For Sipu or anyone really.

I have been thinking. Big thinking!

Mankind is not doing very well is it? Wars, financial crises, ISIL, people becoming so old that we can’t afford to look after them, religion and all the associated suffering because of it, babies washed up on sea shores, migration at “biblical proportions”….I could go on all day.

So, as I said, I have been thinking. Just as when our computers become clogged up with garbage and cease to function properly we reboot or even reset to manuafcturers settings, maybe mankind also needs a reset.

What would this include? Here are just a few ideas to get started.

  1. Euthenasia for over 80s
  2. Concept of needing to “work” to exist needs changing
  3. Religion abolished
  4. Introduction of democracy throughout the world, especially in the West
  5. World Government
  6. Abolish money
  7. Genetically engineer humans to remove the ‘greed’ gene.

Over to you Sipu 🙂

Author: gazoopi

After finally leaving the world of the black suit and tie, briefcase and laptop, hotel rooms and airports, and donning sandals, jeans and a flat cap, I have entered a new world of creative writing. If, through my written work, I can create a smile, cause a tear to fall or stimulate an LOL from my readers, I will be a winner!

53 thoughts on “For Sipu or anyone really.”

  1. 1. I don’t want my grandparents to be executed. Better to try this out in council estates.
    2. An idle mind is the devil’s play thing. Work is good and necessary.
    3. Religion isn’t the problem, it never was. Greed for power is. Religion is simply one vehicle that many
    choose in order to pursue their dream of power.
    4. I agree that democracy should be introduced in the West. Not sure if it would would in China, though.
    5. Take a look at the UN. Do you really want to give them as much, if not more, power than the EU has?
    6. Money exists because people can’t only barter. Better to abolish my debts.
    7. Good luck with that. It’s acquired, not inherited.

  2. Christopher: We should have evolved to the point where we have active minds even without work, or do you consider all pensioners to have idle minds?

    Religion is the problem. It always was.

    Greed comes from character, which is mainly inherited.

    We can at least agree on the council estates 🙂

  3. Hi, Gaz

    I am not sure how far your tongue is in your cheek, but here goes:-

    1: I know plenty of people over 80 who are far more use to society than some half there age, so NO.

    2: Define “needing” and “work”. If you mean anyone should be allowed to sit around all day doing nothing, then NO.

    3: If you add “Organised Religion” then YES

    4: Define “democracy”. What works in a city state, does not work in a country of 50 million inhabitants so GOOD IDEA but IMPOSSIBLE.

    5: Absolutely and definitely NOT.

    6: And replace with barter? How many cows or seashells will the average airliner cost? So definitely NOT

    7: There is no such thing as the greed gene. If you try to modify Prof Dawkins “selfish gene” you will rather upset the balance of nature and evolution itself, so NO.

    BTW is this the five minute argument or the full half hour? 🙂

    https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=five%20minute%20argument%20monty%20python

  5. My turn:

    1. Watch it, sonny
    2. Work? Can’t remember. See 1.
    3. Execute the infidel.
    4. Abolish democracy.
    5. Trump for boss. See 4.
    6. New currency: the Trump.
    7. Reward greed with freeBigMacs.

  7. All: We need to do another reset here. The idea was for you all to add your own shopping list to the Mankind Reset criteria, not only comment on mine…..

    Come on: What would you like to see done on our little planet?

  12. I somehow think this is not what Sipu had in mind but I could be wrong. I found it amusing but I find I’m firmly in agreement with my learned friend Mr Mackie on the subject of euthanasia.

    Frogs are the future, in my opinion. 🙂

    World Government? You have to be joking.

  14. People need something to do with their lives. Many aren’t creative enough to keep themselves occupied with positive pastimes. Thus, work should be necessary for at least a certain period of time. Since pensioners worked their entire lives they should not be penalised for their longevity.

    Atheism has been just as destructive as organised religion — Lenin’s cultural policies, Mao’s Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, etc. Mussolini was somewhat constrained because he had to make peace with the Church — something Hitler didn’t find necessary. I dislike organised religion in general but think that there is far worse.

  15. I’m too old to understand ‘plastic frog post’. Is it cheaper than airmail? Is it a euphemism (spell check, quick)? Is euthanasia a euphemism? Is Trump an abomination?

    Signed Confused, Baltic Fringe

  16. But as you remind us, we have to give you solutions to the fate of this planet.

    I’ve got a few minutes to spare before breakfast, so let me see….. 😅

  18. Humans lack common sense. It’s things that actually happen that matter, not endless debate and philosophising. Unfortunately it’s the debaters and philosophers who are in charge and since they have a non practical outlook on everything and no practical experience they invariably screw things up.
    Most Humans also lack the moral courage to make hard decisions.

