From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
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.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:40 MDT