Reddit mentions of The New Human Rights Movement: Reinventing the Economy to End Oppression

> There needs to be a balance between protecting the environment and economic growth

The problem is that capitalism is inherently imbalanced because it favors growth over everything else.

Read The New Human Rights Movement. Clarifies all of the flaws that capitalism has to offer...

Btw, can you resolve these three questions/problems logically without realizing the need to remove the Market Economy?

1. Given the market economy requires consumption in order to maintain demand for human employment and further economic growth as needed, is there a structural incentive to reduce resource use, biodiversity loss, the global pollution footprint and hence assist the ever-increasing need for improved ecological sustainability in the world today?
   
   
2. In an economic system where companies seek to limit their production costs (“cost efficiency”) in order to maximize profits and remain competitive against other producers, what structural incentive exists to keep human beings employed, in the wake of an emerging technological condition where the majority of jobs can now be done more cheaply and effectively by machine automation?
   
   
3. In an economic system which inherently generates class stratification and overall inequity, how can the effects of “Structural Violence” - a phenomenon noted by public health researchers to kill well over 18 million a year, generating a vast range of systemic detriments such as behavioral, emotional and physical disorders – be minimized or even removed as an effect?

For one, Zeitgeist was an art piece he did as a social experiment in his mid 20s. Joseph never cared about "conspiracies" at all, if people took 5 seconds to study his work over the past 10 years. He is also an artist at heart.

His AMA: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/6414g3/i_am_peter_joseph_author_of_the_new_human_rights/

--First Book:https://www.amazon.com/Zeitgeist-Movement-Defined-Realizing-Thought/dp/1495303195

"One of the achievements of this book is its ability to find research-based connections between seemingly unrelated social and economic conditions. Without becoming repetitive or dull, each essay is able to shed light on specific issues in a way that is neither too academic nor too informal. Powerful quotes are used at the beginning of chapters, research is clearly footnoted throughout, and the language—albeit at times somewhat technical and term-heavy—does well to give a picture of how one social problem influences the next, and how one scientific advancement could, if accepted and adopted into society properly, change the way all humans interact with the environment that surrounds them." -Review by Kenny Jakubas

--Second Book:https://www.amazon.com/New-Human-Rights-Movement-Reinventing/dp/1942952651

"This book is a fascinating read, and a vitally important one for anyone who is tired of the status quo, seeks to understand why it is so entrenched, and wants to do something about it."New York Journal of Books"

Peter Joseph is one of the great visionaries of our time. If there's a beautiful future―and I think there will be―then his fingerprints will be all over it."―Marianne Williamson, #1 New York Times bestselling author"Since 9/11, security took over and retired human rights into a small closet. We need to get back to the issue of rights for all. Hopefully this important work will draw us closer to that reality and promise. Without economic realignment with nature to secure our habitat, along with conquering the sociological roots of fragmentation and bigotry, the human family is in peril."―Jack Healey,Head of Human Rights Action Center

"One of this generation's greatest visionaries delivers a startling exposé about the violent oppression that defines our economic order, while issuing an urgent call for global activism to unite to change it. Amidst a deepening crisis of capitalism and inequality, coupled with an intensifying assault by the Empire's elite, The New Human Rights Movement provides a crucial roadmap for the movement toward the next system."***–***Abby Martin, host of The Empire Files

--2008 follow up Zeitgeist when he showed his true colors to focus on economics:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EewGMBOB4Gg

--2011 seminal work "Zeitgeist Moving Forward"https://youtu.be/4Z9WVZddH9w

--His Lecture playlist. Brilliant:https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLV9KzChRGz7KEBhw20ZkipLU7BgLoVAxG

You can follow him on Twitter. DO IT!@zeitgeistfilm

Well, Lange and Lerner (1938) were the ones who first put forward a strong opposition to the Austrian School's criticisms by proposing a new hypothetical model of a socialist economy- their idea was essentially to have a market socialist system, with the means of production being publicly owned, capital markets being overtaken by a Central Planning Board (CPB), and markets remaining for distributing final consumer goods. In this model, the CPB would set goods prices through a Walrasian auction, while instructing state enterprises to match price to marginal cost. This latter part is important because it means that the model would be Pareto optimal- the same criteria used by economists in their assumption that perfect competition would naturally pressure price to be equivalent to marginal cost (also hence why monopolies etc. are not considered efficient outcomes). Lange believed his system would qualify as socialism by virtue of instituting public/cooperative ownership of the MOP with public returns, while maintaining a rational pricing system.

