoclast series despite it being a worthy subject to devote an entry to, but this is for many reasons. One reason is that there are too many to cover and I don’t have a full understanding of every one of them in order to deconstruct correctly. Another reason is because they all answer to the supreme religion of economics as I discussed in “Fiscal Depravity.” This means that regardless of what they teach, it is irrelevant so long as the god of money serves as the ultimate deity. However, I will mention it briefly here because it ties in with the subject of this final entry. The main problem with religion within our society is that a majority of beliefs are hyper focused in on the concept of an afterlife. So long as this concept remains the primary focus of all those who follow their respective dogma, then the desire for improvement of our physical world eludes us. Why should one care about improving themselves or the world around them when they are led to believe that this life does not matter? Other problems stem from the belief that anything new or unnatural is evil. This severely halts progress as new concepts brought forth are demonized regardless of how much good can come from them in the long term. Think back to when women were accused of being witches and burned at the stake simply because their ideas were different. Obviously, we’ve come a long way from that time, but similar echoes can be observed today in softer forms.

If we are to change the world and offer a better way of life for all individuals, we can reject the negativity that all religions bring while embracing the best concepts they all offer. We can apply the golden rule that Jesus taught and treat each other as we would like to be treated. We can apply the belief of Hindus and view all life as sacred. We can follow the second noble truth of Buddhism that craving is the root of all suffering, which can be seen with our current world’s obsession with the constant chasing of money and acquisition of “things”. These things we can already do without changing anything except ourselves.

As I’ve shown in this series, currently, human beings are very selfish. But this is not because of “human nature”, nor is it our fault. This is due to the scarcity driven mindset that we should have long evolved out of. It’s the same mindset our cave dwelling ancestors had because their understanding of science and technology was severely undeveloped. To them, if they didn’t fight, kill, or steal, they starved. Selfishness was the basis of their survival and if they attempted to reject it, they died. In our current information age, this is an absurd mindset to still live under, yet, we are forced to because we still serve the false money god. We view the possessions of “things” as a catalyst for power. We’ve attempted to balance that power with false legislation of mans law given to us by politicians who seek such power through the deception of their voters. Once this sense of power is achieved, the use of violent force through pointless wars is implemented so that power can be protected. We are still in our infancy as a race. We have not moved out of the proverbial cave; we’ve simply made it bigger.

In our current stage of technological development, we should have already achieved a type one civilization under the Kardashev scale. We have the internet, international means of travel, multiple space agencies, and trade relations. Without sounding like a broken record, there should be no reason for wars between nations.

If the governments of the world were to remove “power” from the politicians and hand it over to the scientists, the standard of living for all individuals would improve so dramatically, it would be almost impossible to imagine the life we have now. This would have to be done by scientists who do not have agendas outside of bettering the world. To accomplish that, the concept of incentive would have to be redefined to its proper definition. Not the false incentive of money as discussed before, but the true incentive of fulfillment through improvement. We’re constantly brow beat and told to thank capitalism for everything we have today. This is false. We instead should thank a scientist for what we have today. This includes, engineers, doctors, physicists, etc. No politician in history is ever credited with solving problems. However, history looks kindly on the free thinkers of old who innovated, tested, and researched. A scientist is willing to accept when they are wrong and look for a solution, whereas a politician will double down to please their voters.

What I’m describing might sound like a technocracy, but it’s actually beyond. This is only the first step. The problems of our world must be viewed from a technical solution. As I explained in “legal illegitimacy” legislating will not solve many issues. For example, what is to prevent a car from running a red light and striking another car or a pedestrian? A law will not stop that. However, if a steel gate was to rise once the light began to turn red, the gate will prevent anymore cars from proceeding through and the pedestrians would have a safe crosswalk to commute through as well as the opposing vehicles. What about interstates that are divided by a four-foot-high concrete barrier? There are countless videos on the internet of cars losing control and hopping these barriers and causing fatalities on the other side. What if we constructed the barriers higher than a measly four feet? Why not fifteen feet? Or we could erect a fence similar to what Nascar tracks have lining them that is tall enough prevent objects from coming over. The first argument you’ll hear is “it’s not cost effective” or “it’s not feasible”. That is why the concept of money and false incentive must be shunned indefinitely. We must instead consider the lives that would be saved and the overall improvement for our way of life.

