Author Archives: Anna Brix Thomsen

Education of the Human – Best for All in an Equal Money System

In the article Conceptualizing Human Capital, Nancy Folbre and Paula England present “capabilities” as a concept to describe the basic requirements humans need to function effectively in the world. They use this as a platform to critique the neoclassical notion of “human capital”. They introduce capabilities (or capital) from the perspective that these until now have not been valued as actual skills that human beings require to develop; and that requires to be a part of the political, economic and educational policies of the world. What is interesting about this perspective is that it offers an actual critical alternative to capabilities that as human capital until now (through neoclassical economics) has been seen more as preferences taken on by the rational self-interested human being.

The perspective I present in this article, is an amalgamation of the neoclassical notion of the rational and self-interested human being and Folbre and England’s notion of altruism as inherent (or at least emergent) in the development of capabilities. I do this to engage in a discussion on developing an educational policy applicable in an Equal Money System that is based on what is best for all. From this it is my aim to investigate what basic capabilities are to develop ourselves as human beings to a point of utmost support for our own well-being and for the well-being of all. I will go through the capabilities as they are described by Folbre and England and consequently discuss these in relation to an Equal Money System.

Let’s first have a look at what Folbre and England’s definition of capabilities:

A Capability is a state that requires effort from the individual. It requires to be developed and enables one to function effectively in society, once applied and implemented. Capabilities are beneficial both for the individual and for the collective well-being. Folbre and England describe four different types of capabilities: physical, cognitive, self-regulating and caring capabilities.

Capabilities

The physical capabilities are the basic physical requirements for caring physically for oneself, such as cooking food, getting dressed, cleaning the house, knowing when to respond to pain etc. However with these basic physical functioning capabilities, Folbre and England contends that they are often not discussed or emphasized (in social science or in economy) and suggests that this can be because of the tradition in this of valuing “mind over matter” in these traditions ranging back to a focus on the metaphysical . (C.F Descartes famous quote: “I think, therefore I am”.) [i]

Cognitive capabilities include what is considered “formal education” that according to Folbre and England has an extensive impact on one’s income earning abilities. Besides these capabilities that is achieved through education, such as reading, writing and math, Folbre and England describe capabilities such as house hold economy, the ability to see the cause and effect of one’s actions and points such as mental health and emotions as part of the cognitive capabilities.

Self-Regulation capabilities are based on the ability to have self-discipline and Folbre and England suggests that this capability is the basis for the other capabilities, because without self-discipline, one is not capable to develop for example the ability to write. When self-discipline is developed one becomes able to perform tasks that one does not necessarily want to do or experience as difficult. Folbre and England suggest that self-regulation as a capability is not valued by economics as a human capital because economic theory would define self-regulation as a preference and not as a skill. Instead Folbre and England contends that self-regulation in fact is both a skill and a preference and they mention how becoming skilled and enjoying oneself once skilled mutually constitutes.

Folbre and England describes Caring capabilities as a “service” that differs from the other capabilities in that it also contains an element of altruism where having the capability might not (only) benefit oneself but also others and even that one within this could express care without it being of benefit for oneself, something that according to Folbre and England, refutes the neo-classical notion of rational self-interest. Caring capability also requires the other capabilities to function effectively, yet however also requires certain emotions and motives exactly as altruism, but also affection and warmth. Folbre and England contends that that even though caring as a service can be exchanged on the labor market, it is still valued as less than other types of work. As with self-regulation, neo classical economy sees altruism as a preference, but also here Folbre and England contends that altruism and the capability of care, requires skills. These then in turn requires to be developed.
How are capabilities developed?

In Human Capital theory, capital is considered a “stock” as a long-lasting transformation of the human that focuses on self-investment within the definition of investment as “present cause for later pay-off”. Folbre and England however introduces the notion of “input” instead of investment and uses the transference of capabilities between parents and children as an example for why this is.
This is then also used to argue for the notion of altruism in the caring capabilities, where parents act in supporting ways for the child to benefit, without getting anything out of it themselves. They are teaching the children skills that the children will use independently of the parents.

Why are capabilities important for society?

Folbre and England contends that capabilities are dependent on social embeddedness and as such exists as a social capital. They claim that as well new as traditional economics “underestimated the social and political nature that effects which children will have their capabilities developed the most” and that as such that “resource constraints should not be ignored.” What this means is that an assumption in neoclassical economic thinking (that which our world systems are based upon) is that everyone intrinsically have ‘equal opportunities’ to develop skills and capabilities. Folbre and England highlights the fact that the conditions we are born into determines to an utmost extend what opportunities we have to learn and develop skills and capabilities. These conditions are created through a political and financial system that in turn is created by us as human beings. Who and what we live as human beings is something we decide individually and collectively interdependent. The same goes for the capabilities that we support the development of, in ourselves, in our children and in society as a whole.

It is a Matter of stopping the Mind

For a long time physical work has been disregarded as “crude” and “simple”. This is reflected in how people that primarily work with the physical receive a much lower wage than those working in (and as) “mind-jobs”. When our children are sent to school, one of the primary points they are too learn, is to disconnect the mind from the body and use the body as a tool for the mind to expand, for example in sitting still and listening to the teacher and suppress the body’s urge to jump or sing or move. In all educational policies, it is thus the cognitive capabilities that are prioritized which can be seen in how all forms of craft classes and sports are minimized and cut back. But if we look at what it is the children are learning about the world, that which they are supposed to learn, to enable themselves to live as effective human beings, it is all in the head. They are expected to grow up and direct their physical world and reality, from within and as the mind, while the body remains a mere vehicle, a tool. In very few schools do children learn about their own bodies or how their bodies feel.They do not learn how to cook, clean or care for animals.
They do not (at least not effectively) learn how to interact with nature, with animals or with the bodies of other children and adults. Instead they learn to disconnect themselves from the physical, to use the body for competitive sports or transportation and as they grow up, they are expected to know how to move and care for their bodies, without actually being in (contact with) their bodies. They might learn about health regimes and that milk is good for you, but they don’t learn to feel in their stomach when some food is not supportive for them. They do not learn to touch or support themselves or each other in ways to alleviate pain or simply for enjoyment. We can draw a straight line from how the physical is disregarded in the current education system to how the state the world currently is in. What thrives is mind-based designs and constructs at the expense of the physical world – the real world – in which and as we live and which we cannot live without. The aspect of physical functioning thus reaches beyond learning basic skills of buttoning buttons – it involves caring for the entire planet as well as for ourselves and each other. A Destonian perspective on education will thus focus exactly on the physical, on us getting out of our heads and into the physical to actually learn to care and nurture ourselves, our bodies and the planet.

Learning is not fun in a capitalistic system

According to Folbre and England, self-regulation and discipline is both a preference and a skill. It becomes a preference when we discover the joy of completing a task or in learning something new. But as education is designed in the current system, a sole emphasis is on the skill aspect of self-discipline, where we are skilling ourselves to be able to compete with others on an unstable job market. The competition is based on fear of not survival and in many countries that is what enables children to remain disciplined – not because they are enjoying what they are learning or perfecting themselves within it. Furthermore, the way education systems are designed, children and adults are most often running on tight deadlines where text books have to be consumed with the speed of light and there is absolutely no focus on disciplining oneself for the sake of self-enjoyment. Furthermore: those of us who has had teachers that enjoyed teaching and teachers that did not, know that there is a lot more to learn from a teacher that enjoys what they are doing. But how can we expect teachers to enjoy themselves, when they get placed close to nothing and are stuffed into a small room with 40-60 students, disconnected and high on sugar and an old curriculum to teach from?
A Destonian perspective is that learning is about expanding and exploring oneself, alone and together with others – teaching is about standing as a living example, not a regurgitator of indoctrinating brainwash that only has the purpose of creating stupid obedient consumer slaves. Furthermore: learning is physical and education, both physical and cognitive could be developed in a variety of ways that incorporate physical learning – if only the focus was on developing capabilities that are best for all as well as the individual in a setting that is not based on fear of not surviving, but instead on self-expression, dedication and openness. If self-discipline is taught without self-consideration or direction, we educate followers that will create secret inner lives where they can live out their desires, we create workers that only do exactly as much as they have to for then to go home and leave the rest to someone else – instead we can educate ourselves (and the children) to develop a self-discipline that is based on dignity, on self-integrity and on doing what is best for all, simply in seeing the basic common sense in that principle – because the world-systems are based on equality.

