Preventing Extinction: Introduction

We, the members of the human race, are gathered together at the edge of an abyss.

We are being pushed closer and closer to the edge by the course of events which appear to be beyond our control.

If we go over, nothing the human race has ever done in its entire history will mean anything.  We have made wonderful pieces of art and built fantastic structures.  There will be no one to appreciate them (if they are aren’t destroyed in the events that destroy us), after we are gone.  People have fought for things they believed in and won victories.  Beliefs will no longer mean anything if there are no people left to hold them.  There has been a lot of love passed along over the 50,000 years or so that humans have been here, and many organizations have been created to do good deeds.  We have stories and songs, memories, books, and have made some great scientific achievements.

This will all become meaningless if we perish.

And there seems to be nothing we can do.

A lot of people are crying about this.

A lot are praying.  They beg whatever gods they believe in to fix things for us.

A lot of people do something they call ‘protesting.’ They carry signs saying ‘this is not what I want to happen and those of you who want it to happen (a group they think must exist or the problems wouldn’t exist) are wrong and should change.’

Some people write letters to the people who they have been raised to believe love them deeply, love the human race deeply, and are trying to fix it all:   the entities called ‘governments of countries.’  We will see that these entities were never designed to, and are incapable of, bringing the human race together to work on common goals.  This is, in fact, the exact opposite of what they were designed to do.  Relying on them to save us is just as naive as sheep relying on wolves to save them from predators.

We hold hands and sing Kamiah.  We practice random acts of kindness.  We try one religion after another, hoping we can hit on the right deity or deities (the ones that really exist and are in charge of everything), and give the people who represent them here on earth enough money to convince them to use their power over the gods to get them to do what we want (saving the human race) rather than the things the priests and shamans want done.  We waste our wishes upon evening stars or when throwing coins into fountains:  rather than asking for selfish things, we ask for world peace (or at least an end to the current ongoing war) or a clean world (or at least a little bit cleaner air) for future generations.

None of this helps.  We move closer and closer to the edge every day.  The crowds are getting denser and gathering closer to us each day.  Soon, the pressure will be too great and we will have nowhere to go but over the edge.

A Different Approach

In the past few centuries, humans have found that science is not an evil mode of thought created by the devil that it was once thought to be.   It is a simple tool that we can use to solve problems that we can’t solve using our feelings, emotions, and the prejudices and instincts that we have inherited through the generations from our ancient ancestors.

We can see things happening with our own eyes.  We can accept that the are happening and formulate theories about why things happen this way.

For all of history—at least until very recently—Science was seen as a tool of evil.  The leaders know how things work.  They organize the schools that teach us these things.  Long before anyone now alive was born, the leaders organized with the priests and scholars to figure it all out.  They determined the reasons behind everything.  They taught us these reasons, not to control us (even though accepting their findings gave them the power to control us) but because they loved us more than anything and wanted the best life for all of us.

Sometimes, we see things that seem to indicate that the principles they told us hold don’t really hold.  They taught us to be wary of this message.  They taught us that, if our eyes tell us things that go against the things we were raised to believe, our eyes are tricking us and we must use our willpower to force ourselves to ignore the things we see.

Galileo was convicted of ‘teaching false sciences’ and ‘corrupting youth’ because he claimed he saw things that the people who ran the system claimed could not be happening. It had long been known that the earth was the was the center of the universe and the only possible center of orbital movement.  Nothing could orbit any other body.  Galileo built a telescope and could see that planet Jupiter has four large moons that are clearly orbiting it.  (You can see this with any good pair of binoculars or even a cheap telescope).   In 1610 he published a book of drawings he had made of things he had seen through his telescope called Sidereus Nuncius.  He was arrested and put on trial for the crimes listed above.

His defense was simple:  He was only drawing what he saw.  Anyone who looked through the telescope would see the same things.  He wasn’t trying to corrupt anyone or change the way they thought, he only wanted them to see the things he saw.

He convinced the judge to let him conduct a test:  He took the jury to his home at night and let the jury members look through his telescope.  They saw the same things he had seen.

What was the reaction?

