Day 158: Prevention is the Best Cure - Equal Money System

Prevention is the Best Cure

Decision-making within an Equal Money System will adhere to the Constitutional Principle of ‘Prevention is the Best Cure’. This implies that with every decision made, all possible ramifications, consequences and outflows must be considered in order to design the policies and regulations in a way that do not cause unnecessary harm to the current or future generations of plants, animals and humans.

The moment disharmony exists, it indicates that the point of disharmony was not adequately prevented. Becoming aware of such a point of disharmony places us in a reactive mode. A reactive mode always takes place after the harm as a result of disharmony that has already occurred, and thus, it is in essence ‘too late’ as the harm cannot be undone. To design a regulatory political system based on reactive measures is therefore unacceptable, as it implies that we wait for harm to take place before action is taken. Currently, policy and regulations are mostly based on the interest of select groups. This causes harm to manifest on other levels that were not included in the equation, causing us to continuously be in a reactive mode as we attempt to correct the mistakes of our past. This is why it is so important to always design policies and regulations according to the Principle of What is Best for All, as it will enable us to prevent disharmony before it occurs.

Obviously, taking action before harm takes place also reduces the amount of resources that go into correcting mistakes and dealing with the consequences of carelessness. A simple example is nutrition. There are countless ills that are currently caused through inadequate nutrition, among which are diabetes, heart conditions, cancer, impaired cognitive functions such as memory capacity, and so on. Treatment for such ills requires a whole range of resources and is time-intensive. If the source is corrected, which is the diet, the ills are prevented as well as the need to use up resources for their treatment.

Initially, policy making will still largely involve correcting the mistakes of our past, as there were many, and thus many consequences. However, as we progress as a global society within the ability to prevent disharmony and to direct all matters in a harmonious way, we will be able to bring children in the world knowing that we’ve taken all preventative measures to allow them to live a life without harm. And thus, the principle of fear as it is now part of society will have been addressed and will no longer form part of our co-existence.

Related articles

• Day 154: The Application of Justice in an Equal Money System
• Day 156: Honoring the Right to Life in an Equal Money System
• Day 150: Voting Responsibility and Tight-Knit Communities in an Equal Money System
• Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System
• Day 155: Constitutional Equality as the Rule of Law
• Day 157: Growing your Own Food and Equal Money
• Day 151: Media, Law and Information Accessibility within an Equal Money System
• Day 148: Policy Initiation and the Role of Administrators in an Equal Money System

Day 156: Honoring the Right to Life in an Equal Money System

Honoring the Right to Life

To understand the Principle of Honoring the Right to Life, first must be understood what Life is.

Changing the form Life takes on does not change Life - Life remains the same. So, whether the Life is a sperm or an egg, or whether it is ‘merged’ or ‘fused’ into a new being – that new being is not a ‘new’ Life Form. It’s just Life in a new form, but it’s the same Life. Therefore, even if you have an abortion, you are not ‘taking’ a Life, you are stopping the Form that that Life will take from taking Form. Because allowing Life to take that Form would, for instance, cause disharmony. So, within altering the form of Life, you’re not in essence, causing any harm. If that were so and you walk on the grass and you kill lots of animals and bugs – then you would be under the Law of Karma for eternity – because you are doing it every single day. There is, as such, also no difference between eating a vegetable or a fruit or an animal, you are changing the form of Life into another form of Life, which would come out of your body as shit, which then again becomes the manure, the support for the plants, for instance, to produce fruit or to produce grass so that the animal can eat it, so that the cycle can continue.

So, for instance, in the case of facing the question of having an abortion or not – one will look at the whole point from a perspective of harmony and disharmony. The guidelines on how to assess whether allowing a child to be born would be Best for All and in fact Honor Life, will be decided upon together. Within this, the central question that will be required of an answer is: What or how is the Life going to be of this being; is this Life going to be free from limitation? If it is not, and there is a high possibility for a disease or a genetic problem to manifest – then why would we make that Life suffer? The claim that one’s baby should be born regardless of its quality of Life because it is ‘a part of you’ is not valid, because everything is a part of you – Always! One’s belief does not change that.