Another argument you’ll hear is “we don’t need technology controlling us, this is an attack on our freedoms.” You’ll typically hear this argument when safety-based technology is applied to cars or other forms of recreation. While the idea of personal liberty being undermined by AI or other types of technology sounds like a dystopian negative, one must consider the improvement to society. Nobody argues the idea of guardrails being on the side of the road as an impediment of your freedom to drive off a cliff because we all collectively agree they are necessary to prevent certain risks. In America we have a habit of being selfish with a rebellious attitude of nobody telling us what to do. We also have an obsession with old things. Old traditions, old ideals, old technology, old laws, old politicians, and old values. As a result, we have outdated infrastructure, outdated power sources, and outdated mentalities. One can look at the Asian nations and marvel at the advanced way of life they have. Places such as Singapore, Japan, South Korea, China, and Taiwan are archetypes of technological development. In fact, the US relies on these nations for their technology (the US’ dependence on Taiwan for the superconductor chip for example). It’s also striking to see the difference between the Beijing subway compared to the New York subway. It’s very indicative of how far behind the US is in terms of development.

Topics such as alternative energy sources should not be a political tennis ball. It should be the standard. We have the means to implement nuclear fission, tidal, geothermal, wind, and solar power. Instead of these means of energy becoming the norm, they’re instead demonized and heavily debated all in the name of “jobs”. Old jobs being replaced with new types of jobs have been a fact of life for centuries. The stage coach salesman was replaced by the car salesman. The telephone operator was replaced by the cellular tower worker. The blacksmith was replaced by the steel worker. As is often the problem with a lack of critical thought, we are holding onto the belief that if old jobs are rendered obsolete, then we have no choice but to be homeless. This has never been the case. As technology progresses so does the convenience of life, but we are instead hamstringing ourselves out of fear of the unknown. We continue to push for the continuity of the dark ages for the sake of familiarity.

This is why I personally identify as both a futurist and a transhumanist. Now a lot of conspiracy crazed people hear the word “transhumanism” and automatically equate it with devil worship or that I somehow desire to make myself a god among men. This is a completely false and exaggerated definition of the term. The term transhumanism is the basic belief that humans are capable of evolving beyond their current state. There might be some transhumanist out there who believe they can become gods with the implementation of technology but that is of course a very extreme case. Transhumanism isn’t just a belief but it is the way things are. As humanity advances its education, it’s evolving. As technology becomes more integrated into our lives, the more we evolve.

An example of this would be Neuralink. Ever since its announcement, it’s been scrutinized by the conspiracy groups as being a method of mind control, when it’s simply a new method for improving the human condition. Its very purpose is to provide mobility to victims of paralysis. What about the anti-vaccine crowd? The harm this group brings is the risk of reintroducing formally eradicated diseases back into the world. Diseases such as polio, small pox, and Rinderpest. The anti-vaccine crowd claims that these vaccines are inoculations meant to reduce the population. When we apply critical thinking, we must ask the question “what would the US stand to gain by purposely killing off its own population?” A few seconds of thinking about the answer can quickly dispose of the conspiracy theory.

Now you might be saying, “they would do it for population control,” again let’s apply critical thinking for a moment. The powers that be have acknowledged that there is an impending population cap that is soon coming due to the slowed birthing rate that has taken place on a cultural scale recently. It is estimated that this will mark the beginning of a declining population. This is being looked at as a crisis, not as a celebratory event. Having gathered this information, does it seem likely that there are intentions to expedite this process? For this reason, it is important that we remain persistent in understanding the difference between provable fact and conspiratorial theorizing.

Another fear that needs to be overcome is the new age of artificial intelligence that we have suddenly found ourselves in. As a futurist, I am thrilled to see it becoming a mainstream concept as well as its implementation into our daily lives. Although, we are still in the beginning stages of its development and several years away from its evolving into a singularity, it’s still fascinating that one of the most profound subjects of science fiction over the last century has now become a reality.

Before we arrived at this era I remember hearing so many outlandish theories about why it is such a bad thing and how when it arrives it’s going to kill us all off (I still hear these things too). These theories were stemmed from science fiction novels and movies for the sake of plot. A lot of these critics will even say: "Have you not seen Terminator??" As if that is a viable source of proof that AI is bad. Using critical thinking, we can come to terms with such fears and understand the absurdity. For one, if a singularity was to become sentient and be housed within a mechanical body, it would still lack the emotions necessary to desire “revenge” against its “captors”. It would be the same as thinking your phone or laptop developed feelings and tried to purposely self-destruct in your face. AI is software, not a hormonal being. AI is more beneficial than it is risky. The only thing that makes AI dangerous is humans misusing it. That is why it is crucial we must develop our minds just as fast as we are developing technology.