Did they let him off?

Of course not.  The prosecutors added a charge of sorcery to the incitement.  Somehow, Galileo had made people see things that couldn’t exist because they violated the known laws of physics and astronomy.  The prosecutors brought forward experts who testified to this and the jury eventually voted to convict:  They had been raised and trained well and trusted the arguments of the experts above the evidence of their own eyes.

People who call themselves ‘scientists’ then tell us that the world may not really work the way we have been raised to believe it works.

They tell us the things we see with our eyes are actually happening, even thought the experts, authorities and government officials all tell us they are not happening. They tell us better systems are possible. They tell us that we can find these systems if we simply use the mental tools we currently use to help us build better weapons to understand our societies.

Until very recently, these people were simply removed from society.  The authorities killed Pythagoras this way:  He was giving a lecture in Croton (now a part of the Italy) about the same basic ideas this book is about:  ways to use logic and reason to understand the reason our world works as it does.  The authorities had soldiers surround the lecture building and block all exits.  Then they set the building on fire, burning it to the ground and killing everyone inside (including Pythagoras and all who defied the warnings of the authorities and went to listen to this dangerous man).

There are certain areas that are off limits.  We aren’t supposed to use logic, science, or reason in these areas.  Most importantly, we must accept the system that has been in place for thousands of years, the one that provides great benefits to a tiny minority at the expense of the great majority, is the only system possible.

Socrates took up the ideas of Pythagoras about a century later.  We have partial transcripts of his trial and you can read his words. He really thought the world had advanced:  we were no longer the primitive animals that killed people who tried to make the world better.  But history shows he was wrong.  The prosecutors made their arguments:  Socrates was dangerous.  He didn’t look at the world the way we are supposed to look at it.  (In his time, this crime was called ‘heresy.’  Much later, George Orwell would call it ‘thoughtcrime.’  We are all supposed to know the right way to think.  Socrates didn’t seem to get it.)  His second indictment was one that you might call ‘making too much sense.’ (Parts of the trial transcripts still exist, and they include his answer to this charge.  It is almost funny to read it:  how can it be a crime to make sense?  He is clearly being sarcastic when he replies, but it is not funny: he wanted to make the world better and the people reacted by having him put to death.)  He was convincing and he ‘corrupted’ others with his dangerous ideas: better societies were possible.

More than a thousand years later, Sir Thomas More was beheaded in the Tower of London.  More had written a book claiming entirely different societies were possible and collaborated with a person who had live in Inca societies in South America (before the massive plagues that wiped out all of their civilization and about 99% of their population).  More compared the societies and claimed they clearly operated entirely differently.  In the second part of the book, he proposes that we consider that people may be able to live differently, in societies that were not divided into ‘countries’ (the Inca didn’t accept the principle of territorial sovereignty, which must be accepted into divide the land into the entities we call ‘countries’).  If you go to the internet and read about this, you will find some rather strange and bizarre explanation to make it appear that he was put to death for an entirely different reason, and the ideas in this book weren’t responsible.  But the fact that his book was totally rewritten to alter its meaning after he had been put to death, and then the altered book was then released under the same title as the original (hiding the real words of More from readers) tells us that the book had things in it that the government thought were dangerous.

For a long time, all science was banned (except, of course, military research) for fear it would be used to try to change the system.  In very recent times (the past two centuries) science has lost a lot of its stigma.  It is acceptable to us it in almost all areas of human analysis.  It is acceptable, for example, to use science to help us design and build nuclear bombs.  In fact, who build these devices have to be able to think totally logically and not let emotion enter their thoughts at all.

In the United States the leaders of the bomb project considered and rejected both Eliise Meitner and Albert Einstein, even though they were the people who had discovered the processes and knew more about how to turn the theories into practical devices than anyone on earth. Why? Psychologists profiled all prospective scientists.   They determined that these two people had ‘displayed pacifist tendencies.’   You can’t have people who may let morality or any other dangerous mental perspectives be involved in a project like this:  The people recruited had to think like machines and do what they are told, regardless of the consequences.

However, it is still not considered to be acceptable to use science in certain specific areas.