Caring is Equal Money For all

A mentioned by Folbre and England, the caring sector is highly underpaid compared to occupations that favor cognitive capabilities. This includes teachers, nurses and all other professions where it is the care for other humans (and animals) that is the primary work function. What this means is that Care in itself is highly under-prioritized in our societies, something that can clearly be seen in the many cases of negligence and lack of funding in many care facilities. We are as a species underdeveloped in our ability to care for others (as well as ourselves and the planet). Care as a capability is furthermore a physical act, that one can do even if one does not get something out of it – this is also why there are still people volunteering and working in these positions even though they get no or little pay for their work. Obviously there is in this, a dimension of self-interest, in that a person in a care position can get something out of defining themselves as ‘carers’, something we shall come back to. However there are also people who place themselves in such positions, because they can see that it is of benefit for the group or individual they are working with or because they can see that it is best for all.

We live in a world that does not prioritize what is best for all – that in fact demotes the people who work for what is best for all, and as such stand in direct opposition to creating a world (and an education system) that is best for all. By implementing an Equal Money System that in fact is Best for All, caring will be a basic fundamental priority as it is embedded directly into the very notion of what is Best for All and in the practical policies developed therewith. Another important point here to mention is that care work traditionally has been women’s work. And in that is thus also an intrinsic degradation of women, instead promoting only a patriarchal system that emphasizes traditional masculine values (note: not the values of males) that essentially is based on competition and war. By bringing caring into the forefront of a political and economic (and educational) system, we can no longer deny or ignore the suffering of others. We can no longer justify the exploitation of some for benefit of others. We can no longer push and pressure ourselves to only excel and not consider the consequences of our thrusting through the earth. Finally we no longer need to compete, deceive and fight each other to survive.

Altruism and Self-Interest

Folbre and England mentions that children begin developing capabilities even before such a point as “self-investment” even emerges. In this, adults are required that are able to act in ways that are not based on self-interest with then as mentioned conflicts with the rationality of neoclassical economy. A critical (Destonian) perspective on this is that when parents support children to develop specific capabilities, they are in fact acting in self-interest as they see the children as reflections of themselves; thus how ‘successful’ the children become, will reflect back on the parents as ‘successful parents’ and as such ‘successful individuals’.

This shows how altruism is difficult to apply and questions whether such an application is even possible. According to the neoclassical economists, it is not. In relation to care work Folbre and England emphasizes this capability as one that benefits all and as such is best for all. Within this they bring up an interesting perspective, that there perhaps are other ways to make care work more valuable for society and in this they wish to challenge neoclassical definitions of human capital. Instead they suggest collective strategies for example within using taxes or policies to create inputs that emphasizes care as a capability.

Humans self-interested by nature but that does not mean we cannot educate ourselves to change

Neither acknowledging altruism as inherent (or at least emergent in how parents support their children to develop capabilities) or in the neoclassical theory of rational self-interest is common sense applied.
Therefore an amalgamating perspective is required in an understanding that in spite of self-interest being pre-dominant in human beings, policies and education (as developing skills and capabilities) can be applied to support the development of capabilities currently defined as ‘altruism’ and ‘care’, without expecting that parents do this because of some innate altruism. Through basing policies on principles that are created to implement solutions that are best for all, will support an actual emergence of altruism. In this, if all live in a way that is best for all, an application such as altruism will not even exist, as it exists directly in opposition to ‘self-interest’. If all are educated, skilled and capable of supporting what is best for all, practically speaking, the concept of altruism will be redundant.

In the development of an Equal Money System, we are researching and developing policies based on the practical and physical capabilities that each human being requires to live a dignified life and the implementations of such policies in our society, based on what is Best for All at a practical, physical level. It is open for anyone to participate, who are willing an interested in creating a world, where children can thrive and learn how to support themselves and the earth to live a life of self-expression, dignity, care and enjoyment – a life that in all ways will be best for all. Join us at the Equal Money Forum, on the Destonians Network, join the Desteni Group on YouTube and Facebook and partake in making this Earth a heaven for the Children to come.

“The Equal Money System have as Goal to Educate prospective parents with the skills and understanding necessary BEFORE a child is Born to make sure that the Child have every opportunity of an excellent Life and the required Base foundation as example of what it means to give as you would receive with a dedication to care for Life in all ways. We are what we are taught form Birth and changing our Beginning Here will change Human Nature. We all know this, yet we continue to ignore what can be changed” Bernard Poolman


[i] As a critique of Folbre and England’s theory, I suggest considering the emerging trends in sociology of sociology of body and sociology of sports. Because the paper is written in 1997, a certain progression in development of the field must be taken into account, but it is interesting to consider that there in fact has been some movement on this point in social science.

Global Women: Inequality is Interconnected

 Women have been taught that, for us, the earth is flat, and that if we venture out, we will fall off the edge.  ~Andrea Dworkin

Abstract

Keywords: Global Women, Inequality, Intersectionality, Feminist Theory, Sociological Theory

(The article was submitted by Anna Brix Thomsen as a part of an examination at Stockholm University in February 2012. New foreword has been added for the purpose of this publication and a few comments has been added. All rights are reserved.)

The article draws on the initial inaugurators of intersectionality in social science, the black feminists, specifically with Patricia Collins as its representative[1]  with their initial aim of introducing intersectionality as critical approach to the predominant discourse in social science and from there place the term into a current context drawing on scholars such as Leslie McCall and a practical example that is indicative of a new type of inequality that also raise a discussion for a renewal of intersectionality as a methodological tool to analyze society in general and inequalities in particular. This example is chosen specifically to highlight the discussion about how intersectionality has progressed (or should progress cf. McCall 2005) in analyzing new inequalities.  Within placing the introduction text to Global Women in contextto intersections of inequality that are emerging, my aim is to show how intersectionality can be applied to extract and understand the underlying inequalities that are playing out within the complexity of women migrating cross the world.

Foreword

The article is written from the starting-point of showing how global inequalities require global political solutions. It is the aim of the paper to show how global inequalities are created in interdependent relationships between the people that have access to the capitalistic system and those that do not. The reason why a woman in the Philippines is unable to efficiently support herself and her children and therefore has to migrate across the world is directly interconnected with how a woman in the U.S or in Europe is able to hire a nanny to take care of her child. It starts and ends with money and in between are the lives and stories of these women and their children. The children are the ones that in the end pay the price of an unequal money-system where no global policy exists and where money is all that matters to everyone because that is how we have constructed our world and our reality to function. These are the children that will grow up and become adults in this world, having to fight for their survival in a constant chase after money – exactly as do we all.

The article stands in support of a Global Equal Money System based on a Global democratic solution as the decision to change the systems and paradigms of this world with which we allow our lives to be managed, directed and controlled – to a system of equality that is based on the basic principle of what is best for all, as the practical living in such a way that all life-forms are equally supported to live optimally.

