Plutopia, a name I coined for an Ideal Form of Society
I have developed an idea for a form of government, which I suspect might be the best solution in terms of type of government for many nations today. I call this form of government Plutopia, Plutopian, Plutopianism. I first expressed this idea, to the best of my recollection, a few years ago by reading the idea into an answering machine at some media outlet(s). Then: best I can remember I first named the idea "Plutopianism" in an email I sent to "Chatham House" on January 14 2005; on January 30 I discussed it again in an email to the "World Social Forum"; and on 29 September I mentioned Plutopianism again in an email to Tim Bolen, who as I recall is some guy who appeared on the George Noory late night radio show.
Excerpt from my email (Jan 14 2005) to Chatham House:
Suppose the truth was that if there are more than 10 billion people in the world, the damage to the ecosystem will screw up the elite and most of the planet.
In that event, it could be unnecessary and counterproductive to attempt draconian measures such as massive disease induced exterminations.
Take for example a hypothetical society, "PLutopia", in which women recieving X level of assistance agree to limit themselves to having one child only. As a result, 33 percent of women in Plutopia, the Plutopian proletariat, have one child. In Plutopia, if a woman wants to have more than three children, she has to buy a license to do so from the state. In Plutopia, one percent of women, the Plutonian elite, have an average of 5 children each. In Plutopia, the remaining 66 percent of women, the Plutonian volk, content themselves with having 2.4 children each, many stopping at two due to the operation they have to undergo if they have 3 children. Guess what? in Plutonia, the average woman has 2.0 children, the (not counting ever-lengthening life-spans) zero population growth level.
Excerpt from my email (Jan 30 2005) to the World Social Forum:
Right now my idea re the problems of the world, is that the population of the world needs to be managed in a way that corresponds to whatever the truth is regarding the maximum number of persons the world can sustain without doing serious damage to itself and turning the world into a disaster area for the vast majority of the world's people.
There is disagreement regarding what this maximum sustainable level is. Depending on the maximum sustainable population the world is able to sustain, the population (as I see the issue now) should be managed according to the following "Plutopian" (name I coined) formula: With Y being greater than X, and Z representing the maximum sustainable population in the world, women who get assistance from the state agree to limit themselves to X number of children, women in general are limited to Y number of children, and women who want to have more than Y number of children have to buy licenses from the state in order to do so, the levels X and Y are set at depending on Z.
My current state of mind, is to fear what the result could be, if an elite were to conclude that its own prosperity and survival depended on eliminating a large proportion of mankind, due to the planet earth's ecological inability to sustain a given population level.
Excerpt from my email (Sep 30 2005) to the World Social Forum:
In the end we have to face the fact that misanthropic tendencies have been unleashed in the world due to the high level of population growth caused by public health and agricultural improvements. I have dreamt up a way to deal with this kind of misanthropism, which I call "plutopianism". The Plutopian society agrees to give women the basics of live in exchange for a given level of service and the women agreeing to limit the number of children they have to a given level. In the Plutopian society, women have to buy licenses in order to have more children than the general limit. The wild tiger in the human race so to speak is preserved against overcivilization by placing no limits on how many children men have (then you have the fact that practically speaking it is easier to tell how many kids a woman has had than how many kids a man has fathered).
Complete text of my 2005 emails re "Plutopia":
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/vincemoon/plutopianism.htm
@2005 David Virgil Hobbs
Excerpt from my email (Jan 14 2005) to Chatham House:
Suppose the truth was that if there are more than 10 billion people in the world, the damage to the ecosystem will screw up the elite and most of the planet.
In that event, it could be unnecessary and counterproductive to attempt draconian measures such as massive disease induced exterminations.
Take for example a hypothetical society, "PLutopia", in which women recieving X level of assistance agree to limit themselves to having one child only. As a result, 33 percent of women in Plutopia, the Plutopian proletariat, have one child. In Plutopia, if a woman wants to have more than three children, she has to buy a license to do so from the state. In Plutopia, one percent of women, the Plutonian elite, have an average of 5 children each. In Plutopia, the remaining 66 percent of women, the Plutonian volk, content themselves with having 2.4 children each, many stopping at two due to the operation they have to undergo if they have 3 children. Guess what? in Plutonia, the average woman has 2.0 children, the (not counting ever-lengthening life-spans) zero population growth level.
Excerpt from my email (Jan 30 2005) to the World Social Forum:
Right now my idea re the problems of the world, is that the population of the world needs to be managed in a way that corresponds to whatever the truth is regarding the maximum number of persons the world can sustain without doing serious damage to itself and turning the world into a disaster area for the vast majority of the world's people.
There is disagreement regarding what this maximum sustainable level is. Depending on the maximum sustainable population the world is able to sustain, the population (as I see the issue now) should be managed according to the following "Plutopian" (name I coined) formula: With Y being greater than X, and Z representing the maximum sustainable population in the world, women who get assistance from the state agree to limit themselves to X number of children, women in general are limited to Y number of children, and women who want to have more than Y number of children have to buy licenses from the state in order to do so, the levels X and Y are set at depending on Z.
My current state of mind, is to fear what the result could be, if an elite were to conclude that its own prosperity and survival depended on eliminating a large proportion of mankind, due to the planet earth's ecological inability to sustain a given population level.
Excerpt from my email (Sep 30 2005) to the World Social Forum:
In the end we have to face the fact that misanthropic tendencies have been unleashed in the world due to the high level of population growth caused by public health and agricultural improvements. I have dreamt up a way to deal with this kind of misanthropism, which I call "plutopianism". The Plutopian society agrees to give women the basics of live in exchange for a given level of service and the women agreeing to limit the number of children they have to a given level. In the Plutopian society, women have to buy licenses in order to have more children than the general limit. The wild tiger in the human race so to speak is preserved against overcivilization by placing no limits on how many children men have (then you have the fact that practically speaking it is easier to tell how many kids a woman has had than how many kids a man has fathered).
Complete text of my 2005 emails re "Plutopia":
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/vincemoon/plutopianism.htm
@2005 David Virgil Hobbs
posted by David Virgil at 8:36 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home