For example, why do we want nuclear bombs in the first place?

What are the forces that cause the human population to divide into the entities called ‘countries’ and fight (using tools like nuclear bombs) over the locations of the imaginary lines called ‘borders?’

What is the logic behind having children pledge their allegiance to these entities (countries) and taught false histories that glorify war and make it appear noble?

Why is the location of the imaginary lines that separate the entities we call ‘countries’ important at all, let alone important enough to organize mass murder events to change?

How did these ideas originate?

How did they evolve from their early forms into their current form?

I suspect that, when you read the above lines, you felt a kind of quiver in your mind.  This are things that we really aren’t supposed to think about, at least not in logical analysis.  We are supposed to love our countries.  We are supposed to approach them with feelings of respect and patriotism. If they need us to die for them, we are supposed to feel that is our most sacred obligation.  We are supposed help participate in the organized activities that advance the interests of what we are told are ‘our countries’ even if this harms the human race as a whole.  Why?  This is not a question to be asked.  Socrates wasn’t smart enough (or hadn’t been well enough indoctrinated) to realize this was a dangerous question.  It was not to be asked when he asked it and it is not to be asked now.

However, if we refuse to use our greatest gift, our intellects, to solve the problems that threaten us, we will never solve them.  This book proposes that we can use science to understand the way the entities we call ‘societies’ work. It proposes that these societies operate in accordance with scientific principles that we can all understand. It proposes that, if we understand these things, we will realize that the societies we inherited from our evolutionary ancestors (apes lived the same way, as we will see) are simplistic and primitive and totally unable to meet the long-term needs of a species of technologically sophisticated thinking beings with physical needs.

We are in this category. The animal societies we inherited can’t meet our needs.

It shows how to analyze societies scientifically.  It shows that the basic forces of the kind of society we inherited from our evolutionary ancestors on earth (territorial sovereignty societies) push inextricably toward violent conflict and destruction.  This happens for very clear scientific reasons that have nothing whatever to do with ‘evil’ or ‘bad karma’ or ‘kismet’ or any bizarre intentions of invisible super beings who live in the sky and enjoy watching the killing.

We are at a unique time in history.  We are learning that many of the  things people have believed for all of history are, in fact, wrong.  We are learning that things that people have been told are totally fixed and are unchangeable are, in fact, under the control of the dominant species on this world, the human race.  We are learning that science isn’t a bogyman that we must bury our heads in the sand to avoid, but is a key that can enlighten us and solve problems we can’t solve any other way.

Preventing Extinction is about using the tools that are unique to our time and have never existed before to change things that need to be changed to put us onto a different path through time.  We came to exist through processes we can understand.  The societies we inherited came to exist as a result of processes we can understand.  They work in very understandable ways and push toward war and destruction because of forces that we can understand and control. (In other words, not because of evil forces that we can only hope higher powers fix for us.)  We are in our current mess because of processes we can understand.  We can get out of it by using the one power that we have that no other animal on earth has, our intellect.  Preventing Extinction  explains how to make this happen.

Preventing Extinction is not a single book but a series of three books with three different purposes.  The books are:

Book 1.  Reforming Societies

Book 2.  Anatomy of War

Book 3.  Anatomy of Destruction

Reforming Societies


Reforming Societies, shows that the societies we live in now are not sound and healthy societies that are designed to meet the needs of the human race.  These systems are not functional and have no structures that are capable of turning the collective will of the human race into reality.  In fact, these aren’t really even human societies:  They operate according to the same rules as the societies of apes, hyenas, wolves, and many other species of animals that organize into groups to take control of territory to use as exclusive feeding grounds for the groups and then use fanatical violence against other groups to prevent them from infringing in their exclusivity (‘sovereignty’) over that territory.