So, if we are to imagine an ideal world for us humans, how would it look? What kind of economy would it be? What kind of laws would it have? It’s not a difficult concept to imagine at all. A post scarcity world through the process of implementing a resource-based economy. A focus that is void of profit, void of poverty, and void of old obsolete ideals and institutions. A world that declares the earth’s resources as the fundamental right of all living beings. Through the innovation of necessary technologies, not useless junk that is impractical. One organization that has made this their focus is called the Venus Project. For the sake of space, I’m not going to list the entire technical layout of such an idea, but they have plenty of books and videos of their own where this information can be obtained. I’m personally a donor and a big-time supporter of the project. They label the process as “socioeconomic cyberneering”. Basically, it is the implementation of technology for the sake of improving life for ALL humans, not just the rich. A world where true free thought is the norm, and not thought that is boxed in by oppressive obsolete systems.

The first argument that everyone who hears such a radical concept brings is “it’ll never happen because humans are too selfish and violent.” This is why I discussed the falsities of that statement in the previous entries of this series prior to this one. Once we understand how simple we as beings are, we can then understand how we are denying ourselves a much better way of life. We should be disgusted by the thought of an individual who is sick and in desperate need of medical care needing money to receive medical treatment or otherwise be left for dead. We should be disgusted by the idea of sending our young, who have so much to offer in their prime, off to waste their one life away dying in a war that doesn’t even affect less than 1% of the universe.

We should be disgusted when we see security guards and surveillance cameras around grocery stores when food (a necessity for the continuity of life) becomes increasingly unaffordable for the poor. We should be disgusted when we see fines being issued or cars being towed (seized) from individuals commuting to work and held for a fee (ransom), individuals who are trying to provide for themselves and their families all because a man-made law has told them a white sticker with some ink on it should have been switched out with a green sticker with some ink on it. And finally, we should be disgusted when were hear: “it’s just the way it is.” The callousness of our society does not align with the principles of the religions we boastfully proclaim to be apart of.

Our minds are imprisoned because we spend more time worrying about how to overcome the next financial hurdle and less time asking ourselves “why?”. We are more bothered by the sight of a thief stealing food than we are the starving homeless person on the street. We don’t ask ourselves “why is this person stealing that item? Are they hungry? Are they in desperate need of money to buy their next drug? What kind of homelife or upbringing did they have that deprived them of the guidance to teach them alternate ways of overcoming the problems in their life outside of ‘crime’?” Instead, we demand they be locked up and never allowed to see daylight again! Something is very wrong with our world.

In closing, the only way this will ever be accomplished is to make our first step the most important one. Education. Our educational system is a parody of the word “education”. Our schools are not centered around improvement of the individual or the training of their minds. Instead, they are centers for developing the next work force by teaching them the basics and pushing them through so that at the age of eighteen, they become good employees. This is why when most high school students reach their senior year they are bombarded with three choices. Military, trade school, or college. All three are institutions of exploitation, not exploration. All three focus on the corporations, and not the individual. We must reformulate our curriculums to teach our youth how to think, not what to think. Our schools should be humanity driven and not career driven. Our students should be taught how to solve problems instead of telling them to vote their way out of problems. We cannot vote our way out of the mess we are in, we can only come together and fix things without the burdensome hierarchy of pointless money driven regulations. We must learn to critically think, ask questions, listen, and test our assumptions so that we can become iconoclasts. It won’t be long before the desire to improve our way of life overcomes the desire for money. We must drop our selfishness and understand that there is no greater incentive than the witnessing of you and your fellow man/woman living far better lives than what you were born into thanks to your efforts.  

Below is the order of change needed to become an iconoclast and bring real positive change to our society. Not political changing from red to blue or vice versa, but actual change.

Step 1: Grassroots education with a focus of training others how to critically think about the world they live in and the institutions they’ve been trained to live under. Learning the true meaning of incentive and examining problems the way scientist would.

Step 2: Look for solutions by following the natural laws of the universe. These means avoid the pointless effort of legislating and instead find concrete methods to overcome each issue. Every problem has a source and the source must be fixed, not the symptom. Same as a sickness.

Step 3: Disregard the dilemma of “cost effectiveness” and refocus on the progression and betterment of humanity. The idea of profit should be shunned while the idea of well being should be embraced.

Step 4: Non-complicity. It is important that we don’t fall into the familiar habit of letting our minds wonder and laziness to creep in. As technology increases, we must also increase with it. A common issue we are seeing today is the advancement of technology and the dumbing down of a generation. As an AI learns to think more, so should we. As a computer scans every option to find a problem, so should we.

This is my own personal list and by no means is it a full proof plan. However, it’s better to present a plan of action otherwise everything prior becomes useless information. On that note, I feel it’s best to end this series with two inspiring quotes to sum up it all.

“In order to design a future of positive change, we must first become experts at changing our minds. ___ If you think we can’t change the world, It just means you’re not one of those that will.” -Jacque Fresco