Introduction

In December 2011, I walked into a small classroom in the basement at Stockholm University for my first session in a course called “Doing Gender”; I had no idea that this course would alter my foundation as a sociologist as well as provide me with an entire new vocabulary and perspective on understanding global inequality. I had never been introduced to feminist theories during my years at the university and I had never before encountered the concept of “Intersectionality”.  Initially I was gripped by the fact that I had never before heard of intersectionality, because as it was introduced to me, I immediately saw the potential of intersectionality as an analytical tool and how it could expand the methodologies used in social sciences.

As someone who had never before encountered the concept of Intersectionality, I had, admittedly, a somewhat innocent and perhaps idealistic understanding of what intersectionality is and how it can or should be applied in social sciences. However, looking with fresh eyes at something that for scholars long in the field might seem more like a ‘sticky situation’ (referring to the debates within and about feminist theory in general), I hope to bring a grounded common-sense to the debate and through this, make an abstract and complex term simple and practical. Within this I also comment on the fact that the term that Intersectionality seems to have been applied and discussed mostly at a theoretical level and in academic feminist debates. (McCall 2005, Knudsen 2006, Shields 2008, Choo and Ferree 2010,) The critique is that Intersectionality is a “buzzword” that does not rise to the level of an effective analytical tool as its methodologies are not specific. (C.f. Prins 2006, Davis 2008 in Choo and Ferree, 2010)

The perspective I will share is thus contends Intersectionality as a vital approach within analyzing complexity in and through the social sciences, (cf. McCall 2005, Shields 2008) yet it is also the aim of this paper to investigate Intersectionality as a basic sociological method and the various approaches that have emerged and are emerging using the practical example of “Global Women”[2].

I refer to Choo and Ferree’s definition of Intersectionality as “the importance of including the perspective of multi-marginalized people (…) [in] seeing multiple institutions as overlapping in their co-determination of inequalities to produce complex configurations.” (Choo and Ferree, 2010, p. 131)

Patricia Collins and Black Feminist Epistemology

Patricia Hill Collins was as one of the first black feminists that criticized the way traditional social science was predominantly patriarchal. She contended that traditional science was actually preventing social change and presented instead a new black feminist epistemology that had a different starting-point within how it approached and viewed knowledge and the analysis of information; within this she called for a humble approach that was based on compassion. For Collins, Intersectionality could do exactly that through embracing the narratives of individual stories and expanding them into a broader analysis of emergent patterns of inequality and oppression, instead of as conventional science to separate the researcher from the research. The basis of Collins theory is thus that only those who themselves have experienced oppression on their own bodies are equipped of analyzing it fully. She calls for a dialog between the researcher and the research as “all knowledge is value-laden and should be tested by the presence of empathy and compassion. “P. 3) the approach thus requires accountability in the awareness that knowledge is created, selected and impulsed and not simply the act of presenting scientific facts.

Even though Collins emphasize the personal narrative, she does not promote a collective categorization of for example “black women”, yet at the same time she recognizes that there are challenges that a black woman faces that is within a collective tendency. (Allan, 2009.) P. 3)

Collins furthermore accentuates that oppressed groups require a “space” where they can come together safe from the oppressive and hegemonic rulers. (Allan, 2009.) P. 5) This is something that practically and specifically can be placed into the context of Global women as we shall see, but it can also be used as a metaphor for how traditional science that is supposed to be ‘objective’ and ‘neutral’, is in fact indicative and product of a subjugating Eurocentric “white” hegemony.  Even though Collins meant it more literally, I contend that the intersectional approach thus can be a “safe place” where oppressed voices can speak and be heard. What Collins perspective on Intersectionality can contribute with is thus that an alteration in thinking can change how specific inequalities are seen and approached and consequently through that re-articulate points that might often be seen in the public sphere, but not articulated sufficiently to actually accommodate actual change. (Allan, 2009, p. 07)

In relation to gender, an accumulative result of for example Collins research on how knowledge is produced juxtaposed with power relations (c.f. Prins, 2006 p. 4), that in turn has a subjugating effect, has been an increased focus on and awareness of how one’s own social identity and cultural allocation affects how one sees gender.  It is therefore that the social location is a primary point to identify, allocated through an investigation of the intersecting identities that are at play. “In particular, gender must be understood in the context of power relations embedded in social identities”. (Collins 1999; 2000, in Shields, 2008, p. 1) And as we shall see, this becomes relevant in particular when investigating emerging and complex new social inequalities as exemplified by the text on Global Women and in Leslie McCall’s contends for a new approach to Intersectionality.

Intersectionality and the matrixes of domination

Within how we through Intersectionality can see the different forms of oppression and inequalities that interweave into and as a lived experience, Collins contends the fact that these are influenced by the predominant views on objective knowledge that can silence the voices of the oppressed. (Allen, 2009, p. 8, see also Shields, 2008, p. 1) To expose and expand on this, she focuses on the matrixes of domination as the organization of power in a society. (Allen, 2009, p. 08) These matrixes are featured by how the intersections are manifested according to historical, cultural and socially specific conditions, through which the systems of oppression operate. In this Collins accentuate four domains in which power is organized: structural, disciplinary, hegemonic and interpersonal. (Allen, 2009, p. 08)

These can be described roughly as legislative/ policy-based, bureaucratic, cultural and every day spheres such as education and community groups. What emerges when investigating intersections of oppression and inequality in relation to these spheres is a complex system of power relations that in itself intersects. This thus also brings a perspective to the nuances of intersections of inequality that shows that they are multidimensional rather than one-dimensional. The social categories through which intersections are defined are thus not static or permanent as the can alter and shift in level of inequality and oppression according to which sphere or dimension is influential and intersecting.

Leslie McCall on the Complexities of Intersectionality

McCall represents for the purposes of this article, a modern approach to Intersectionality that also encompasses a critique of the initial approach to Intersectionality. McCall criticizes how feminist theory so far has failed to expand Intersectional theory into and as an interdisciplinary field; she furthermore criticizes how this has failed to expand and develop Intersectionality as a methodology that potentially is capable of amending to an analysis of the new inequalities that has arisen over the last thirty years. Instead intersectionality remains within and as an anti-categorical stance and attitude on how to practically apply Intersectionality in investigating social inequality and oppression.

At the same time McCall criticizes traditional social science for not effectively implementing Intersectionality as a cross- or interdisciplinary methodology. She claims that there is a disconnect between reality and theory in both fields and that a new way of applying Intersectionality is thus required, that is able to embrace the complexities that are emerging with the new forms of inequality, such as the increasing gap between rich and poor. (McCall, 2005, pg. 22) The inequalities become complex because the conditions in and through which they play out are complex and inequalities and dimensions of inequalities overlap.

 “Reality is complexly patterned, but patterned none the less. We can determine the source of the complexity, we can describe it, and we can theorize it. In this view changes of patterns of inequality and in the underlying structural conditions of society are dynamic, complex, and contingent but also amendable to explanation”. (McCall, 2005, pg. 25)

McCall calls this the inter-categorical (or categorical) Intersectionality and argues that one of the reasons why feminist theory not yet have fully embraced such a theory can be explained within how they (as other theoretic fields) have not been equipped with being able to address the new forms on inequality that has emerged. (McCall, 2005, p. 23) She argues that the method is based in feminist theory yet invites to interdisciplinary application (McCall, 2005, pg. 25)

What McCall found within applying this method, is that inequalities as intersectional exist rather as configurations of several forms or dimensions of inequality specifically placed in the context of economic structure.

The advantages of the categorical methodology of Intersectionality is that it allows for a much more complex set of data to be used in a much more simplistic way than traditional approaches.

McCall’s analysis holds the categorical method up against two more traditional methodologies where the anti-categorical emerged with the black feminists with focus on narratives and the intra-categorical with a focus on single groups or individuals. She describes how the categorical approach investigates each element of inequality in a given dimension for then to analyze these within a holistic framework, for example held up against an economic situation or analyzing the relationship two groups at a time. This way the complexity of investigating multiple groups is managed.