Humans divide the world into territories with borders. Many other animals do the same thing.  The other animals that act this way include many primate species (we are primates) including several of the species that DNA evidence shows are our closest evolutionary ancestors in the animal kingdom.  We will see that these societies actually bring evolutionary advantages to most of the species that have them.  They are competing in ‘winner take all’ battles that leave winners wit the rights to food, water, and places where they can raise their offspring.  The losers have none of these things and perish.  Groups with greater capabilities, including greater mental capabilities, have great advantages in these competitions. Over time, the groups with greater capabilities will gain more land and their population will grow.  Those with lesser capabilities will disappear.  The constant competition will force them to be sharp all the time and will cause any mutations that give any group mental advantages to become widespread, with any that cause lower intelligence disappearing.

This is a cruel, barbaric, and brutal process.  But it has an evolutionary purpose:  It causes any genetic advantages that lead to superior intellects to quickly turn into the standard genetic profile of the highest animals on earth.  It supports evolution.  It causes the mental capabilities of the animals that organize this way to increase over time.

This model worked for our ape ancestors.  It even worked, to some extent, for the Homo Habilis, the Homo Neanderthalis, and even the Homo Sapiens Neanderthalis (a subspecies of our own species which evolved from Homo Neanderthalis) that came before us.  But there is a time when this competitive model becomes dangerous and, shortly after that, suicidal.

At a certain point, we became capable of feats of intellect that allowed us to build weapons that were fantastically destructive. Only a short time ago, our ancestors figured out how to smelt metals (remove them from rocks using very hot furnaces) and forge the metals into alloys of great strength.  They figured out how to mix common materials to make explosives.  They put these things together to make bombs, cannon, grenades, muskets, and rockets.  They figured out how to make engines to carry the bombs to the enemies and drop them in ways that killed hundreds and then thousands and finally hundreds of thousands of people in a single raid.  Shortly after this, they found ways to build bombs that could kill millions of people and, shortly after that, they figured out how to make bombs that could kill everyone if they were used for this purpose.

Once we reached a certain level of technological sophistication, we outgrew the conflict-based territorial systems we inherited from our evolutionary ancestors.  These societies can’t meet our needs now.  They work in ways that harm us.  Nature requires all animals to adapt to changing conditions.  Those that don’t disappear and are replaced, eventually, by animals that were able to adapt.

We are now at a decision point.

We must make a choice.

If we want, we can use our intellects to find a way t adapt to the changing conditions of our existence.  The competitive territorial system can’t work for us.  We need something else.  If we want, we can use or intellects to find something better and figure out how to put it into place.

We have another option:

We can decide we love the system we inherited from our animal ancestors and refuse to give it up.   We can refuse to even consider alternatives.  We can keep the competitive model in place and continue to use or intellects to build better and better weapons to accomplish animalistic goals.  We can act like wolves, hyenas, gorillas, chimpanzees, and other highly territorial animals and fight over territorial borders, using the best weapons we can build.  Eventually, the same forces that push us to keep waging these wars will push us to use the weapons that we already have, or perhaps some new weapons that have the same capacity.  This is a choice that we can make.  But if we make it, we are making a decision that I don’t think any group of people have a right to make.  We are deciding that the human period on earth has come to an end and everything we have ever done in our entire existence is meaningless.

If we want to survive, we need to choose option one, above.  We have our own societies.  We have to figure out how truly human societies work.  Then, we have to figure out how we can change the path of human events so that we leave the path we are now on and head down a path that leads to these societies.

Volume One of Preventing Extinction, called, Reforming Societies, is about ‘reforming’ or changing the form of the societies that are now in place on earth.  It is possible for beings that are on the verge of gaining the power of higher reasoning but are not fully there, and happen to have inherited dangerous animal societies, to understand their situation and plan out a set of steps that will take them to well-designed societies that can meet their needs.

There are no magical forces involved.  We do this by mumbling under our breath to some invisible being that we hope lives in the sky and expect the combined weight of everyone mumbling at the same time will wake this being and make it issue an incantation that will fix it all.  We can’t do it by whining (another word for ‘protesting’) against the people who are in charge of the dangerous societies and begging them to start to play nice.  We can’t do this by discussing what a mysterious ‘they’ would do if ‘they’ existed and had power to do anything at all.  We have been trying the shortcuts, the spells, the wishing and hoping, the love-ins, hand holding, and other non-intellectual solutions that would, if they worked, allow us to solve the problems without having to put any kind of mental effort into the project for all of history.

None of these things have worked.

There is no reason to think they will suddenly start working.  We need to accept that, if we want to survive, we will have to do the one thing that logic tells us is likely to actually work:  We need roll up our sleeves and go to work.  We need to figure out where we are and how we got here.  We need to accept that most of the fields that claim to have information about how societies work don’t really tell us how societies of technologically sophisticated thinking beings work.  They tell us how conflict-based ape societies work.   If we want to understand the human condition, we will have to start fresh and not take anything for granted or assume that anything that people before us figured out is correct. This is hard to do.  People don’t like to have to abandon past efforts and start fresh.  But, sometimes, there is no other way.

We need to find a perspective that allows us to look at the big picture and figure out the needs of thinking beings with physical needs in general, wherever they are in this vast universe.

We need to figure out what works for beings in this category and what does not work for them.  We need to accept that these laws apply to us because we fall into this category.  We need to figure out what practical steps such beings would take, when they first gain awareness of these basic realities, to move to sound societies.

Then we need to take them.

It can be done.  I am confident that, if you read this book with enough mental attention to really understand it, you will agree with this totally.  We, the members of human race and inhabitants of this tiny blue speck of dust in this immense universe called ‘earth,’ can make it happen.

You will see that the technical steps necessary are not particularly challenging or difficult.  They work by creating structures that allow the human race to work together in an organized way.  They are designed to ‘empower’ the human race and turn us into something I call a ‘community of humankind.’

The human race is not now a ‘community.’  We are a collection of eight billion people divided into several hundred teams called ‘countries’ that are all working at cross purposes.   There is nothing tying us together into a community. There are no tools we can use to work together to meet our common needs.

The technical steps involve building these tools.  This is not hard.  The hard part is getting people to let people accept, in their own minds, that the human race has outgrown the animal societies of our evolutionary ancestors.  The hard part is getting people to accept that the entities called ‘independent and sovereign countries’ are artifacts of our primitive past, and not tools that we can use to move the human race toward a better future.  The people who run these entities (the ‘countries’) and tell you they love the human race and believe that all men were created equal and endowed by their creator with inalienable rights that they are there to protect, then take money away from you to build bombs that can destroy this world, are lying to you.  They are not in the side of the human race.  Only one entity is on the side of ‘the human race:’  That is the human race itself.

We have to accept that we have conflict between two sides of our beings.  We have animal sides that make us want to fight and kill and even give our lives defending the territories that the people our group claims as its ‘founders’ and past members have conquered.   Our animal sides make us want to accept that victory in these fights is more important than anything else; it is, in fact, more important than existence itself.  If we must use bombs that can destroy the world to protect the monopoly rights to (or ‘sovereignty over’) a certain piece of dirt on this world, our animal sides tell us we have no choice.  Our priority is to protect our territory.  Existence can be sacrificed.

We also have human sides.

They make us want to end the fighting and work with others to gain the incredible benefits of cooperation that could allow all to live better.  They make us want to protect the wonderful world around us, rather than rape it to get materials for the wars.

We need to accept that the animal impulses are incredibly strong.  They have been honed by millions of years of evolution.  We experience them as emotions, loyalty for the entity we are raised to accept as our tribe, troop, or nation, fear and mistrust off outsiders, and hatred of any who organize to do things that advance the interests of different groups over the interests of people in our group.  We need to accept that these feelings are all strong and we all inherited them.  But they are irrational.  They are animal impulses that we inherited from beings that didn’t have the ability to use reason at all.

We need to understand that our human sides just came to exist.  They are still babies.  The impulses they create have a hard time competing with the mature and well developed animal sides.  We need to accept there is a battle going on in all of us between these two sides of our beings and that, in most people, the animal side wins this battle. We then need to understand that reason and logic are there in all of us and even the most animalistic have impulses that push us all to use it.

We can strengthen the human side if we use the right tools.  If we know how things work, we can show the people around us that they make a difference.  We can turn them from the animal side of the force to the human side.