    I would give practical skills a far higher precedence in the school curriculum than they presently enjoy. In order to get to ‘Uni’ (dreadful word ) you would have to a an A+ in a skill, Woodwork, pottery, dressmaking, gardening, fitting and turning…..etc…etc. and if you didn’t ? Well no ‘Uni’ you.

    If this stricture had been applied previously I bet many of our current politicians and senior public ‘servants’ wouldn’t be there.

    Practical skills built the empire and intellectuals lost it.

    BTW the word (?) ‘Uni’ is pronounced with a nasel whine in the same way that you would say ‘Socialism’ or ‘entitlement’.

  21. 1. No but allow those who want to go to do so.
    2. No – but stop change the idea that those who don’t provide for themselves should have the same life-style and goodies as those who do.
    3. No – but since religion is a life-style choice stop making allowances for different belief systems. Common sense, and equality should prevail over nonsensical religious dogma.
    4. Make a start by not allowing anyone to sit in parliament until they’ve done ten years living in the real world and then sacking them after 10 years working in government..
    5. You have to be joking!
    6. No other way of exchanging labour for goods
    7. Stop financial institutions from lending money to keep people permanently in debt.

    8. Start limiting the world’s population.

  23. Gazoopi: stop throwing good money after bad. If people can’t feed children, stop sending them food aid. The Japanese traditionally limited their family sizes to about 2-3 in order to prevent stretching natural resources. In developed countries no child aid should be provided past the second child. Anything else encourages people to have too many children in order to make more money.

  24. Jazz, your educational model doesn’t acknowledge the some have practical skills and some don’t, just as with ‘brains’. Would you have penalised Einstein if he couldn’t do woodwork?

  25. Christopher: So, what would you do with third and subsequent children if the parent was put into a situation where they couldn’t any longer provide for them? Let the child starve, remove it from it’s parents, have it terminated or we could have all women sterilised after their second child…?
    I certainly have no satisfactory answers except to provide a safety net from the state, as all developed countries do today.

  26. To say that children would starve without additional child allowances is an oft stated fallacy. There are private charities and there are charity chops. I’ve had my share of hard times, too. The problem with the safety net as it is constructed is that too many treat it like a hammock.

  27. All these liberal ideas ignore the fact that if people don’t HAVE to work to live decently, many will be happy to sponge off those with consciences. Simples.

  29. I just don’t want to live in a country where our houses are protected by barbed wire fences and going outside means being surrounded by poor starving beggars.
    As soo as we begin to let the ‘lower’ end of society drop further, we begin to live in such a country. I have seen enough poverty and starvation to last me a lifetime, even though I have never been in Africa or India yet. Lack of support for children does nothing to limit the number of children born. On the contrary, the poorest ountries have the highest birthrate. I guess this is a human instinct to have more children when the chance of survival is low.
    I had an aunt who had 13 children, 11 of which survived into adulthood and are all grandparents today. They were very poor and at that time were not helped by the state. However it didn’t stop her from having those children.

  30. Janus, you are right, there will always be those who don’t want to work. Where is the fundamental reason to work coming from? You or I would not feel well if we hadn’t worked. Christopher has implied that he needs to work to not become idle. Other people think differently, so why not let them?
    I have a good friend who is a Philosophy Professor in Paris. He tells me that his job is not work. It is a hobby. Should we stop paying him as he is enjoying himself?
    Alright I know that I am stretching it a bit here, but Sipu did say that many of the blogs are boring 🙂

  31. janus

    …Would you have penalised Einstein if he couldn’t do woodwork?

    No. And how do you know that he wasn’t good at glass blowing..or something?

  32. Gazoopi: if people can support themselves without needing to work then I see no problem with their not working. If people enjoy their jobs they have unusually good luck. We work because we have to, because we need to survive in some way or another.

  33. Christopher: That is exactly what I meant in the original post “concept of work needs to change”.

    In the near future, after the point of technological singularity, there will be no such thing as work. We know that today. Machines will be able to do everything, from cleaning, building, medical care for us weakling humans, create music, symphonies, . You name it and machines will be able to do it.

    Between now and then we have to rethink our concept of ‘working’. It is not that “if people can support themselves” it is that ALL people must be able to support themselves without working.

    Immediately after the point of technological singularity there will be an exponential increase in computer capabilities within seconds. It will be like a technological big bang.

    And what’s more. I haven’t been drinking either 🙂

  35. It strikes me that most of the world’s problems are caused by overcrowding of too many human beings.
    The world needs a serious culling of humanity.

    A. Let plagues and disease ravage unchecked. Stop do-gooding liberals meddling with cures. In the past plagues and disease only ravaged a certain proportion of the population and kept the numbers in control.

    B. Stop all handouts for children. You want ’em, you pay for them. Refuse to alleviate poverty and starvation anywhere. Make contraception freely available. Parasites in the west will soon stop breeding if they cannot get the freebies to which they have become accustomed.

