Thoughts on Fixing the System

The only way to fix anything is to actively look for viable solutions.

The product development process has been designed from the ground up as a method to find solutions to problems, which is why I think applying this process to social issues is a good way to actually solve problems.

Politics uses a different process to find solutions, if at all that's what it tries to do, and obviously it has not resolved anything for more than 2000 years.

Design, Engineering, Architecture, Science and Physics are all disciplines designed to find solutions to problems. It is just a matter of implementing their methods to solve global social issues.

The first step any of these disciplines use to solve any problem is to do a lot of research. Global scale solutions to global scale problems, require global scale research.

We now have the global communication and infrastructure to perform global scale research, and that is what Fixing the System is all about, at least on this stage of the process.

We are programming an online platform that will allow people to find and research viable solution to global scale problems and there is an increasing number of websites doing a similar thing.

The FTS platform should hopefully be online and functional within a month. In the meantime what we are doing here is brainstorming different ideas which is also a very important part of the product development process.

Another important part of the PD process is to create a design brief, or a set of requirements that serve as guidelines. For this project however, we believe the important thing is to create a set of values and principles that would be at the core of any proposed alternative.

First and foremost, a viable alternative cannot be violent. It cannot call for war, or provoke the destruction of any nation, point of view or group of people. It can not encourage anarchy , false revolutions or social uprisings. Instead, it must be compatible with the current systems, adopt their virtues and allow a moderate and gradual transition. We can not pretend to destroy what already exists.

An alternative must be much more humane and pragmatic, a strategic transformation, or evolution. It must be adaptable and spread worldwide without the need for oppression or senseless dictatorships. Instead, people, the industry and even governments, should welcome it as an overall benefit to society and individuals.

It should however, create an incentive for businesses, a competitive advantage to those who become part of it, so that it can propagate in the same way the Internet and other beneficial technologies have spread around the Planet.

An efficient system should not be ideological. It should not judge religious beliefs or political views. Instead it should provide a level of global cooperation and union, where the priority is life, respect for others and for nature. It must guarantee human rights and freedom, but must also be organized, efficient. and encourage technological development as well as the protection of our planet.

It should compensate hard work and value excellence. It should motivate human beings to get an education and move forward as individuals of multiple cultures and points of view, but must also give all people equal opportunities. Must ensure access to all basic goods, but must not promote or encourage laziness, apathy and mediocrity.

A good alternative must take into account the needs of our society, adapt to our current situation and ensure our future. It must provide an efficient global resource management platform through the prioritization of alternative energy development and implementation. It must eradicate our root problems through efficiency, creativity and innovation, as well as moral, ethical values, not by force or by arms.

Now, you say that the only way to fix the system would be to destroy what already exists. To demolish the system and start over.

Don't you think you would find opposition by trying to destroy those who think different from you or those who agree with the current system? Strategically, that approach is destined to fail.

Wanting to destroy another system, in the same way that socialism, communism want to destroy capitalism each other is one of the things that are keeping our society on a constant state of conflict and polarization.

You also say that we need to destroy organized crime, and to some extent I agree there. But the question we need to ask is what is the cause of organized crime?

Isn't organized crime a result of the design deficiencies of the current system? Isn't the monetary system, and the quest for money, which you have to take form other people, the one thing that drives organized crime?

Why is there weapons trade along the Mexican border? Isn't it because of the poor uneducated people used as pawns by the drug cartels who know that they will do anything or kill anyone just to make money as quick as possible?

We need to focus our solutions on the root of the problem and not on the causes, with organized being one of the biggest problems caused by the current monetary system. Would changing the system reduce organized crime? Perhaps.

Now, if I am to say that we need to destroy or go against the monetary system I would be completely contradicting myself.

So wouldn't it make more sense to design a system that works better, gives people opportunity, allows them to collaborate and compete, creates innovation and motivation and provides freedom and opportunity, but more importantly gives people the choice to transition to it without obligation?

If it really is more efficient, the transition would be seamless.

It would be like wanting a new computer because the one you have had for 10 years just doesn't work as well anymore, but those who love their 10 year old computer can keep using it if they want to.

I know It sounds idealistic, but I am certain that we, humans, are capable of designing a better system.