As I pointed out earlier, the technical steps we need to take are not very difficult or complicated.  The hard part involves getting a certain state of mind.  If we all had the right state of mind, we would all see the steps we need to take and take them.  (They really are obvious, as you will see.  People have been trying to put us onto the right path for a very long time.)  If only a few of us know what to do, we can have some effect, but can’t do it all.  We need ‘enough’ people to understand what steps are needed, and how they work.  We need people who are doubtful and afraid to take the step to rationality to understand that they have allies and don’t have to do it alone.

This book, Reforming Societies, explains both the technical steps needed and the tools we can use to help people understand that, if we take them, there is real hope for our race.  This book is the first book in the three book Preventing Extinction series.  We must do more than simply reform our societies in order to survive.  The two other books explain the other steps.  The first is called ‘Anatomy of War.’

Anatomy of War

War has been a part of our ancestral societies since long before we evolved into humans.  Our chimp ancestors made war and their gorilla ancestors made war.  (Both of these subspecies still do.)   As our early human ancestors gained the ability to reason, some people used this skill to take advantage of the forces pushing for war. They used their intellects to find ways to make themselves better off by preying on the forces pushing for organized mass murder within the different groups.

They figured out how to profit from war.

Once they could do this, they wanted as much war as they could create.  They found ways to make war happen when it otherwise wouldn’t have happened.  They found ways to strengthen the basic animalistic bonds that tie the people of the ‘countries’ together and to strengthen the mistrust and fear of those born outside of the groups. They found out how to kindle resentment of outsiders into passionate white hot flames of hatred and paranoid fear.  They found ways to manipulate societies so that the great majority of the people in the world were helpless pawns who were forced to participate in an ever-growing military complex in order to stay alive.

If we want to prevent the extinction of our race, we must understand this:  Some very powerful people in our world profit from war. They will do everything in their power to make sure there is as much of it as they can create.  As we reform societies, we will move to systems where it is harder and harder for them to create the necessary conditions.  (The systems designed to unify the human race and give us common tools we can use to advance our common interests will make it harder to push us apart.)  War will become less and less likely.  However, the risks of war are so serious that we can’t simply sit back and wait until it is no longer possible to create the conditions necessary for war, because even a minor war can escalate to a world-ending event.  We need to take precautions.  To do this, we need to understand the steps the rich and powerful take that lead to war, the way they rationalize these steps and induce others to support them, and the way we can reduce the forces that push the world toward war.  Anatomy of War deals with these matters.

The third book in the Preventing Extinction series is ‘Anatomy of Destruction.’

Anatomy of Destruction

The type of society we inherited form our animal ancestors is built on group monopolization of the resources of a territory. Everything inside the borders belongs to the group, to use to meet the needs of the group.  The primary need of the groups humans we call ‘countries’ is war.  Resources help win wars.

As human intellect grew through evolution, people learned they could take advantage of this important relationship.  They could manipulate the structures of the war-driven societies to make personal profit raping the world.

The reforms discussed in this book will transfer rights that currently belong to the largest destroyers in the world (the entities called ‘governments of countries’ and their primary assistants in destruction called, ‘global corporations’) to the one entity that has the strongest stake in protecting the world, the human race itself.

We all want a healthy and sustainable world for ourselves and our posterity.   We just don’t have any tools that we can use to turn our collective desires into reality.  The first book in the series, Reforming Societies, explains tools we can create to empower the human race and make our desires important.

We can use these tools to change the structures that tie the right to make profits to destruction.