    C. Stop all IVF and fertility treatments. Stop all neonatal medicine. Humanity should not be assisted to produce sub standard human beings that nature would not have allowed to enter the genetic pool unassisted.

    D. I rather suspect that we either make an effort to reduce our numbers or nature will do it for us, probably in a far more unpleasant way.

    E. Allow euthanasia at any age. If you want out why not? Nobody else’s business anyway! I always thought Soylent Green was a rather prophetic movie anyway!

    It is patently obvious that the current population, especially of the west, is going downhill in intelligence, moral integrity and ability to create anything of worth or consequence. Time for a change, perhaps another species might do a little better?

  38. Wouldn’t it just!

    Thinking on, for centuries the British govt. have been bumbling incompetent tossers. Lord North going on holiday during the War of Independence, just like Cameron! Refusing to relieve Mafeking seemingly over political point scoring. etc etc. All remind one of the current immigrant balls up.
    But and it is a big but,the general run of people seemed to be far more sensible than now, self reliance was a built in survival instinct. Now its why hasn’t it been done for me, provided and paid for.
    Puke making, frankly I’d be quite happy to have left the bodies rotting on the beach as a reminder to others.
    Kos, Calais or Brighton. People need to toughen up to survive because at the end of the day it is about our survival, not theirs.
    We can’t all make it. There just isn’t enough to go round anymore, especially agricultural land and water.

  39. christinaosborne

    Thinking on, for centuries the British govt. have been bumbling incompetent tossers.

    My thoughts exactly. I think the real rot set in with Gladstone who seems to have been an arch tinkerer.
    Living in a country (continent ?) governed by a bunch of vacillating fools is no fun.

  41. First of all thank you Janus, for this post, though I do wish, sometimes, that you has the balls to take a stand on some these issues instead of posting an endless stream of rhetorical questions.

    Christina, I have to say I have considerable sympathy with your comment above. Those photographs and the ensuing outpouring of ‘disgust, anger, grief, horror etc. etc.’ were the best bit of marketing any human trafficker, IS terrorist or Islamic expansionist (and let’s not pretend that this whole business is not about spreading Islam to the West) could have asked for. While I am not suggesting it is the case, it would not surprise me if the whole thing was staged just as was this photograph. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/heartbreaking-syria-orphan-photo-wasnt-taken-in-syria-and-not-of-orphan-9067956.html

    Broadly speaking, journalists, politicians and lawyers stand guilty of manipulating public sentiment and the law to their own selfish ends and truly are the last people on earth to be worthy of passing moral judgement.

    The BBC has wheeled out dozens of luvvies who have expressed passionate support for Britain’s accepting thousands more migrants but I have not heard a single guest speaker who opposes that view. And yet we know damn well there are millions who do oppose accepting them and that they almost certainly make up the majority.

    The truth of the matter is that there are far greater numbers of people suffering all over the world than there are on the beaches of the Mediterranean. But those stories do not sell newspapers, win votes or generate legal fees. Christ had it right when he was criticised by Judas for allowing Mary Magdalene to anoint his feet with expensive oils, ‘the poor will always be with us’.

    Janus, with reference to your last question, you know my answer to that. For now at least, as far as I am concerned Zimbabwe is a much better place to live than Blighty or most countries in Europe. And you can forget Australia, New Zealand, the US or Canada. I think Chile would be worth exploring as alternative.

  42. How would I curb population growth? Simple – like Christina I would stop paying people to procreate.

    I don’t know how old you are Gazoopi, but may I give you a small (potted) history. In my own case, child benefit only applied to the second child and any subsequent children. I stopped at two. Child care places were only given to those in ‘need’ and no one expected the State to provide child care facilities for those who simply wanted to go back to work because they ‘want it all’. Life is about choices – and it’s about time people realised that having children is not a ‘right’ but also carries responsibilities. NO ONE has to have a child these days – and those who make that choice should have to face the consequences of their actions – especially those idiots who claim that God has told them to ‘go forth and multiply’.

    Going further back – there has been relief for the poor for many centuries in England – no one has ever had to barricade themselves from hordes of beggars. OK it was minimal relief and the Work Houses were pretty grim – and no one is suggesting that we go back to that.

    As to going back a bit – some family history here – my grandmother was left a widow with five children under the age of 10 in 1929. The Relieving Officer arrived and told my grandmother that she had to sell her carpets (unnecessary), any chairs over six (unnecessary), her curtains (unnecessary), her engagement ring (unnecessary) and indeed anything else that was deemed unnecessary – I have no doubt that had the Relieving Officer known that my grandmother had been offered 20 pounds for my grandfather’s brain she would have been told to sell it. My grandmother told the Relieving Officer to close the door on his way out.