What is perhaps the most different from the traditional approach is as McCall describes how the categorical approach within multigroup studies as “analyze the intersection of the full set of dimensions of multiple categories and thus examine both advantage and disadvantage explicitly and simultaneously.” (McCall 2005, p. 18) In the following section, I superimpose McCall’s proposal of an explicitly categorical methodology to show why such a methodology is specifically applicable for analyzing new inequalities, onto the example of on Global Women.

The intersections of Global Women

Global women present and represent an example of the new social inequalities that have emerged over the last 30-50 years with an increasing migration of women from the poor south/east to the rich north/west[3], conglomerating with the increase of labor market participation and the increase independent income of women in the west.

I use this example for three reasons: firstly, I use it to exemplify the increasing complexity that McCall describes and the consequent requirement for a re-assessment of the methodologies of Intersectionality. Secondly I use it to show how an intersectional approach in general can assist to analyze and understand such emergence of complex intersections of inequality and why the intersectional approach can be one of the most important methodological analytical tools of social science today. Thirdly, I pose a somewhat polemic stance within how it through an intersectional view on the emergence of the new complex social (and economic) inequalities, can be seen that what converges is a global phenomenon that is clearly not being met adequately by the policies currently being applied to accommodate the consequences of such global inequalities.

 Global Women – Emerging new social inequalities

The introductory text to Global Women focuses on the narrative of a Sri Lankan woman named Josephine who works in Athens as a nanny. Already on the first few pages a conglomerate of intersections is playing out: the role of being a nanny can be categorized within the intersection of class as well as within how a woman from a poor country is working for an affluent family in a more wealthy country and the intersections of South/East versus North/West. The woman being from Sri Lanka relates to culture, nationality, ethnicity as well as language (and language barriers). There is furthermore a generational element, wherein Josephine’s ability to travel and work abroad is defined as “an independence her mother could not have imagined” (Ehrenrich and Hochschild, 2002, p. 11). This suggests a generational shift economic independence and women’s ability to participate on the labor market.

This is furthermore described directly in relation to how Josephine is not receiving help from her ex-husband and thus suggests an intersection of gender inequality. Josephine is saving up for a “modest dowry” for her daughter and is paying off on a bus that her son is driving, a reference to gender and class as well as cultural differences. (Ehrenrich and Hochschild, 2002, p. 13) Finally, the parents of the child for whom Josephine is hired as nanny are characterized as “devoting” themselves to “careers and avocations” (Ehrenrich and Hochschild, 2002, p. 13). This again refers to an intersection of class, but also a specific unequal discourse of valuation within that, where Josephine’s job is seen as survival, her daughter’s dowry as “modest” while the affluent Greek parents have “careers and avocations” that they are “devoting” themselves to, something that suggests choice as well as a view on work as personally or professional fulfilling. The intersection of race is seen within how the migrating women are largely “women of color” (Ehrenrich, p. 3) and through a notion among the Western women that employ the migrating women as nannies of seeing women from 3. World countries as more in touch with nature and traditional values, quality that is valued in relation to caring for a child. (Ehrenrich, p. 9)

What we can see here is a multitude of intersections that are influencing how and why and what Josephine’s story imply within a bigger picture of emerging new global inequalities and this is still barely touching upon the intersections related to the Western women involved in this story as well as Josephine’s Sri Lankan family and how they are affected by Josephine’s leaving to work abroad.

According to McCall’s theory on the categorical approach to Intersectionality that is required to be applied to understand an analyze new emerging inequalities, we would now have to analyze each of these intersections “in its own right” for then only after to bring all these dimensions together in a holistic analysis of for example the entire phenomena of Global women migration and the general inequalities that are playing out here.

What is effective with this approach is that it does in fact encompass Collins notion of Intersectionality as method that works with humility and compassion within the principle that to understand oppression, one virtually has to be able to place oneself in the shoes of the lives of the people one is researching.

A dimension that further more speaks for a juxtaposition of Collins notion of humility relates to the emotional dimensions of the story of Josephine, which reveals complex emotions that has emerged as a result of a global “care deficit” (Ehrenrich, p.3 ) that in turn reveals a broader global inequality that influences the lives on both side of the deficit.[4]

With Collins approach we can thus place ourselves in the shoes of the women whose lives we are investigating and with McCall we can place that information into a more structural and global context without its losing its humility, because we in fact take each dimension pertaining to the specific intersections of inequality into consideration.

Discussion on emerging new inequalities

What can thus emerge when we extract the complex dimensions of inequality involved in this one example, through applying an intersectional point of view and methodology, is in fact a wholeness, a holistic perspective on the global situation, from which we can see that lives are not only influencing each other reciprocally, but are indeed intertwined; “Third world women achieve their success only by assuming the cast-off domestic roles of middle- and high-income women in the first world.” (Ehrenrich and Hochschild, 2002, p. 3)

It is interesting that the third world women within migrating to the west to be nannies or maids are defined as having achieved “success”. Within this it can be argued that a discursive vocabulary is revealed that assumes that all women in the world have become “liberated” and “independent” and thus successful, also connecting this to travelling and uprooting oneself. A different perspective is that success is defined as one’s ability to make money and as such women like Josephine are successful in fact – simply because they do make money.

However this can also be seen as a form of oppression that serves to silence the voices of the global women, who might not feel successful, free or independent, because their fears and worries and concerns are still revolving around how to survive and how to feed their children as well as the intense emotions that can be related to having to leave one’s child in the care of others.

Within looking at these points the question emerges whether equality and independence of “Women”[5] has in fact increased or whether the inequalities have simply shifted around and shifted places. This perspective is only possible within viewing the world as a whole and that is made possible through the consideration of each dimension involved in the intersections of a certain inequality.

This thus also brings the discussion of Intersectionality back to the question of power relations and specifically shows how and why Intersectionality was coined within and through a political movement to expose and abolish inequalities where the black feminists sought to give a voice to the voiceless black women as a “significant political as well as intellectual demand, since only by inclusion of the perspectives of these groups could the political issues emerging from their experiences be addressed by movements, law or policy-relevant scholarship.” (Choo and Ferree, 2010, p. 131)

Conclusion

Within the new emerging inequalities among the migrating women are nation and culture specific migration patterns and streams which results in for example Eastern European women going to Western European countries or Algerian women migrating to France. However, there is also a relevance in talking about Women in general, as the patterns that are emerging at culture-geographical level show that it increasingly are women that are migrating to work abroad as well as in regards to the changes in the lives of women in the Western countries, facilitates the demand for care workers from abroad. What often happens is that these women migrating to become nannies, maids and sex workers in the West, become isolated as their jobs are within the home and not on public display and therefore not receiving media attention. (Ehrenrich and Hochschild, 2002, p. 3-4)

What are emerging are thus new forms of inequality and a new way lives intersect that is complex within how multiple inequalities intertwine at a global level. To address this, the ability to analyze global tendencies from a multidimensional perspective, Intersectionality can potentially be utilized to bring these complex inequalities to the surface, both politically and academically. Polemically speaking, one could say that global issues require global policies. Although it might be hard to comprise a monocausal analysis when taking all the dimensions of how inequalities intersects (Choo and Ferree, 2010, p. 135), there is the silver-lining of an unequal monetary system where a global corporate world acts transnationally while few global policies are made to countervail or interfere. The consequences for women migrating, such as Josephine, can thus be that they have no rights or choices but to follow the stream of migration as they are caught between intersections of inequalities that are caused by global problems. The women who migrate have a greater chance of making money and supporting their family if they leave their home-countries to work in the west as nannies, maids or sex workers. But they pay a price within being separated from their children and often within not actually being integrated into the culture or country they are living in (sometimes for the rest of their lives) because they are merely there to serve a service function that is seen in many cases as empowering by policy-makers and in the media, because they can then send money home and as such “support the country”.  So the discourse around the empowerment that the migrating women experience in comparison to past generations, might exactly is a part of that same hegemony that is responsible for the continuation of global inequality. The Solution is an Equal Money System because within its implementation, it is acknowledged at a fundamental and practical level, that the interconnectedness of human beings lives requires solutions that are able to encompass such interconnectedness and interdependence. The current financial and political systems and institutions are prioritizing segregation and profit  and do not take human beings actual lives into consideration. The result is a world of disconnection, where everyone is able to abdicate responsibility because there is always someone else to hold responsible and because the system is not set up in such a way that it is even possible to take responsibility for one’s own life, even if one wanted to.

The effect of an Equal Money System is in fact that all forms of intersectionality of inequalities will be absolved, because it is  acknowledged, into the very core of the policies implemented, that only a holistic solution will ensure equality for all.

For more information I refer to the Equal Money System Wikipage

In the following video I expand on the points brought up in this article: 2012 – One Woman’s Liberation… The Solution to Global Inequality

Bibliography

Allan, K. D. (2009). Patricia Collins: Intersecting Oppressions. http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/13299_Chapter_16_Web_Byte_Patricia_Hill_Collins.pdf den 01 01/ 2012

Choo, H. Y., & Ferree, M. M. (2010). Practicing Intersectionality in Sociological Research: A Critical Analysis of Inclusions, Interactions and Institutions in the Study of Inequalities. Sociological Theory, 28:2 .

Deutsch. (2007). Undoing Gender. Gender and Society, 1.125: 51.

Ehrenrich, B., & Hochschild, A. (2002). i B. Ehrenrich, & A. Hochschild, Global Women: Nannies, Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy (ss. Ch. 1 – 2 ). New York : Metropolitian Books.

Knudsen, S. (2005). “Intersectionality—A Theoretical Inspiration in the Analysis of Minority Cultures and Identities in Textbooks. Caught in the Web or Lost in thte Text Book?, (ss. 61-76). Paris.

Lutz, H., Vavik Herrera, M. T., & Supik, L. (2011). Framing Intersectionality: An Introduction. Ashgate. Hämtat från http://www.ashgate.com/pdf/SamplePages/Framing_Intersectionality_Intro.pdf den 25 12 2011

McCall, L. (2005). The Complexity of Intersectionality. Signs, Chicago Journals, 3(3), 1771 – 1800.

Prins, B. (2006). Narrative Accounts of Origins : A Blind Spot in the Intersectional Approach? European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13.

Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An Intersectional Perspective. Sex Roles, 301 – 311.

West, C., & Zimmermanm, D. (u.d.). Doing Gender. Gender and Society, 1.125: 51.

 (The article was submitted by Anna Brix Thomsen as a part of an examination at Stockholm University in February 2012. All rights are reserved.)


[1] Even though Kimberlé Crenshaw is famous for coining the terms, I refer to Collins because she is a sociologist (Crenshaw is a professor in law) and because of her specific approach towards Intersectionality as intra-categorical and because of her view on Intersectionality as providing a needed compassion in the social sciences. (Allan, 2009, p. 3)

[2] I use the term in italics when referring to the text and without italics when referring to the actual lives of Global Women.

[3] I use the terms ”south/east” and ”north/west” loosely to describe the differences in global income and living conditions according to how the text “Global Women” uses these terms to describe the divide between women of affluence and women of poverty in the respective regions and continents.

[4] Referring to Ehrenrich’s description of how the West is experiencing a care deficit because of the increasing number of women on the labor market, which creates the demand for nannies from abroad but at the same time how the migrating women are too leaving their own children behind in the care of others. (Ehrenrich, p.8)

[5] As Collins referred to (black) as having a “collective standpoint does exist, one characterized by the tensions

That accrue [sic] to different responses to common challenges” (Collins p. 28, emphasis original in Allan, 2009, p.4).

Welcome to The Dark-Side of 2012

For eons of time humanity have looked up into the sky, the dark night filled with stars and seen the mystery of creation. For thousands of years we’ve speculated about what is “out there”. Astronomers have tried mapping the Universe, astrologers have tried to understand the connection between the Universe and our humanity, astronauts and Nasa have attempted penetrating the vastness of space and many a myth have been shared between generations in the light of bonfires under the stars.

We sit on this small planet among giants held in place only by what seems like a fragile force of gravity as though we could at any moment lift of the ground and float aimlessly into the darkness. For eons of times humans have created ideas to explain the universe and its riddles, many of which are experienced as spiritual or extraterrestrial, like the Planet Niburu or Planet X, The Galactic Federation of Life or the belief that we are ascending to a 5. Dimension. The year 2012 has equally become a part of global speculation and wonder.

In this blog series I am going to focus on the backside, the shadow side of the 2012 phenomena, which ironically is the events taking place right here on earth in front of our very eyes, effecting our very lives on a daily basis. Because while we are busy talking about what is going to happen “out there” or in between the weavings of the world, we are (conveniently) disregarding what is already going on here on earth.

It is convenient because what is here on earth is not pretty or magic or mysterious. What happens on earth does not bear witness of a sovereign, benevolent or intelligent universe that has a plan. So let’s for a moment, instead of ascending up into the universe, descend down to the earth and have a look at some predictions for 2012 that does not have to do with what is “out there” – and perhaps through that gain a better understanding of who we are, where we are going and how to change our Destiny.

Let’s begin.

The end of the Kyoto protocol in 2012

The Kyoto protocol was created in 1997 when it was realized that the climate crisis (that, already before 1997 when it was written could be seen) was potentially devastating for the earth, the climate, human beings and all life that is here.

“The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC or FCCC), aimed at fighting global warming. The UNFCCC is an international environmental treaty with the goal of achieving the “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. The Protocol was initially adopted on 11 December 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, and entered into force on 16 February 2005. As of September 2011, 191 states have signed and ratified the protocol.[6] “[5]” (Wikipedia)

The basis of the protocol is that all the countries that have signed the protocol, agrees to decrease the country’s contribution to the outlet of greenhouse gasses that are potentially (and determinedly) destructive for the ozon layer. The ozon layer is a thin layer around the world that protects the earth from the UV rays projected by the sun. Without the UV protection we would most likely be fried in worst case scenario and in the best case scenario, we will see massive global warming (as we are) along with massive planetary changes, such as devastating nature catastrophes (which is also busy happening). Secondly it is predicted that the human created warming through the outlet of greenhouses cases is contributing to the global warming. This is not only threatening the life of animals and plants, but also us as humans and the planet itself.

Basically our human activity is harming the planet as a whole, through interfering with and not effectively co-existing with the natural climate. Remember that the earth is an ecosystem that is able to support itself through a collective collaboration between all life-forms, from little ants in the African desert to huge thunderclouds and rainforests. All life-forms are able to collaborate and ensure the earth thrives for what is best for all, except us humans.

Lots of huge meetings between the world leaders has been held about the Kyoto agreement and in 2011 Canada pulled itself out of the agreement. The US has not been complying with the agreement at all. In 2012 on December 31 the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol ends. So what is going to happen on the 31. December 2012 when the commitment period ends? Does it even matter if the world’s biggest nations and those that are responsible for the largest portion of outlet of greenhouse gasses do not take responsibility?

The Dark Side of the Kyoto agreement

This entire point is reflecting us back to ourselves, humanity. Because the nation states are us, the climate is us, the Kyoto agreement is an example of how we make half-assed agreements to change and then don’t or create backdoors to slip silently out of our commitments, so that we can continue living as though our actions had no consequences.
Each of us, participate in this every day in our own lives. Huge factories are creating cars, weapons, toys and furniture for the pleasure of the consumer-citizen along with the creation of traffic and thousands of people driving SUV’s so that they can feel safe and boost their egos or who’s houses are lit with electrical appliances to the point where even from outer space it looks like the entire earth is on fire.

So how can we let our lives sit in the hands of politicians and lobbyists that are given mandate BY US to make decisions on behalf of all of us, while blaming them for making such decisions, when all they are doing is serving the (self)interest of mankind – to keep consuming the earth and all that is here, until we burst into flames and crumble like a punctured crème brulé in an overpriced French restaurant?

And are we willing to give that up? And for what?

What does it take for us to be willing to stop what we are doing, to stop creating back doors to slip out of, to stop creating mental realities to escape into, to stop creating conspiracy theories about who is doing what to whom and how?
The responsibility lies in each of our hands and in the togetherness we create through our living together in and as this world and reality. The solution lies in the soil beneath our very feet and not in some fantasy reality in the sky high above.
It is easy to dream away into outer space and to imagine a solution where we can conveniently float away, leaving a scorched earth behind to wither and die as though it was just another piece of junk cast aside on our journey on the highway through the universe.

If we really want a ride of a life time, if we really want to see a universe of wonder and peace and to live adventurously in oneness with all that is here – we remain on earth, we get our feet back on the ground and our heads out of the sky and we turn our eyes to what is going on right in front of our noses.
Join us as we unveil the Desteni of the Universe

Join us as we unveil the Desteni of the Universe
Vote for an Equal Money System and participate actively in the creation of bringing heaven to Earth.
Visit the Destonian Network for more information. Let’s begin.

Let’s begin.

The end of Jealousy with an Equal Money System

Have you also experienced that intense sting of jealousy or the pain in the stomach that feels like your entire body is about break into a thousand pieces? Or that experience of almost going insane and feeling out of control within being subjected to the irrational and emotional experience of jealousy? Would you like to never again experience jealousy? To never again experience  someone you care about being jealous and therefore not support you in what you are doing?

In this article we will have a look at exactly those questions as we will look at jealousy and how it exists in this current system. We will furthermore look at how it is possible to stop jealousy all together, not only within ourselves, but within the world as a whole with the solution of an Equal Money System.

“Never waste jealousy on a real man:

it is the imaginary man that supplants us all in the long run” – George Bernard Shaw

According to Wikipedia , the word Jealousy “stems from the French jalousie, formed from jaloux (jealous), and further from Low Latin zelosus (full of zeal), in turn from the Greek word ζήλος (zēlos), sometimes “jealousy”, but more often in a positive sense “emulation, ardour, zeal” (with a root connoting “to boilferment“; or “yeast”).” 

If we look at the two original definitions the newer being “full of zeal” and the older “to boil/ferment/yeast.”, the first exposes the fact that jealousy is an intense energetic experience, and the second the consequence of that experience as a literal deterioration of the physical as a process of fermenting. Those who have experienced intense jealousy, will recognize how there first is a surge of energy and thereafter, depending on ones level of possession, one will go into a constant state of jealousy where one becomes bitter and spiteful and one will literally start to ferment and deteriorate. It is interesting to note that the ‘yeast‘ symbolizes something that will grow through fermenting under the right conditions. The same is the case for jealousy. Under the right conditions jealousy will grow and keep growing.

And have you ever noticed how everyone gets jealous at each other?  What this shows, is that jealousy is a basic component of the competition between people and that everyone participates in. We compete and fight each other to survive, because we believe that we are separate and that there is only room for one of us — yet this is a delusion, because there is already only one of us: all of us – One Earth – One Life, One Whole.

So let’s have a look at how jealousy exists in the world:

I recommend these videos for a more extensive perspective on Jealousy from a Destonian perspective: Jealousy is Nasty – Love is NastierEvolution of JealousyThe design of jealousy  

Below is a list from Wikipedia describing the various contexts that jealousy can be experienced in/through Each specific context exemplifies why and how jealousy exists in the current system and further more consequently through which it can be seen how jealousy will not exist in an Equal Money System.

  • Sibling rivalry – Sibling rivalry is a common form of family jealousy. Family jealousy can affect all ages and different members of any family. This jealousy can arise from lack of attention from a specific member in the family. More attention towards another member of the family can cause this emotion or the emotion can be seen through comparison to another member in the family. This type of jealousy is once again in result of losing some sort of attention or services that someone once had or that they believe that they had.
  • Workplace jealousy – Jealousy in the work place is not uncommon. People can experience jealousy of one another in practically any setting that one person feels like they are losing services from something or someone else. This type of jealousy is often seen between colleagues in similar job positions. If one worker receives positive feedback from the boss while the other employee feels like they deserved that, positive feedback jealousy can arise. Jealousy between colleagues can also arise if the employees are working for a raise or trying to outdo each other for similar job positions. Once again, the attention received towards one employee and not the other may cause intense emotions of jealousy to develop.
  • Romantic jealousy – Romantic jealousy can be experienced in long-term or short-term relationships. One partner can feel the emotion of jealousy arise if the other partner is paying more attention or time with someone else. To lose services from one partner and have their attention directed towards someone else does not have to be in a romantic way. One partner could be spending more time with a friend that no romantic feelings could ever develop.
  • Platonic jealousy – Platonic jealousy is a form of jealousy that is seen in friendships. Platonic jealousy is similar to romantic jealousy in the way that this type of relationship can lead to jealousy in result of fear of being replaced, having competition or being compared to a third party. For example, the intense emotion of jealousy can arise if two friends that are females decide that they like the same man and both want to possibly start a romantic relationship with him. Comparison and competition will more often than not lead to the two females experiencing the emotion of jealousy.
Sibling rivalry is a result of competition embedded into and existing as a part of family-construct that in turn is a crucial part of holding the world-system in place. Family is thus the incubator through which we eventually become the full-functional systems. (Read my article Fascist Family – The shocking truth for more perspectives on this point) Thus parents will literally play their sibling children out against each other through subtle manipulation and favoritism. According to  Bernard Poolman, Parents and Siblings are the Keepers of the Past and parents will encourage competition between siblings specifically to ensure that the strongest genes survives and carries the genetic legacy of the family through to the next generation. They will thus tend to support the child they see carry the strongest genes.
Now – workplace jealousy is based on the exact same point: competition, yet here it is a different way it is playing out as it also has to do with success, yet in work and career, the point of competition is much more directly playing out, since people are literally competing on life and death to be the ones in the best positions with the most money, knowledge, networks and power. Points like fashion and technology-hypes are direct derivatives from this point and lots of money is being made (obviously by people who wants to get to the top themselves) so that people can compete over who is the most modern or has the newest cell phone or watch.
This entire point is experienced so real for those participating, for example in the business sector that they don’t see that it is absolutely delusional. In their mind they are fighting for their life through keeping up to speed with trends. Jealousy obviously occur for those who fear losing what they have and that is literally everyone. So the point of jealousy in the workplace is instilled directly by the system itself and within that by people keeping the system in place through buying the “newest new”  and through the actual competition in the work environment for jobs and positions of power.
Romantic jealousy is one of the most common reasons for domestic violence and “crimes of passion”. It is also one of the contexts that we have discussed here where jealousy is more explicit and competition is more implicit based on the idea that the partners are equal and supposed to work in a team to win. However this is also what leads to the most intense experiences of jealousy as the fear of losing ones partner increases. Those who are single will be jealous of those who are in relationships who in turn will fear losing their partners.
Now – in an Equal Money System, jealousy will no longer exist. There are two reasons for this.
Firstly, we will, by removing the element of competition between us and the delusion that we require to fight each other to survive, remove jealousy as jealousy is, as we have seen, a direct result of competition. People will not require to buy the latest things to keep up appearances or to play their children out against each other in an attempt of ensuring the tribes survival. People will not go into relationships just to be competitive on the mating-market. They will not require a mate to exist and live a satisfying life.
Why people do all of this in the first place, is within a belief that we must fight to survive – this is so embedded within our lives and experiences that we are literally refusing to give it out out of fear that we will fall behind in the competition that we perceive life to be. It is because of this fear of losing, of dying, of not surviving, that we experience jealousy towards all and everyone.
The second reason is thus that we will re-educate ourselves to stop the delusion and existing in fear. We have become so used to existing in fear that it is not necessarily easy to give it up or to even see that literally all our motivation for the things we do in our lives is based in this exact fear. Therefore we require to support ourselves to stop all participation in jealousy and competition and fear of not surviving. One of the ways we can support ourselves is of course by giving everyone on Earth Equal Money.
As we establish this basic point of equality in our outer reality, we also establish a foundation for an inner reality, which we in turn require to transform our entire world and reality into and as a place where no one fear each other or perceive themselves as separate from the whole. The re-education back to equilibrium will take as long as it takes. By implementing an Equal Money System, we have
taken the first step to a world without jealousy, competition to survive and fear.
There will thus be no jealousy in an Equal Money System because there will be nothing to feel jealous about. We will have nothing to lose and we will not have to compete with others to survive  because all resources will be given to by ourselves equally.
That is the form of reality and world that we have all dreamed about, consciously or not, yet which no one have even believed to be possible. We will never have to feel or experience jealousy again, because we will have removed the basis for it, that is the delusion that we must fight each other to survive as manifested into and as our family-, work-, work- and money-systems. And we will begin the process of cleansing ourselves inside and out until we have established equilibrium, in our bodies, work places,  relationships and on the earth as the one whole it has always been. We experience jealousy because we believe ourselves to be separate, not only from each other, but from ourselves as well when in fact we are not and cannot be separate as we are all here as a whole.
Join us as we embark on a journey to discover life in equilibrium. Vote for Equal Money for All and Walk the Process of Bringing Breath back to Life.

