The Treason Trilogy: Capitalism, Terror and Doom

2013, Economics  -   68 Comments
Ratings: 8.49/10 from 152 users.

Casino Capitalism. The moment that defined the chaos of the 21st century is the financial atomic bomb that exploded in the heart of the world's banking system, sucking up the lifeblood of the global economy, the credit that keeps the wheels of fortune turning. Banks grown too big to go bust held nations to ransom and trillions of dollars cascaded into the bankers vaults. Leaders of the twentieth largest economies promised never again but once again they've betrayed their duty to protect the wealth and the welfare of their people.

The Crucible of Terror. Barack Obama's plan to defeat terrorists is like throwing petrol on a fire. The President's dream of peace is straitjacketed by economic policies that incubate the seeds of violence. How did the most powerful man on earth become prisoner of a false economic doctrine which threatens the security of the United States and nations around the world? Capitalism was conceived nearly 500 years ago with the Royal act of sacrilege. When Henry VIII demolished the religious life of his nation to enrich himself he laid the foundations for the kind of violence that now blights every corner of the world.

The Temple of Doom. Humans have taken control of the destiny of all life on Earth. What was once the domain of the Gods is now in the hands of mortals and their leaders are worshipers in the Temple of Doom. For hundreds of thousands of years the oceans moved with the ups and downs of the levels of the greenhouse gases, but then the humans begun releasing a new layer of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Some scientists say this will rise the global temperatures causing an environmental catastrophe. Rising sea levels of just a few meters would flood most of the coastline of United States. Around the world thousands of cities would be submerged by nature's retribution. Governments say they want to reduce greenhouse gases and protect species, like fish in the oceans, that are exposed to the economics of greed.

More great documentaries

68 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Navjass

    Nice storie

  2. Joshua Marks

    This doc is a close look at several historic developments leading to our current global "dilemma" - 'treasonous,' strategic, and coordinated powers operating at the "top." Broad perspective on our modern global financial system, the use of chaos and the war on "terror," and detailing the process of commodification of natural resources including "cap and trade" carbon strategies. If the metaphor is chess, and we add in a historic and current reality of the military industrial complex, ownership/control of global media, Big-Ag, Big-Pharma... the trilogy seems to be pointing to something closing in on "checkmate."

    But, the world continues waking up out of it's hypnosis - the "truth movement" gains momentum and sweeps the globe - revolutionary fires smolder and flare - transparency is being used strategically... and multiple religions and faith traditions point to Messianic fulfillment on the horizon. "Doom" is a premature conclusion...

  3. anastasius

    This documentary is little more than "idiot fare'. How on earth can someone discus inequity, credit booms and the business cycle and not make one mention of fractional reserve banking and it's corrollary; credit based money?

    Unbelievable!!! Talk of land grabs and not one word of a banking system that allows banks to lend money they don't have then make a claim on the property. Lucky for the financial sector people watch this dross and think they are being educated.

    1. tom432

      everyone knows the banks are just stupid. this doc talks about the other more deep routed problems that the fractional banking emerged from. how the money consolidation is not just a banking problem

  4. Alv V

    How horribly depressing these documentaries are, they just make me want to give up completely and flush myself down into the sewers, because as a human I should be ashamed to be breathing at all. Always the same apocalyptic talk about how f*cked the planet really is and what we should've/could've done instead. The best and brightest of the scholars just have to get all the gruesome predictions of their chest, obviously thinking they somehow are changing things to the better by complaining, shifting the blame to those on the top that supply all the polluted goods the rest are working as slaves to be able to consume.

    The thing I really agreed with though is that ownership of land is one of the things that seem to be wrong. Personally I've got roots here with a family name stretching at least eight centuries back (so possibly further back since that was just the first time they mentioned it written on vellum), but I can't just find a spot of idle land and start growing my own food there, raise livestock and build a shelter from the weather. If I do that someone will start complaining that they own it, no matter if it is a stinking swamp, armed forces will come promptly, destroy all my lifework and likely place me behind bars until I learn to be obedient to the aristocratic landowners again. And I dare resist and try to protect it, they'd kill me as a warning to those that would try the same.

    I should have known that some Brit was to blame for all of this sick system (calling it civilization) - we should have taken control over that island while we had the chance, instead we felt content by just rape, burning, pillaging and demanding tribute.