An aside: Under normal circumstances, the least destructive method of doing anything is the most profitable.  The reason is simple:  the things that are destroyed have costs.  They are expensive.   The people who produce would (if they had to pay the full value of the things they destroy) want to destroy as little as possible so they had the lowest possible costs and therefore the highest possible profits.  As Anatomy of Destruction shows, totally non-destructive alternatives are possible to make virtually everything that is now produced destructively.  If market forces operated, and people who destroyed had to pay the full costs of destruction, there wouldn’t be any destruction.  We wouldn’t have to do anything to make it disappear because market forces would make this happen without any outside human effort. These market forces only work if the people who make decisions in production have to pay the full costs of the things they destroy.  Most of the people who are in positions of power and have the ability to make policy have a vested in the destruction.  (They are either destroyers themselves or on the payrolls of the destructive companies.)   They have created policies that allow destroyers to get resources without having to pay the full costs that are imposed on the world by their destruction.  The great majority of these costs are transferred to the human race as a whole.  (They are ‘externalized’ to use the formal economic term.)   Destruction is still expensive, but not for the destroyers themselves.  They get the things they destroy for a tiny fraction of their true costs.  This allows them to make profits doing things that would ordinarily not be profitable. In addition to this, the policy makers have set up systems that make it illegal or impossibly expensive to use non-destructive methods.  (It is illegal in most countries for private producers to sell solar-generated electricity  ‘into the grid.’  In the United States, this is due to a law specifically designed to prevent solar, called PURPA.  If you produce more electricity than you use using solar, as I do, you basically have to give it to your local utility for free; you can’t sell it.  If you try, the utilities can sue you to force you to stop, then the courts will take away everything you own to pay the utilities for the costs of the suit.) Taxes on non-destructive energy systems, including solar, are the highest taxes in the world.  In addition to this, the policies require that money be taken away from everyone (as taxes, paid almost entirely by people who work for a living) and used to subsidize the destruction.  The destroyers are paid, in cash, per unit of destruction, for everything they destroy. The result:  the normal relationship that would hold if there were no interference does not hold.  Destruction is profitable when it would otherwise not be.  Anatomy of Destruction shows the way these systems developed and how they work.

As the changes discussed in Reforming Societies happen, destruction will become less and less profitable.  Eventually, the natural forces discussed in the text box above will hold and it will not be profitable at all.

These changes will take time however.  We may not have the time, if we simply wait and do nothing.  We need to understand the forces behind destruction better if we are to take the necessary steps.  Anatomy of Destruction deals with these forces.  It shows how people have manipulated the system for personal gain.  It explains the tools they use and the way they trick us into thinking they are the good guys trying to make the world better so that the people who would oppose them if they understood what they are doing become their proud backers and help them rape the planet.  It shows what we can do to weaken the influence of these people and slow the rates of destruction while the reforms take place.

If we want to prevent extinction, we have to do a lot.

We have to change the mindset of the human race in ways that will get people to start working for the benefit of the human race rather than for the benefit of the specific territorial group (country) that claims they belong to that country.  We need to create tools that make it possible for them actually make a difference, once they have decided it is the right thing to do.  We also have to keep the problems that threaten us under control for long enough for the structural changes to take effect.

I wish there were an easier way.

I wish that I had reason to believe there really is a all-powerful superbeing in the sky who will fix things if enough people mumble for it to do so.  I wish that wishes worked to fix problems.  But I don’t have any reason to believe these things.  I know that I am a physical being that can affect the realities of the world around me by actually doing things.  I know that there are eight billion other intelligent beings in this world who have this same ability.  I know my words can turn into their thoughts and these thoughts can help them come around to the above way of thinking.

I know this will be hard

But sometimes there is no easy way.

I hope you will take the time to understand the points of this the Preventing Extinction series.  It deals with unconventional ideas; this means that it isn’t going to fit easily with the things you were raised to believe about the way the world works.  It proposes that we evolved from primitive and barbaric animals and are only now barely gaining the ability to live as intelligent beings.  It proposes that the societies around us are not human societies, they are animal societies, built by animals and run in accordance with rules that apply to savage, barbaric, and totally irrational animals.  It proposes that there are tools we can use to transfer rights and powers from the entities that have all the power now (the entities we call ‘countries’) to the one entity that has the best interests of the human race at the top of its priority list:  the human race itself.  It shows how to do this and shows how you can help.

The books in the Preventing Extinction series propose that this is the only path that takes us away from the mess that evolutionary forces and our foolish ancestors have created and we are now in.

There are no other options.

No one is going to do it for us.  If we want it done, we have to do it ourselves.

Comments (1)

  • Annie Nymous


    this is a test comment by Annie

Comments are closed