Where Ends Meet – The Retirement of an outdated Money System

Have you ever seen those advertisements for retirement companies – you know, the ones that are showing happy men with silver stained hair and tanned with huge smiles standing on the golf course? Or the older couple sitting on a balcony in the sunset drinking margaritas and playing scrabble? Do you also dream that it will be you one day – walking barefoot in the sand with no worries and a loaded bank account?

Well, most likely that is never going to happen. And in this article, we are going to expose why – and how you can do something about it yourself, here and now, without having to slave away for years until you get the payoff of retirement.

Did you know that in order to even get a retirement fund, all you have to do is to work the next 20 – 40 years in a job you will most likely hate or change every couple of years for less pay as you wait for that retirement fund to kick in? All you have to do is to give 40 – 60 hours pr. week working and many more hours commuting in cramped subways or on packed highways for then to go home to sleep, only so that you can be ready to go to work again in the morning. You can then go out drinking in the weekends to get all the anger, that you’ve built up towards your boss, colleagues and yourself, ‘out of your system’. You can even go on holidays once in a while to ‘really reload’ so that you can manage to spend one or ten more years slaving away.

Is this really what we live for? What we give our lives for, each and every day slaving away in jobs, one more horrible than the next? We even make ourselves believe that what we are doing is wonderful and purposeful and satisfying, just so that we can push and force ourselves to keep going.

So – what if we did not have to work and live these exhausting lives where we have to lie to ourselves and everyone around us? Later we shall discuss how this is in fact possible.

An estimate from the European Union shows that the working population will fall by 50 million between 2008 and 2060, where the amount of people over 65 will have increased by 67 million. At the same time the fertility rate is decreasing, which means that the smaller younger generations will be responsible for caring for a large group of elderly people.

According to an analysis made by Russia Today, it is estimated that in Britain 7 out of 10 people cannot afford to retire on their pensions. And thus if the elderly are forced to remain on the job market because they cannot afford to retire, less young people are able to get into the job market. Subsequently there is in the US an estimated 24 % youth unemployment rate. This is the same country where the richest 400 Americans, has more money than the bottom 150 million people combined. The lucky few can obviously afford to retire whenever and wherever they wish to do so. Depending on our age, our income and where we live, you and I are more likely to have to work literally until we die. Of course none of this is even mentioning countries where there is no such thing as retirement and where people suffer in poverty from the moment they are born.

The solution is not to simply raise taxes for the rich as the problem is within the entirety of our systems and how we’ve allowed ourselves to exist and live accordingly. The problem is a system, where we accept and allow millions of elderly to suffer and die in poverty through the justification that the few who has all the money, has gotten to that position in life, fair and square and that we would do exactly the same, were we in their shoes, (which we properly would, but that does not justify the inequality we’ve allowed because of it). To support this belief, advertisements suggest that everyone can win a happy life on an exotic island somewhere, playing golf and sipping cocktails in the sunset if they just believe in it and work hard for it. Pension funds are created to further legitimize this belief and make it more probable than possible. The only problem is that, once we reach the age of 70 and realize that it was all one big scam, it is too late. There is no exotic island, just as not all little boys can become multi-million dollar soccer players or NFL stars. Yet these are the fantasies that are instilled and installed into us by the very system that we’ve created to manage ourselves and our lives.

We require an entire overhaul of our monetary and political systems, not to mention of our own outlook on the world and ourselves in it. We require overhauling how we have been romanticizing survival as a justification of inequality and suffering. We require to be self-honest about  how we have manipulated and deceived ourselves and each other to keep going with a smile on our faces, even though we are slaving ourselves day in and day out in jobs we hate.

Because if we don’t, it is the same bleak future we are promising our children and their children – a future with no pensions or retirement, yet with lots of hopeless fantasies instilled – where the majority work to die, essentially to ensure that that the system keeps going and remains unequal in its basic foundation.

Now – in an Equal Money System, retirement will not exist.  Why no one will retire in an equal money system, is because there is no requirement for retirement in a system where all life is supported equally and where each and every single human being has their life secured financially from the moment they are born.

The idea of retirement is a product of capitalism where middle class people were manipulated into believing that the system was doing them a favor, as supporting them and their children by placing in a social security system, yet as we can see, this system is not functioning in fact to the benefit of all and is largely placed-in to compensate for other costs and as such ensure the system profit.

In an Equal Money System, we don’t actually have to get tired and therefore require a re-tirement, because we can live our lives at our own pace, not rushing through trying to make ends meet to survive. We will not be competing and fighting against each other to be the one that wins a happy life on a paradise island – because first of all, we will all have woken up to realize that this was not real and that it was a fantasy that we’d instilled into and as ourselves to keep going in the delusion of the game-of-survival. Secondly, we will realize that in order to actually create paradise on Earth, we firstly have to take self-responsibility for what is already here, to face the world and the systems and ourselves and everything that is here, so that we can decide in clear assessment what kind of world we would like to live in and what is practically required to make that happen. If we want heaven on earth, we’ve got to create it for ourselves.

So – in an Equal Money System, which at this stage is as close as we get to heaven on earth, because it is a system that is based on what is best for all, everyone will from a certain perspective be retired all the time. Our entire lives will be more relaxed and enjoyable because we’ve dismantled the element of fighting to survive from our lives. We can still be busy and work hard, but it will be at our own accord and because we decide to do so in common sense consideration of what is best for all. It is quite astounding to realize that such a world and way of living is in fact possible, but it is even more astounding to realize that we’ve been chasing a fantasy of retirement while enslaving our entire lives to a system of suffering and inequality.