    But if anyone else feel like armed resistance, I'll come along, it's about time it start soon.

  5. Guest

    I fell asleep about 10 minutes into this one, but perhaps I learnt it subliminally.

  6. Somersethatch

    Some of the comments suggest that the central point of this documentary is "Capitalism Is Evil". Demonizing capitalism per se is simplistic and naive at best. Capitalism can provide freedoms and rewards which are unique and spiritually essential to the pursuit of full personal potential. Take away the right to personal property and the rewards for personal achievement, and you impoverish the will, and eventually the state. Unfortunately, where regulatory controls are lacking, or unenforced, capitalism can also provide unique opportunities for those driven by greed to pursue predatory agendas. But as history has proven, no system of human government, regardless of ideology, is ever free of potentially disasterous flaws, and there never a shortage of scoundrels to exploit them. All governments are designed and administered by mere human beings. Since it is man's inherent moral failings and poor judgement that necessitate a system of external controls, how could we create any flawless form of government - one we would and could not subvert? Capitalism is not inherently evil; we have simply failed to guard against its abuse and perversion. Education and informed action are needed -not a different ïsm".

    1. Rodney Bresch

      As you say, man is flawed. Yes, we are and have been. We are changing though and have been for a long time. Look at how dogs were domesticated from savagery to civility with regular regiments of food...and they're just dogs.

      If we fed the world with the potential of technological fruits among us, we could transcend our primitive ways. We aren't even close to our potential full output internationally. This world could be progressing much faster and we along with it.

      Market economy, our financial system in general, and especially frac reserve banking are riddled with fallacies and contradictions in terms of being an "economic" system. The tradeoff is inefficiency with communism. But, that is because our ideologies are based on self righteous promotion, rather than thinking as a unit that could potentially be more far more efficient.

      This could all change. And when it does(as it seems it will), capitalism will be incompatible with our potential to produce novelty and innovation.

    2. Somersethatch

      Please don't misunderstand my previous post. I was not defending our bankster economic system or suggesting that Capitalism was superior to any other pure ideology. The fact is, virtually all modern governments are a blend, with elements of various ideologies. The US adopted elements of Socialism in order to correct the exploitation of workers, and to assist the poor, the elderly and those unable to access medical treatment. Unfortunately these much-needed reforms required new bureaucracy, with its own unique opportunities for abuse, both by those who administrated the programs, and by those it was created to benefit. Now entitlement programs have become a cultural and fiscal nightmare. My point is: there never has been and never will be any form of government conceived by man that is truly equitable or incorruptible. All forms of government, Utopian as they may be in theory, require the delegation of power - and power corrupts. The fault, dear Rodney, is not in our Constitution, But in ourselves.

    3. Rodney Bresch

      Yes, that is why I made the "dogs" analogy...the biggest issue is the inherent operator error lol.

      And yes this isn't pure capitalism, as the system that was mischaracterized to stigmatize communism wasn't pure comm. I'm speaking about the systems hypothetically, as we haven't had a proper enough operator to do otherwise yet.

      So we're in agreement...hold one part. You refer to "man" as a static species, and this is not the case. We are rapidly evolving. We have now the tool to bring about change like never before...the net.

      This is why I often tell people who are so intent on change, that where it is needed most is in our cultural institutions. However, seeing how culture is intertwined with the economic system it exists in unison with(if you don't lump them as one all together), it would make sense to choose a system that is compatible with where we are or could be culturally...or collectively.

      So yes man is flawed, but just as he has been programmed to be so, he can be re-programmed more he has been this whole time. So we not only need to teach the world that we could be so much more prosperous as a unit, but engrain it...luckily we already have the tech to do so. So theoretically, this would be the equivalent of diminishing the need to corrupt the system, as it would only work against working against each other essentially does. The point was, that of the systems we speak of, capitalism seems the least compatible.

      I know I'm oversimplifying things, but things should be addressed as fundamentally as possible I feel...and then worked up from. So similar to how a child grows into adulthood manifesting new ideologies as it continues to interact more robustly with life; we as a species are refining our methods of perception, as we redefine what comes into our values.

      We need to rid the idea that man is this damned creature, as he like everything else...can and does change...and like I said, the potential is among us like never before to induce new we have but to be more open-minded.

    4. Guest

      Sorry for the lack of brevity there...another reason for the oversimplifications lol.