    I see no problem with telling people who sit on their back-sides doing nothing that they and their family do not have the right to cars, holidays, numerous TV sets, electronic games, boob-jobs, etc, etc at the expense of those who are getting up every day to do a job that they hate to provide for their families. And actually, I see no problem with offering incentives to people to stop producing a load of children who are being brought up with the “I’m entitled to” mentality.

    As for the some of Christina’s other ideas – I’m inclined to agree – if nature has made you infertile – get a life and live with it – it’s a fact that maybe your genes aren’t worth reproducing.

    Later – amended to read ‘Not a right’ !

  43. Not guilty, Sipu! It was gaz.

    But to answer your jibe, I take a stand on the logic of arguments rarher than take sides because I rarely see a cause worth defending.

  44. Janus, I agree that it is nearly always about the logic, but unless you defend one side of an argument or the other, it is going to be difficult to fully explore the logic. Wouldn’t you rather be a passionate player than neutral spectator in the debating game? I would rather play hard and lose than not play at all. I would rather be involved in life than a mere observer of it. But I do agree that there are not many causes, beyond one’s own personal well-being, that are truly worth defending.

  45. Glad to see you here Sipu. But not glad that I put all of this hard effort for you and you acknowledge it all to Janus.
    You wanted something worth commenting on. I thought that the future of mankind might be important enough 🙂
    Regarding the seven steps to change the world. I would implement all of them.

  46. P.S. Regarding euthenasia, I was probably strongly influenced by the death of my parents this year, only a few weeks (and a few hospital wards) apart from each other. They were both ninety and ended miserably and seperated. I know for certain that they would have been happier holding hands on the way out much earlier.
    They also both died in a ward full of other cases, who had no more quality in their lives and were draining the hospital resources preventing them from treating more needy patients.

  48. Sipu

    Missed your comment before I posted – I am tired of hearing about ‘poor’ refugees who can afford to pay thousands of pounds / dollars to jump the queues of those who stagger to the nearest place of safety to await the charity of the West to give them a safe haven. Send all the others back – and only deal with those who abide by the rules. Why would any country give sanctuary to those who break international law? If they are prepared to break the first rule of law – why should anyone trust them not to break the laws of the country which gives them asylum?

    Gazoopi – not the 8th of Jan? 🙂 .

    I do not like the word euthanasia one bit. It denotes the notion of the State, or someone determining that a human being is past their ‘use by date’ (80 or whatever) and should be pushed into the Great Unknown – whether they want to or not.

    I far prefer the words “Dying with Dignity”, which I suspect is what you, and your parents, would have wanted. The words are important.

    Another of my ‘big issues’ with religion (along with the go forth and multiply directive) is the belief that their God has not given humanity free choice and that we must all suffer… and cannot choose our own ending … what sort of God is that? Not mine! No one should support euthanasia – but we should all support the right to Die with Dignity at the time and in the manner of our choosing,

  50. Boadicea, yes I can agree with you that the wording is important, especially in the ‘state’ control point. “Dying with Dignity” is a different thing in my book and can, but does not necessarily involve, choosing the moment of one’s death.
    How does someone who has lost his/her mind die with dignity?

    No, 28th January 1956 🙂

  51. “that their God has not given humanity free choice and that we must all suffer… and cannot choose our own ending … what sort of God is that? ”

    It has always struck me that there is an incredible divergence between 1. The Old Testament God of wrath.
    2. The New Testament God of charity. and 3. The God of post AD 384 Synod of Nicea!

    Up till then all sorts of things happened within Christianity, women were acceptable both their presence and their money to keep the early church going. Miracles happened spontaneously! Death just happened.
    But then the church got its act together and turned a good idea into a hierarchical money making exercise!
    All of a sudden women were cast out of the hierarchy, (except their money) Miracles attracted pilgrims and contributions to kiss the odd saintly toenail clipping.
    AND, best of all, tithes and glebe lands and as many assets as the church could grab! Would you seriously allow your source of income to self destruct itself at the first sign of adversity? Of course it became a crime to kill yourself. Any right minded keeper of the purse would rather have 10% every year over the one time burial fee!

    I have always thought a great deal attributed to God was more likely to be attributed to frighteners put on the lower orders of population to keep the hierarchy in place and comfortable.

    Note how the church fell like a ton of bricks on the Albigensians and exterminated them. They didn’t want to breed! No one to tax! Likewise the repulsion of the Antinomian movement of New England. (Who believed anyone could be in direct contact with God without the need for a church hierarchy.

    I do not remember most of the Bible very well. If any of you can cite specific of God making suicide a crime I should like to know! (And I don’t own a concordance!)

    Currently the state has taken over the hierarchy of the Church, can you imagine the consternation if people carefully arranged their affairs and then popped themselves off neatly depriving the state of revenue?
    My my! Even less contributions to keep new immigrants!
    Does anyone know how the muslims regard suicide?

Add your Comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: