From: Samantha Atkins (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Sep 20 2002 - 03:06:54 MDT
Cliff Stabbert wrote:
> Thursday, September 19, 2002, 3:31:35 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> SA> Cliff Stabbert wrote:
>>>But as I've mentioned before, I don't think the main risks to the
>>>achieving the singularity are from the public at large, but rather
>>>from those people and organizations currently in a position of
>>>privilege, because they have (perceived) motive and they have (some)
>>>means to foul up progress.
> SA> As I see it, the basic problem is the same for people highly
> SA> privileged relative to others is to show clearly that their real
> SA> quality of life will rise further in a world of true abundance
> SA> than in the world based around scarcity in which their
> SA> differential status was gained.
> To clarify, by "people and organizations in a position of privilege"
> I don't mean the (say) approx. 10% of the world population in a
> relative position of privilege. I mean the, what, <1% who "have
> power" over the rest, and who I fear are close-to-chronically addicted
> to such power (and its corresponding belief that one is not doing well
> unless others are doing worse, or any other number of metaphors for
> higher/lower status). My concern rests both on that entrenched if
> incorrect belief and the real-world power such entities have (to e.g.,
> shut down research or mobilize public opinion against it).
I realize that. The above I believe applies just as much to
them. I suspect some of them will be among the first to
understand the benefits of true abundance and shifting
consciousness. I think you do many of them an injustice when
you assume they are only given by addiction to power and are
only happy when others are doing worse.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:40 MDT