    5. Somersethatch

      I think we must agree to disagree, Rodney. I see no evidence to support your faith in the promise of technology or ideology to improve human culture. Technological advancements are always morally neutral "tools" which can be used for good or evil. Although science has advanced knowledge tremendously, it has added nothing to human wisdom. Therefore, the notion that science might direct human evolution toward a state of greater enlightenment is dubious and unjustifiably optimistic. Just as music has had its golden age, all the greatest prophets and philosophers have spoken long ago. However, after the industrial revolution we have gradually turned from the search for, and the reverence of moral wisdom to a new faith: the worship of scientific knowledge.
      If man is truly evolving as you believe, how is it that we have, after many thousands of years, brought ourselves to the brink (or possibly beyond) of extinction? The destruction of our climate, the proliferation of WMDs, ever-increasing wars and the devaluation of human life - all these modern horrors are a direct result of man's reckless and immoral application of scientific knowledge.
      What I see is a tragic "devolution" of the moral character of man. What I do not see is any human force or movement, whether spiritually, ideologically, or scientifically based, with the realistic potential to reverse this trend toward self-destruction. Do you?

    6. Rodney Bresch

      If the “powers that be” wanted us to believe the world was doomed, they've sure done a good job…as many if not all agree with you. So which makes more sense, to be unjustifiably optimistic about overcoming hurdles, or to surrender before them? The fact is that mankind and what evolved into
      becoming man, has survived drastic climatic fluctuations, multiple massive meteoric impacts, along with countless other geologic and ecological factors that turn our current crisis level to mush.

      If you look back at history, it seems pretty hard next to impossible to wipe out our lineage actually, and we are as adaptive and resilient as ever. “They” would have you bent on destruction, because it creates a mass of docile slaves, rather than a society of free thinkers who believe they could accomplish anything…like overthrowing those in power for one…which is trivial in comparison to our potential when realized.

      The problem with the prophets of yesterday, was regardless of how inspirational they were, we didn't have the tools to put our money where our mouth was. It’s like telling someone that they should be selfless in an environment of bleak scarcity. No matter how eloquent or convincing the argument is, eventually the circumstances will trump it. Also, they didn't have a platform such as the net to touch as many at one time as can be done today. That really is the issue, is that we haven’t moved as a unit towards a greater good.

      People break from the heard here and there, but there is little reward for doing so in our system, so they get back in line eventually(the net can also be used in the other direction as well obviously). If enough were stimulated in the right direction, we could do much more than we give ourselves credit for…even though we deserve a great deal more credit than received.

      Morals and tech have an intimate relationship though. Most of our sociological evolution as man in fact, were induced by technological vicissitudes. I could give many examples.

    7. Bob Saggy

      We grow rapidly and survive so well because we are a cancer to the earth. An infinite cell that doesn't give a shit about it's consequences, it just wants more and to be bigger and faster. I hope superviruses whipe us out before we do the earth..

    8. Rodney Bresch

      One way to look at it, is that we are becoming technologically advanced enough to compensate for those tha aren't. Soon we will have the capability to prevent catastropic events, such as meteor impacts that could potentially wipe life out. And yes mankind is irresponsible, but we are still developing....jus like children who grow into more "responsible" adults. We have the potential to change, and these saggy attititudes bob...dont help much. Why dont you just kill yourself...not joking...why even go on if you're this horrible burden to everything?

    9. Guest

      Sorry for the lack of brevity there...another reason for the oversimplification lol.

    10. Josh Christian

      no.. you mistake false state Capitalism.. and competitive Leninism and Stalinism with Communism... Communism, /Marxism, unlike capitalism is not based on competition and if not handed over to "Central" planning is a system that could work much more efficiently. The producers sharing in a greater share of their production is obviously more democratic, the subjects of law creating the laws themselves clearly more just.. do not fall into the false dichotomy of "Capitalism vs Communism".. the Market answer is based on minority success.. communism is based on communal experience,, total opposites.
      Once again it is the 10% of us that are biased towards aggression as a means of survival.. we must rid ourselves of the fear based dystopian model. Starting with religions and see the potential for a forwardness that is not locked in the acquisition of material and temporal properties.