This approach, other than being seen by some on both sides of the aisle as a sort of cop-out "capitalism without capital markets", was also attacked by some on theoretical grounds. The main problem, according to it's detractors, was its reliance on neoclassical premises: since general equilibrium does not, in fact, exist, the Lange model has questionable applicability to comprehensive economic planning. The two main authors who put forward this view and proposed alternatives were the Russian economist Alexander Nove, and the Hungarian economist János Kornai. The former has an excellent book which I would almost certainly recommend, titled "The Economics of Feasible Socialism". In it, he explores broadly the problems and history of the ECP and outlines a socialist economy consisting of a CPB combined with publicly lead enterprises. The latter (Kornai) is mostly known for his mathematical contributions. Linear programming is the most important mathematical basis for full central planning (the founder of the method itself, Leonid Kantorovich, was a Soviet mathematician and economist), and the time complexity of linear programming with regards to balancing physical inputs/outputs was a major topic of the ECP debates. János Kornai created an algorithm for decomposing intractably large problems into tractable sub-problems (although this was also predated by a similar method proposed by Dantzig & Wolfe). When specifically applied to planning, Kornai's algorithm models a way of decomposing a linear programming problem of the CPB into decentralized sub-problems mediated by coordination between individual enterprises.

Some modern authors who have recieved a lot of attention on this topic (at least on the heterodox side of the fence) are Computer Scientist Paul Cockshott and Economist Allin Cottrell, who argue that non-market cybernetic planning is computationally viable. They propose their model in their book Towards a New Socialism, but also have a number of papers on it: see here, here, or here. From how I understand it, many of the objections to Cockshott & Cottrell stem from the fact that they address the idea of computational possibility rather than (truer to the original formulation of the ECP) logical possibility.

Peter Joseph also, from a liberal rather than Marxist socialist perspective, has written an interesting book titled The New Human Rights Movement: Reinventing the Economy to End Oppression. In it, he makes some interesting proposals about how the commonly cited role of a pricing system in relaying necessary feedback about consumer preference, scarcity, etc. will eventually become obsolete due to the expansion of information technology and adoption of fully integrated sensor-based networks.

One final thing to follow would be the field of Algorithmic Mechanism Design- it's still a relatively new subject, and IMO will be a major factor in putting to rest this planning debate one way or the other. Many people in AMD have essentially looked at planning with the view that much of the debate boils down to understanding of how to overcome informational problems preventing ideal coordination between actors in an economy- thus necessitating integration of recent developments in information technology into modern economic models.

Fra BBC Newsnight:

‘Our addiction to economic growth is killing us’

Hvorfor har vi blitt fanget i forbruksfella?

Her er en dokumentar fra BBC, som forklarer mye:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnPmg0R1M04

> The story of the relationship between Sigmund Freud and his American nephew, Edward Bernays. Bernays invented the public relations profession in the 1920s and was the first person to take Freud's ideas to manipulate the masses. He showed American corporations how they could make people want things they didn't need by systematically linking mass-produced goods to their unconscious desires.

> Bernays was one of the main architects of the modern techniques of mass-consumer persuasion, using every trick in the book, from celebrity endorsement and outrageous PR stunts, to eroticising the motorcar.

> His most notorious coup was breaking the taboo on women smoking by persuading them that cigarettes were a symbol of independence and freedom. But Bernays was convinced that this was more than just a way of selling consumer goods. It was a new political idea of how to control the masses. By satisfying the inner irrational desires that his uncle had identified, people could be made happy and thus docile.

> It was the start of the all-consuming self which has come to dominate today's world.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0432232/

Hva må vi gjøre for å komme oss ut?

Her er noen forslag:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Value-Everything-Making-Taking-Economy/dp/0241188814

> Who really creates wealth in our world? And how do we decide the value of what they do? At the heart of today's financial and economic crisis is a problem hiding in plain sight.

> In modern capitalism, value-extraction is rewarded more highly than value-creation: the productive process that drives a healthy economy and society. From companies driven solely to maximize shareholder value to astronomically high prices of medicines justified through big pharma's 'value pricing', we misidentify taking with making, and have lost sight of what value really means. Once a central plank of economic thought, this concept of value - what it is, why it matters to us - is simply no longer discussed.

> Yet, argues Mariana Mazzucato in this penetrating and passionate new book, if we are to reform capitalism - radically to transform an increasingly sick system rather than continue feeding it - we urgently need to rethink where wealth comes from. Which activities create it, which extract it, which destroy it? Answers to these questions are key if we want to replace the current parasitic system with a type of capitalism that is more sustainable, more symbiotic - that works for us all. The Value of Everything will reignite a long-needed debate about the kind of world we really want to live in.

https://www.amazon.com/New-Human-Rights-Movement-Reinventing/dp/1942952651

> Society is broken. We can design our way to a better one.

> In our interconnected world, self-interest and social-interest are rapidly becoming indistinguishable. If current negative trajectories remain, including growing climate destabilization, biodiversity loss, and economic inequality, an impending future of ecological collapse and societal destabilization will make "personal success" virtually meaningless. Yet our broken social system incentivizes behavior that will only make our problems worse. If true human rights progress is to be achieved today, it is time we dig deeper―rethinking the very foundation of our social system.

> In this engaging, important work, Peter Joseph, founder of the world's largest grassroots social movement―The Zeitgeist Movement―draws from economics, history, philosophy, and modern public-health research to present a bold case for rethinking activism in the 21st century.

> Arguing against the long-standing narrative of universal scarcity and other pervasive myths that defend the current state of affairs, The New Human Rights Movement illuminates the structural causes of poverty, social oppression, and the ongoing degradation of public health, and ultimately presents the case for an updated economic approach. Joseph explores the potential of this grand shift and how we can design our way to a world where the human family has become truly sustainable.

> The New Human Rights Movement reveals the critical importance of a unified activism working to overcome the inherent injustice of our system. This book warns against what is in store if we continue to ignore the flaws of our socioeconomic approach, while also revealing the bright and expansive future possible if we succeed.

Her er et kort sammendrag:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvkchZADaaA

Og her er et intervju med PJ:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVDLkL8Nvjw&t

I still enjoy watching ZMF from time to time. The narrative in the first 45 minutes is worth watching alone.

However I agree, why post the movie on your channel in a lower format when it exists in other places in better quality? Stupid people trying to get views/karma and don't even care about the deeper messages in the Zeitgeist movies.

By the way, have you read Peter's new book The New Human Rights Movement? I just finished it the other day and I loved it. Peter's best work yet.

Ah yeh... Lets create a law to solve a problem! That's all that can be done in this system. That will do nothing to the root cause of the problem we are facing.
The consumer is always at a disadvantage as the free market promotes any length to increase the profit and reduce the cost. By its very nature it promotes technological unemployment. It encourages using cheap materials. It doesnt care about the worker and their wages. How can it make any money if it did? If you regulate it, it's no longer the free market.

The monetary system, which I mean as any system that uses money to exchange for goods and services promotes this kind of behaviour. Dishonesty and self-interest are literally mechanisms of it. Lobbying and corrupt politicians are a part of this system. We are surprised that a company will pay politicians millions of dollars collectively to support certain laws and chuck ones that aren't beneficial to their business? This isn't some anomaly. This is just government doing business.

For anyone that wants to read a book that goes back to the root causes of the biggest issues we are facing today, I would recommend this book. If we want to solve the greatest challenges of our time, then we need to change our way of thinking. Humanity needs to begin looking at all these problems from a systems based approach in order to solve it's root cause. A cultural shift is what is needed.

https://www.amazon.com/New-Human-Rights-Movement-Reinventing/dp/1942952651

Watch the third film, read TZM: Defined, read The New Human Rights Movement, and watch the lecture Economic Calculation in a NL/RBE. Forget about the first two films. The first one isn't really relevant anymore, and the second one feels like a lesser rendition of the third one.

The purpose of the first film was to shock people into thinking about their reality more critically, at least that's how I see it. PJ backs up every single point he makes in the film, even today, with an extensive companion guide of sources, but if you want to know what TZM is really about you'd check out the things I mentioned above.

I would like to change your view in that humanity has thought of and envisioned such a society but has not implemented it yet. So basically we have "invented it" so to speak but we have not implemented it.

The end goal of futuristic society would be to maintain what is called a relative post-scarcity economy. This economic system would be designed by engineers the same way a bridge is designed. This approach will become necessary for the simple reason that if we ever want to achieve any serious progress as a civilization, we need to start thinking about how to create an economic system that will allow for environmental sustainability along with economic sustainability. When thinking about a system that manufactures and distributes resources we need to think about it in a way that is systematic, scientific and sustainable. Obviously building a well designed bridge is practically a lot easier than transitioning the world economy to a post-scarcity economy. Nevertheless, it is still worth considering and it is well worth the effort to start thinking about how to get there one day. If we created a nation wide "Manhattan-like project", put the smartest minds together we could easily sketch out a system that would create a near-post-scarcity system. The goal of such a system would be to create a society where everyone would have access to a high quality of life, without having to exchange their labour in order to create the value needed to have access to those services/goods (like in a market based system). This would be doable if a 90% unemployement rate could be reached without lowering standards of living. To make that happen we would need to automate production on a scale never seen before, so nation wide self-driving car system, decentralized local manufacturing (large scale 3d printers), completely open-assess internet with all design schematics accessible and modifiable, mixed-use renewable energy infrastructure, mass scale fully automated vertical farming near urban areas and near fully automated hospital systems. More importantly the AI system in charge of determining distribution would have an algorithm that would consider the available supply of all resources and products (through dynamic feedback with sensors), dynamic information on human demand, sustainability calculations, environmental calculations, biodiversity calculations, transport calculations, ect... so that very few if any externalities are created. Importantly such a society would allow every individual to focus on their own personal endeavors without having the need to work a job they hate to pay rent/food. Individuals would be free to focus on cultural, social and creative enterprises. Ideally the 10% of employment needed to maintain the system would be seen as a badge of honour, there would probably be a nation wide competition to fill these posts as they would be seen as an honourable endavour. Ideally these positions should have "term" limits to encourage every citizen to take part in the their civic duty to maintain the post-scarcity system that allows for such liberty and freedom.

If you are curious other post-scarcity related things, check out the Venus project and Peter Joseph's latest book.