What also requires to be understood is the fact that – because the Form Life takes on does not determine the Life, all Life is Equal, and thus – requires to be Equally Honored.

Therefore, the Principle of Honoring the Right to Life should not be understood in terms of not causing ANY harm or giving every baby the right to be born. It does, however, imply to eradicate all unnecessary harm and to ensure that all Life forms experience the Best Life possible.

Related articles

• Day 154: The Application of Justice in an Equal Money System
• Day 150: Voting Responsibility and Tight-Knit Communities in an Equal Money System
• Day 155: Constitutional Equality as the Rule of Law
• Day 128: What Is Nature Worth To Us?
• Day 220: The Greatest Cult in History

Day 154: The Application of Justice in an Equal Money System

Identifying the Source of Disharmony for Correctional Action

Within an Equal Money System the meaning of justice stands within the context of the maintenance of harmony within society. Therefore, injustice will entail the correction of points of disharmony. Whenever an individual or group of individuals is living in disharmony, and thus, will cause disruption and harm within society - an assessment will be done in terms of the origin of the disharmony.

If the disharmony is caused by inefficient management guidelines or institutional structures, then this inefficiency requires to be addressed on managerial or institutional level to correct the disharmony. Because in such event, the disruptive behavior of the individual or group of individuals is a reaction to a disharmonious environment - and thus, in removing the cause of the disharmony, the behavior will be corrected.

If the disharmony originates within the individual, it will be assessed whether the behavior is deliberate and a form of spite, or whether the condition is medical.
In the event that the origin is deliberate spitefulness by the individual, a social intervention will take place by experts. Because - understand that the moment one causes disharmony within society, one is in breach of the basic constitution - and therefore, one will no longer have the protection of the constitution, because one is breaking it. And, thus, from a certain perspective, one is breaking the law. However, the issue is not that one is breaking a law, but that one is breaking the harmony of co-existence - which means one is causing harm and such harm mus tbe prevented. Therefore, experts with the necessary level of skills to be able to assist, will take action through taking the individual through a process of re-education.
In the event that the condition is medical, where the dysfunctional behavior is caused by a chemical imbalance within the human, the correctional intervention will be centered around re-establishing the harmony within the physical make-up of the individual.

Correctional Facilitation

Within the current system we speak of 'correctional facilities', but what is actually being referred to is a building where we can lock-up criminals who now have to 'serve time' as payment for their mistakes. Thus - the term 'correctional facilities' is inappropriate as not enough - if any - emphasis is placed upon the actual correction of the disharmonious behavior.

Within an Equal Money System, disharmony will be addressed through facilitating correction in every possible way - which is what correctional facilities are supposed to be about. The focus will therefore not be upon punishment and revenge - as these actions in no way facilitate actual understanding, which is necessary to effectively correct the disharmony. As such, these measures only take into consideration those who were on the receiving end of the harm caused by the disharmony through making them feel 'safe', remunerating them for losses experienced or giving them a sense of satisfaction through vengeance. Obviously, this implies that the way the justice system currently works does not consider what is Best for All, as the well-being of the individual in disharmony is not equally considered. The justice system requires to address points of harm and disharmony in a way that is sustainable and actually aids the society as a whole. Punishment and revenge are merely quick-fixes to temporarily resolve a point of conflict, but don't ensure the prevention of further harm. 

Related articles

• Day 150: Voting Responsibility and Tight-Knit Communities in an Equal Money System
• Day 151: Media, Law and Information Accessibility within an Equal Money System
• Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System
• Day 148: Policy Initiation and the Role of Administrators in an Equal Money System
• Day 149: Credits and Levels of Administration within an Equal Money System

Day 152: Linux proves Profit Motive does not Provide the Best Result

One of the main arguments that has been put forward in terms of why we have to hold on to a profit-based economic system, is that - apparently - people are not motivated to perform to the best of their ability if there is no form of monetary reward attached to it.

If that were the case, then who can explain the Linux phenomenon?

The Linux operating system and software are assembled under the model of free and open source software development and distribution. It means that everyone who is capable and interested can be a part of designing the products and it can be freely used, modified and re-distributed by anyone.

It's done by volunteers for the betterment of everyone. So - then the question: does it produce good results? Well -the following should answer that question:

"The Linux kernel was originally developed as free kernel for Intel x86-based personal computers. It has since been ported to more computer hardware platforms than any other kernel. Linux based operating systems are the leading operating system type on servers and other big iron systems such as mainframe computers and supercomputers: more than 90% of today's 500 fastest supercomputers run some variant of Linux, including the 10 fastest. Linux also runs on embedded systems (devices where the operating system is typically built into the firmware and highly tailored to the system) such as mobile phones, tablet computers, network routers, televisions and video game consoles; the Android system in wide use on mobile devices is built on the Linux kernel."

The best computers on Earth run on some variant of Linux - that says something, right? I mean - computer technology is one of the main points we see as important in terms of 'advancements' in technology and most of these advancements are made by volunteers. That completely debunks the idea that you need to pay people and need an environment of competition for people to be creative and driven to achieve excellence.

Within the current system we've simply been brainwashed into believing that we shouldn't do anything unless we can get some type of monetary or material reward out of it. And you can prove to yourself that this is in fact brainwashing by looking back at your childhood - where you looked at what you wanted to be in the world - whether it was a farmer, a hair dresser, a doctor or a librarian - where you didn't factor in the point of money and wealth - because that didn't form part of your motivation. You simply looked at what you would enjoy doing and where you'd like to contribute and what you'd like to participate in. It's only when you got older that you started becoming lazy, because your passions were no longer considered and you were just expected to fall in line and 'get with the program'. In such a context, laziness is a form of giving up on yourself - because you see that the system does not really care about you and you see no way of changing that point - therefore, you become lethargic and decide to 'rebel' in a way - through only doing the bare minimum. And to get people to do the bare minimum - they bribe you with money - making it so that: if you don't do the bare minimum, you simply don't get money and you simply can't survive.

So - in changing the system from a worker-manufacturing system to a life-support system - these problems will mostly become irrelevant. For more perspective on this point, I suggest reading the Labour section on the Equal Money Wiki.

Related articles

• Day 220: The Greatest Cult in History
• Day 116: Is Brainwashing Possible?
• Day 141: Even the Rain: Water Politics - Catastroika
• Day 233: Speak System, Speak!!! - ADC - Part 80
• Day 131: The Justice System - also a Scam?

Day 148: Policy Initiation and the Role of Administrators in an Equal Money System

Within the following blogs we'll be replying to a comment made in relation to 'Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System'.

How would new policy ideas be brought up? For example, if it came to be that the systems in place to provide for everyone's basic necessities became so efficient (many years down the road) that it was no longer necessary to have every human contribute 4 years to maintain it, how would it work to propose reducing the conscription period to, say 3 years and 3 months? Could individuals propose new policy changes or would they only be proposed by policy-makers as experts?

Within the stage of identifying policy-issues, everyone is able to participate, regardless of qualification or expertise. Each one will have a 'Life Profile', which is an online profile, like we are familiar with from networking sites such as 'Facebook'. This profile will be your main interaction portal with the political decision-making process, through which you can signal policy issues that require direction or alignment, as well as make your own suggestions as to how to correct the point. Therefore, the stage of the identification of policy issues is available to all, regardless of qualifications. Once policy issues have been identified and suggestions have been made by the general population, the next stage is initiated, which involves the policy formulation by experts.

It might be helpful to provide specifics on how these committees of law-makers will be assembled.

To answer this question we require to distinguish between the various participants within the law-making or policy-making process - which are:
- The general population
- Scientific experts
- The administration

In terms of the content of the policies to be decided on, only the general population and the scientific experts are relevant.

The role of the general population mainly pertains to the identification of policy-issues as well as the cross-referencing point in terms of voting on whether or not the proposed policies indeed adhere to the Constitutional Principles of Equality and What is best for All.

The role of the scientific experts pertains to the formulation of policy in adherence with the scientific and mathematical methodologies as laid out by the Constitution.

So - what role is left then for the administrators? The role of the administrators is a purely managerial function. They have in fact no more influence on policy-making than anyone else does. The type of functions administrators are to perform are for instance the convening of all identified policy issues by the population as well as their suggestions, the directing of all organizational aspects involved with bringing together a qualified committee of scientists with the relevant expertise in terms of the particular policy that requires to be formulated, the publishing of each step within the policy-making process, and so on. Their role is thus to ensure that the Rule of Law as laid out by the Constitution is followed without influencing the content of the policies themselves.

Members of the administration require to have a minimum set of qualifications and will be voted into office for 1 term. Ideally, each person will only be able to take office once in their lifetime to give each one who so desires, the opportunity to experience what is involved within taking in a position of responsibility in the world.

I'm assuming they will be payed beyond the basic income everyone is to receive in an Equal Money System- so does that mean they receive the same hourly wage as everyone else choosing to take part in work beyond the 4-year conscription period? 

Your question shows that you're coming from an understanding of the Equal Money System based on old information. The Equal Money System proposal is one that goes through change and adjustment according to feedback and comments we receive (like yours). So, I suggest reading the Labor section on the EMS Wiki to understand that there will be no relationship between labor and the resources available to you. In other words, there will be no hourly, daily, weekly, monthly or any other type of wages paid out in an Equal Money System. Each one fulfills their 4-year internship, which forms part of each one's educational curriculum, after that - for those who wish to in some way continue to contribute to society, labor is voluntary. Everyone is equal within this point and Administrators will therefore not receive any type of special treatment in terms of receiving additional resources or support while they are in office.

The point of resources allocation will further be clarified within the next blog.

Related articles

• Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System
• Day 142: Presidents under Fire
• Day 141: Even the Rain: Water Politics - Catastroika

Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System

Many people ask the question whether 'What's Best for All' and 'Democracy' from the starting point of 'the majority rules' are not contradictory or incompatible.

What is being looked at within such questions is a scenario where a majority wants to enforce a particular policy -- but this policy is not best for all – what then?

Many democracies existent today are constitutional democracies. A constitution contains a set of fundamental principles and guidelines according to which the particular state will be governed. It is thus a 'framework' within which all decisions, policy and legislation are made. Whenever a new policy is being developed or when policies are reviewed -- it has to be checked whether it adheres to the base principles, as outlined within the Constitution. If they are not -- they are considered to be 'unconstitutional' and can hence be disregarded. This also implies, that even in democracies today -- one cannot vote on policies which are in essence unconstitutional, and there is thus a 'limit' on what is acceptable and allowed. So, what we are introducing within and Equal Money System, where Equality and What is Best for All are the base principles of the Equal Money Constitution: is nothing New.

Within this, it is thus implied that achieving and enforcing what is Best for All is not contradictory to democracy per se -- as the available options to be voted on, will always be within the framework of what is Best for All. As such -- voting will not exist from the perspective that one is presented with a policy and either 'likes' or 'dislikes' it based on an opinion one has and would vote accordingly. Instead, one will be presented with policies which have been designed by various agents from various backgrounds/expertise who have volunteered to contribute their time to design policies as frameworks and guidelines in terms of how particular points are to be managed -- and these are always designed within the starting point and context of Equality and what is Best for All. The end result coming from this process, will then be peer reviewed to cross-reference the proposal and make sure that all points are aligned within what is Best for All and that no points have been left unconsidered.

All of these processes, will occur in a transparent, publicly available manner -- where at any moment, anyone can check the movement of information -- leaving no space for 'hidden agendas'.

Upon completion of the peer review, the particular proposal or policy will be presented to the public for voting -- which is then in essence the final stage of review/cross-referencing. Within the voting process one is then in fact indicating that one agrees that what is proposed is indeed Best for All -- and if one disagrees, one would have to back up this disagreement with the necessary proof and evidence -- upon which the policy/proposal can be revised/re-evaluated (simply having an 'opinion', is thus not acceptable).