    11. Rodney Bresch

      If you look at the production and innovation that has arisen
      from communism…it’s unmatched by any other system. Now, obviously endless
      production can be a bad thing, but the innovative qualities alone are striking.
      The problem is that we need to change our values, before we switch to
      communism. I agree, it could “potentially” be more efficient even, but
      obviously more equitable. It would be futile though, unless we change our values,
      as we our currently are incentivized by self righteousness and materialism.
      That is at the root.

      And you didn’t read my comments, I didn’t mistake
      anything. I stated how what they were referencing as communism wasn’t. You
      basically just said everything I’ve already said lol.

    12. Josh Christian

      yes capitalism is inherently evil... it is based upon competition, which inevitably does not serve the larger group. by definition competition creates one winner and unlimited losers.. in any contest the outcome is always the same.. which in itself is unnatural.

      I am sorry that Market believers cannot make this one simple distinction for it seems to me a great waste of the public mind to continuously toss a nonsensical system back and fourth, that was created by the ego-maniacal winning percentile to ensnare the remaining throngs to begin with. Mitigate all you like but at the end of the monopoly game one person owns the board and you either sit in his prison or you work at his railroad.. but no matter what side of the board you reside, you're paying that one "WINNER" the rent and so this documentary actually targets successfully in my opinion, the longest and most tangled root system of our dystopia.

      "Civilized" should mean the rejection of the insect hive social structure/ Darwin observation in favor of a full life that allows all individuals to pursue that which suits and gratifies them most. Think Dolphin pods as opposed to Ant Hills.. which would you rather be a part of, which do you imagine yourself more akin? The trappings of a material reward and hording are simplistic reptile brained throwbacks... 1% of the population can now feed the entire planet..we are at heavens door but instead we wrestle, indeed kill over crumbs on the floor as the elite feast on our cake at the table.

      Resource allocation is the fundamental distribution point at both the top and bottom of the pyramid.. it is the single most important and yet least discussed of all the systemic wrongs within the dystopia... TRUE Capitalism cannot exist without a complete resource redeployment and even then what would stop the consolidation of these same resources once new market titans were in place?? As if the personality that dominates in the Capitalists competition system would ever willingly "play fair" or allow for a thriving competition to their winnings. How futile does this seem.. how obvious is this?

      Every time I hear someone say "free market" I know that I am hearing the echo's of the early exploiters.. ON the American continent these family names operated without regulation, with unlimited access to resource both human and natural.. along with slavery went on to create the fortunes that shaped the planet to this very day... WE ARE IN THE END STAGES OF A FREE MARKET.. This is where it will always lead.. even if we completely redistributed all of the natural resources (an impossibility) this is where we would end up again, it would only be a matter of time.

      Pick your "ism" none are perfect on their own but the creeping feudalism of Capitalism in inescapable and frankly we've been at it for a very long time relative to our time on the planet.. from the bibles excuses of slavery to the shining towers of Dubai..I for one have had enough of the 10%'s cunning and ego as a basis of existence.

      Time for us, the producers to sublimate the predators.

    13. Rodney Bresch

      That's a fascinating connection...the free market.of slaves. Do you facebook? You seem like an interesting guy.

  7. Trinea

    Something like casino, monopoly, corporate, crony...capitalism doens't exist. Only capitalism exist with its natural consequences. If you have a system that is based on egocentrism (self-interest), competition, and so on, you will also get correspondingly society and values. Catastrophe in itself, such as ours. Ignorant, selfish, short-sighted, materialistic society, that defines success on the basis of material wealth, how good they do against other competitors. Capitalism is based, requires & reward the worst values. Always has, always will. Morality in the match of existance, it's a fantasy. The entire system is nothing else as a renamed social darwinism.

    1. dmxi

      you're right...partially,as nothing in politics happens by coincidence
      & thus the demise of capitalism,entwined into democracy has a
      shelf-life,as communism,the anti-thesis of the aforementioned,did
      have!the biggest mistake is to await the co-operate the
      presented solution in it's 'wake' has been/will be engineered by the same
      ambitions & perpetrators whom we owe these ambivalent rules of
      engagement to,imo.

    2. disqus_KaGdwj0Fv8

      Still the only system that has brought the most people out of poverty and raised the standards of living across the entire planet. No other system comes close to capitalism and thats simply the reality of this world.

    3. Alv V

      Excuse me, but did you say "the entire planet"? What keeps the West running? Where do all the cheap goods come flowing from? Some other perfect and rich country that gives it for free, because they have too much of it? Or are all of it just a result of the strictly maintained post-colonialism?

      Why are people worried about the increase in standard of living in China and India? Could it be - perhaps - that the reason of the economic meltdown in the West is the same reason for the raising wealth in the East? Do you think the entire earth - ever - can hope to live in a prosperous, capitalistic society?

      No, the reason why you got a computer (and then I take it for granted that you also have food to eat, clean drinking water, a place to live - perhaps even a car and other luxury-items?) and seem to be happy with the world as it is, is because someone else, somewhere else in the world do not have all that.

      We don't have enough planets for everyone to be able to live like we do in the west. The amount of energy each of us consume equal that dozens of slaves work 24/7 to keep our lives running.

    4. disqus_KaGdwj0Fv8

      Our cheap goods come from our trading partners across the plant. Life is not a 0 sum game as you imply, in capitalism, both parties can acquire what they desire trading that which they do not want. Doing this without cohesion is what made western capitalism so great and the reason the west became so powerful in the previous century. Now as more countries embrace capitalism (even communists) we see the standard of living rising there, while in countries like the us that are moving more towards a socialist form of governance our standard of living is declining.

      Too add, you apparently know nothing about astronomy as well as economics but feel free to try again.

  8. Black Scholar

    White people are a bad mutation. These "Ice People" are the worst orgasms ever. Earth knows how to save herself. She has been doing it for over 4.5 Billion years. Ice people (white people) have only been around for 20,000 years. Earth Gives, white people Take. This is not going to end well.

    1. tom432

      you,ve got a gd point white people have ****** the world up more than any other. but if you go bck through history we,ve always done this indian people destroyed masses of earth through deforestation, in the middle east. hasn't always been a desert we made it that way. we just forget things that happen thousands of years ago. so allow the racism if black guys where different they wouldn't have grabed there own people to give to us white people. its not black and white lol

    2. dan stig johansen

      They don't beat hair hats and madden kings.

    3. disqus_KaGdwj0Fv8

      earth gives, people take, all animals do this and if given the opportunity would destabilize their environments as well. the reason they don't is because they are limited to what their physical bodies can adapt too. Humans changed that rule, we just adapt our technology and keep on pressing forward, changing environments often on accident. Though its nice to know that racism is still strong today.

    4. Alv V

      What kind of f--ked up racist delusion is that?

      With Mutated Ice People I recon you are thinking about homo sapiens, but I got news for you: So are you, unless you are not hairy from top to toe, grunting, eating raw flesh and walking around at all four.

      Us Ice People simply live in a better geographical zone of the world then you Mud People.

      I recommend watching "Guns, Germs and Steel" - should be around here somewhere on this website and you'll get to see a real scholar talking about some interesting facts.

  9. Terry "OldFox" Seale

    OMG,"then the humans begun releasing a new layer of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere." Pullease! More greenhouse gases are released by bovine flatulence than every internal combustion, jet and fossil fuel engine existent and formerly existing in the entire world.

    You greenies willing to kill all the cows? Whoops what about the pop explosion? No problem. Indians don't eat cows. Yeah, that's the ticket: Kill cows.

    1. tom432

      joke :) good point but it not just cars buses and trains or ships. you,ve got the petrol chemical plants that pollute masses of carbon dioxide and monoxide. also the normal power plants. but lets not forget the trees that have gone, not the amazon rain forest but the woodlands across Europe and before them the forests in mesopatamia (Iraq). We've damaged the planets ability to absorb carbon. if we still had those forests we could drive around and burn fossil fuels with out any problem because at the end of the day it all come from are planet we didn't make it we just released it.

    2. Val Valiant Five

      You are referring to reference (2) as reported here by the Hinkle Charitable Foundation. Cows exist to feed our inability to adapt to a less destructive food source. If the westernized world could get over its' aversion to eating protean rich insects, we would could feed all 10 billion people on the planet as predicted by 2050. And reduce emissions significantly. Grasshoppers taste good too.

      "There are three primary anthropogenic (human caused) contributors to rising greenhouse gas concentrations: (1) our excessive burning of fossil fuels for energy, (2) our accelerating removal of the earth's natural carbon storage through our destruction of forests and our removal of previously vegetative land for habitat, grazing, and agriculture for livestock production and (3) our various manufacturing processes which release near-permanent and extremely potent man-made greenhouse gases. Few of us appreciate how the many things we do, the things we consume, or the things we buy, generate greenhouse gases directly or indirectly in their own production. " -HCF

    3. Terry "OldFox" Seale

      I think that CERN has shown the Sun's gamma rays have more to do with climate change than any human or bovine life. I know a PhD meteorologist at Oak Ridge Labs that shows climate change has always occurred with some significant volatility but always within a narrow band resembling a normal distribution and invariably seeking a return to the mean. Measurable in tree rings and earth and ice columns over centuries.

      The least political and most reasonable way to address climate change is to irrigate and cultivate the vast regions of ever-expanding desertification in Asia, Africa, and North America. The Gulf Arabs are growing fruits and vegetables today where only sand and brackish water existed when I first visited less than one lifetime ago. It is quite amazing... a farmer's market in Dubai!

    4. disqus_KaGdwj0Fv8

      completely agree although Id rather use the vast desert of the ocean to add to our worlds ecosystems.

    5. disqus_KaGdwj0Fv8

      Id don't like bugs, ive tried scorpion, grasshopper, mill worm and did not find any taste good. If you want to save the earth by changing peoples diet then work on bringing something people want to eat. For ex, there is a company called beyond meat that you should look into.

    6. Val Valiant Five

      I'll look into 'beyond meat', and thank you.

  10. Jerry Brooks

    Don't shrug this one off if you want to better understand why there are Americans who believe their haves make them better American citizens than other Americans.

  11. Somersethatch

    Excellent doc. Fast paced and wide ranging. Suggest watching more than once in order to absorb the mass of info. Provides a deeper understanding of the methods by which corporations and the financial sector have gained control of public policy. It begins with an historical review of the abuse of political power which created the elite class over 200 years ago, and explains how they continue to evolve the feudal state into it's current global form. Provides pieces which irrefutably tie many confusing parts of the puzzle together. Best exposition of the "Cap and Trade" scam ever.

  12. Kansas Devil

    I own land that I use to sequester carbon. That means if the taxes go up on it, then I might also get an environment credit and my effective tax would be lower than I already pay. That would not give the government more money to spend on improving services. It might encourage people to leave their land sit idle and subject to nature rather than using it to generate money for government use.

  13. socratesuk

    Kind of interesting. Part 2 is very interesting, this is the first time I have come across Pakistan's complex landlord problem. Though surely more industrialization is the key for Pakistan, as its mainly still agricultural based. Maybe some state-owned companies in special economic zones might be a start?

    However a land tax in western countries doesn't seem to make a massive amount of economic sense. Basically the guys in the documentary seem annoyed at paying income tax and sales tax. So they think big land holders should pay instead. I don't think there is enough big land holders to pay the difference. Also a lot of land holders have little output. For example The Forestry Commission in the UK owns a lot of land, but makes hardly any money out of it. Likewise a lot of councils own land, so were going to tax councils?

    Also the M.O.D owns a lot of land, were going to tax the M.O.D?

    So although I thank this documentary for highlighting some of the issues in Pakistan. I think this land tax idea is stupid for western countries. Clearly in Pakistan it might make a small difference. But I don't think its the solution. Maybe organizing the agricultural output in more efficient ways makes more sense. I happen to know several UK farmers, and although most of them have smallish farms. Its surprising how much crop/milk/fruit they produce. Especially as its usually just a handful of people working the farm.

  14. Matt Kukowski

    Part 3 is the best part. But, watch the documentary Will Work For Free

  15. Mark Filby

    Well said Matt. Love ALF

  16. Matt Kukowski

    Yet another documentary about Capitalism. This is the NATURE of Capitalism. Yes, there are same very bad apples that REALLY break the rules, but the rules of Capitalism are inheritance easy to break.

    We may not beat each other over the head with a bat, but with a bank.

    Communism was Capitalisms first victim.

    Even we try to 'reform the laws' will only plug a hole when there are THOUSANDS of holes.

    Black people are not victimized but whole nations are!

    Anytime you automate through robots, you are being anti-capitalism. Anytime you write a program to automate a task, you are being anti-capitalist!

    So, is automation bad? NO! It frees people. But, it takes the Jobs. It will hurt Businesses and Governments in the end, because there are no jobs.

    The problem is Automation in an age that still Operates using Capitalism. I know people think Capitalism is the only way. And if you say you are anti-capitalism, means you must be a Socialist or Communist.

    But, tell me what happens when robots and computers are driving your cars and being your clerk and driving the combines in farm lands? Are YOU going to blame the machines and cut them down?

    NO! You can automate EVERYTHING and free humanity ! Free them to spend time with your friends and family ... spend time learning, spend time LIVING. People think automation leads to lazy people... what a COP OUT. If you had all the time in the world, and travel on a GPS controlled Google car to travel the world using a Hydrogen (water fueled car, see Stan Meyers ).... you will be freed.

    WAKE the F up.

  17. Val Valiant Five

    "When the people shall have nothing more to eat, they will eat the rich." ~Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    1. Harry Nutzack

      ahhh, thanks for the original source of the quote! i always attributed it to a grafitti writer in NYC during the 70s, who truncated it to a speedier "eat the rich" (it allowed him/her to be MOST prolific with the message). many of us already have our cutlery (and cookbooks) ready!

  18. Chul

    How about limit personal earnings to 1.000.000/year and inside each company establish the 1/12 ratio of salaries for a start. just saying

  19. a_no_n

    When Henry VIII demolished the religious life of his nation to enrich
    himself he laid the foundations for the kind of violence that now
    blights every corner of the world.

    I actually agree with most of what this documentary says except for that particular bit...Henry was a right old ba5tard granted,and his reasons and methods for dissolving the church weren't exactly ethical, but it left us with the church of England, which is one of the more progressive arms of Christianity, and if he hadn't have laid those foundations then the center for power in the world would probably still be the Vatican and the pope, which would be an even worse turn of events for humanity.

    1. Terry "OldFox" Seale

      Henry VIII was a Republican?

    2. Harry Nutzack

      not every point made relates to american partisan politics, Terry. a_no_n is from the uk, and really spends little time on OUR political side taking in the usa. in short, "get over yourself"

  20. Janeen Clark

    capitalism is a disease, a psychological distortion

    1. 1concept1

      "psychological distortion" Thank you so much I see the problem now. Email that over to Bristol Myers I'm sure they'll jump right on that.

      Would you be so kind as to give us an outline of the changes you would make and how you would implement them?

      Janeen we all know what the problems are we don't need to be reminded? What we need is away out of this messy system that has evolved and leadership to guide us. Are you her?

      Oh I know i am being asinine; generally speaking your post are insightful but we need solutions and we need them NOW!

    2. Janeen Clark

      when we design a computer mother board what is the method we follow? do we place the parts strategically based on efficiency and requirements, or do we make decisions based on human opinion, like randomly making patterns in between processor chips and pathways zigzagging in random directions? i challenge you to take this analogy and apply the principles to the world social system, do we update computers often every few months as the tech allows? or do we keep computers the same for 20 years because of "tradition" apply the same principle to our world systems and you see the emergence of a design strategy with advancement at the heart of it.

    3. 4ArthurDent

      Technocracy shifts the decision making to the technicians who design the next motherboard which is still human opinion.

    4. Harry Nutzack

      a mis-routed trace on your mobo at worst equals a dead short, some smoke, and a bit more head scratching in the R&D dept... in "the real world" it equals pol pot's "year zero". hardly comparable, no matter what the chief engineer has to say

      edit: the other problem in the analogy is the problem in a mobo is immediate. the "real estate bubble" took a decade to "smoke the board". engineering is purely physical, economics is almost purely philosophical in nature. in 03, i was telling all i knew the bubble was disaster in the making, and pretty much predicted exactly how the "board would smoke". NOBODY would listen, as "the box was running fine just this morning". terrible ideas can be buoyed for a VERY long time by "confidence", and excellent ideas can be rendered stillborn by lack of same. moray invented the transistor in the late 20s, but was rejected by the patent board because he lacked a heater for the cathode (needed in a tube/valve).

    5. socratesuk

      Very good post.

    6. Harry Nutzack

      parasitism is the disease. truly efficient economies allow for BOTH accumulation of wealth/comfort, and social responsibility for ALL. greed is part of our hard-wired psyche, as is cooperation toward greater good. striking the balance between the 2 is where the truest solution lies. outright rejection of either is folly, and leads to exactly the same ending (aristocracy/serf society)

    7. 1concept1

      You are lazer dead on with that one!!

  21. Paul Gloor

    I still hear that magic word "growth"