Within this structure Education will play a major role, within ensuring effective education to all children in order to provide them with the necessary mathematical, scientific and common sense skills and insights, to be able to evaluate and participate within policy formulation or policy-review effectively.

The focus is thus on the Participation of the Majority within directly taking part in the policy creation process.

Within this, the approach of 'Prevention is the Best Cure' also plays a vital role -- where we want to ensure that all policies and decision-making are done in order to prevent consequences resulting from inequality. When consequences have already manifested, this would indicate a major problem in the effective application processes where a point within the foundation is unsound and 'cracked' so to speak, which results in having to 'go back' and fix things -- which is unnecessary and could have been prevented, and these points would as such require urgent attention. We thus want to ensure at all all points are taken into consideration at all times, so that a sound foundation can be in place which will prevent unnecessary harm and abuse from taking place. This is in contrast to our current system, which only acts after problems and consequences have already taken place and only then devise solutions -- which is in essence, doing everything 'backwards'.

Related articles

• Day 137: Greece: The Birth and Death of Democracy
• Day 111: Evilution - Neocolonialism - Part 2
• Day 128: What We've Failed to Consider about Policy and Voting
• Day 141: Even the Rain: Water Politics - Catastroika
• Day 140: Congo - Children Torn from Families as we Speak to Fight as Soldiers in Civil War
• Day 142: Presidents under Fire

Day 144: Airport Tender Sham Under the Auspices of NeoApartheid

The Msunduzi Municipality has the responsibility of handling the tender for the management of the Pietermaritzburg Airport. In 2010, the municipality advertised a contract for the management of the airport, for which there were 6 bidders. The contract was awarded to Joint Venture. Another bidder, Indiza logged an objection based on faulty scoring procedures. The chairman of the objection hearing ruled in Indiza's favor and said the tender had to go back to the bid evaluation and adjudication committees for correction. The Bid Evaluation Committee, subsequently, recommended that Indiza get the contract.

However, the acting municipal manager decided to cancel the contract with Indiza without giving proper reasons - only stating they had to cancel the contract due to 'unforseen circumstances'. The real reason is probably that they wanted to get pay-back for Indiza's logging of the objection. It's like a child saying: "You rat me out to the teacher - I hate you now!"

This story yet again reeks of political corruption - where those placed in power by democratic means have no other intention than to further the interest of the elite classes of society and completely ignore and sabotage the democratic processes that have been put in place to protect the citizens from the government abusing its power. Political decisions are made through mutual agreements between politicians and corporations that both wish to enhance their own self-interested agendas with no regard for the good of the community. And who ends up drawing the short end of the stick? The people - who have to deal with an economic environment to which they have less and less access and in which they have less and less opportunity to live a dignified life. While the elites as politicians and their corporatist friends create their own little utopia by means of the sweat and suffering of their citizens and clients.

NeoApartheid has got us by the balls - and this time it's not limited to South Africa - it's happening all over the world - read the newspapers, do your research - we live in a NeoApartheid world where some hold all the cards and others have nothing - no rights, no freedoms, no power - even if they don't know it yet.

The ANC which led the struggle for liberation from Apartheid in South Africa has become blinded by the bling of money - where they themselves are now the ones upholding NeoAprtheid through economic and political corruption - claiming all the rights and all the freedoms for the price of everyone else's. They keep on trying to manipulate public opinion through emotional reference to their role in the struggle for liberation and by continuously trying to link themselves with Nelson Mandela, who, himself, declared that the ANC is no longer what he created it to be.

It's time we design a new world based on True Equality and Right to Life - join us on the Equal Money Forum to discuss the creation of an Economic and Political system in which people rule for themselves, by themselves and where no position within the system can ever lead to a path of corruption and NeoApartheid. This is your world - take responsibility. Educate yourself and join those who are dedicated to create Real Solutions that work according to the Principle of what is Best for All!

Related articles

• Battle for spoils tearing ANC apart - Zille
• "The ANC today is no longer the party I joined in prison during 1980″ - Zackie Achmat
• Day 143: The Neo-Apartheid Era
• Dag 126: Turning a Blind Eye to Corruption
• Day 109: Politics as a Double-Faced Game