To realize this for ourselves is the first step to re-creating a new world on earth that is best for all life, equal and one. Because once we have realized this, that our entire motivation has been based on fear and delusional desires, we can start changing our starting-point within and as who and how we live and exist.

So - Where the ends meet is within the retirement of an outdated Money System and the beginning of an entirely new way of living on Earth, where all Life is cared for Equal and One. The solution is an Equal Money System.

Get your copy of the first Equal Money book here: http://store.desteni.org/products/equal-money-future-of-money-volume-1

Learn here how you too can reboot the system we call life:http://eqafe.com/i/abrix-thomsen-virus-free-mind You will see that it is possible to change the software of humanity, to change ourselves from self-interested beings of greed to actual living beings that care about Life

At Desteni our interest is life and the living. Join us in this journey of creating the way to life to stand the test of time. Desteni I Process is available to all regardless of affordability. http://desteniiprocess.com

Get your copy of the FREEDOM BLOGS HERE:http://eqafe.com/i/abrix-thomsen-freedom-blogs-the-birth-of-practivism-volu­me-1 It is available at the Desteni store along with many other self-supportive products.

Check out the Desteni website where we unveil what is here in common-sense self-honesty http://desteni.co.za . Join the Desteni Forum for discussions and start writing yourself to freedom with the support of people who are walking as equals.

Check out my process blog:
Anna’s Process Blog: http://annabrixthomsenprocess.wordpress.com

How on Earth will an Equal Money System be Implemented?

One of the most frequently asked questions about the Equal Money System is the question of how the system will be implemented. Indeed it can be difficult to see how an entirely new way of existing is and will be possible considering how we currently exist. What is important to realize and understand is that a new way of living will not suddenly come about by itself. So how we will get from where we are today, to an Equal Money System , is through practical changes accumulated step by step, through actions taken by directive groups and individuals advocating the Equal Money System.

For an Equal Money System to be implemented, we require a re-education of the group, as all of humanity. This is required because we, as we currently exist, are in no condition to take self-responsibility for the world as a whole. It is also required so that we can realize and understand that a different way of existing is even possible and from there, educate ourselves to be able to implement the changes required practically. Even though we can somewhat consider the notion of an Equal Money System, we have a long way ahead of us to learn how to live together in a way that is in fact best for all. What is further more required for an Equal Money System to be implemented, is that the group of people that are currently starving and suffering, which counts more than half of the world’s population get breathing-space as a “break” from having to exist within a fight to survive, so that they actually become able to even vote for an Equal Money System.

We thus require an intermediate relief of the most pressing suffering and inequality that human beings currently exist within and conditioned to.  Once this is in place as a basic system where all are given the necessities to live a dignified life, we have enable ourselves to practically stand together to implement an Equal Money System

This basic system is what is known as the BIG or Basic Income Grant or Guarantee system[1]. The basis of the system is to[2]:

  • Provide everyone with a minimum level of income,
  • Enable the nation’s poorest households to better meet their basic needs,
  • Stimulate equitable economic development,
  • Promote family and community stability, and
  • Affirm and support the inherent dignity of all.

This preliminary system will ensure a basic level of existing for all those countries participating where all citizens will be supported. It is from there that we can start implementing a fully functioning and Global Equal Money System. Once we get to this stage practically, we can start discussing and deciding how products are to be produced, how goods are stored and how work is going to be dispersed and all other questions pertaining to how to practically exist in a way that is best for all.

The first step in the implementation of an Equal Money System is thus a Basic Income Grant System and this will only be implemented as we re-educate ourselves to start caring about and understanding all life as equal to change our incentives within how we exist. We do this through changing ourselves and through exposing the system that is here for and as ourselves and each other, until we clearly see what is here for what it is and what are required to be done.

At Desteni, we encourage all to participate in the discussions on the forums to gain a practical understanding of what is required to be done and how we can each stand up to change the world. At The Equal Money Forum we discuss points specifically pertaining to the Equal Money System and at the Desteni Forum we come together to support ourselves to practically change and stand up as self-responsible, through writing ourselves to freedom in self-honesty and supporting each other to do the same.

We are active on Facebook and Youtube all year round, 24/7 as we participate from all areas of the world. Here we share links to relevant documentaries and news stories, personal experiences and realizations as well as music and videos. These is also available along with many products at the Destonians own shop EQAFE. Here we provide access to all the blog books written by Destonians as well as official books on the Equal Money System and exclusive interviews.

We encourage you to join us and begin the journey towards the making of a world that is Best for all, a world that is created from our very own hands, as we walk ourselves, step by step, breath by breath to self-honesty in self-responsibility for what is here. If we can do it, anyone can. And who will do it, if we don’t?

Will sport still be based on Winning and Losing in an Equal Money System?

Do you participate in sports to win or to have fun? Is it okay to lose so that others can win and is it okay that others lose so that you can win? Do you see yourself as a winner or a loser?

Within looking at the element of competition that is inherent within sports, there are two points that are embedded in the polarities of winning and losing. These are currently what we are competing for.

One is money,  as can be seen within the prizes, salaries and grants that are given to “top athletes” when they win. The other is honor, which can be seen for example starting with the ancient Olympic Games and how the winners were rewarded with laurel leaves wreaths and applauded by the crowd and how certain athletes today are worshipped as heroes, even though their accomplishments are limited to winning a match on a soccer field or in a tennis court. Through this most people on Earth support all forms of competition that allows one to either win or lose.

Within investigating the origin of the word compete, we shall see that it is not the point of competition itself that is unacceptable or not best for all, but instead what happens when competition is made into a form of war, where people must fight each other, even in sports, to survive in the system. This is because the system is designed this way and because everyone accepts the conditions pertaining to it. Thus competition as it exists currently is based on an acceptance of the possibility of either winning or losing where, because we want to win, we accept the possibility of losing and thus accept loss as a valid element in our system. Furthermore, the validation of competition as a basic element of the system is the belief that we must fight each other’s to survive. The ones best at surviving wins. This is what has transcended into sports where the seriousness of survival in our everyday lives is turned into drama and entertainment in sports.

Historically competition has been seen as a natural instinct of survival that is inherently existent within humans as well as animals and plants. Competition has been seen as a point of natural selection that exists to prevent unbalances and decrease in the genetic development of an organism.

One of the most famous references to competition has been Darwin’s concept of “survival of the fittest.” That Darwin in the same moment said “…for mutual aid[1], has been disregarded and perhaps devalued. It is from this perspective clear that there is an element to competition where the competitors not only compete against each other but actually also with each other.

The word ‘compete’ stems from Latin and contains two definitions of which one has become more dominant as we have shown. This pertains to the fighting aspect of competition and the other pertains to an aspect of competition that is based on agreement and a coming together.

1610’s, from M.Fr.compéter “ be in rivalry with” (14c.), or directly from L.L competere “strive in common,” in classical Latin “to come together, agree, to be qualified, “later, “strive together,” from com- “together” (see com-) + petere “to strive, seek, fall upon, rush at, attach” (see petition)[2]

We will therefore here distinguish between these two perspectives on competition, one being aggressive and destructive where there can only be one winner and a loser and the other that focuses on a mutual agreement and corporation.

Adam Smith who was famous for promoting ‘friendly competition’, perceived the concept of friendly competition as the foundation for the free markets and their agents’ ability to move freely.  From this perspective competition is seen based on the idea that the mutual agreement to compete is in everyone’s best interest and that everyone will win. [3] This fits with one element of the original Latin definition where competition is something we do together. It is thus also interesting to note that Smith’s ideal society where everyone competes as equals is far from the reality of the free markets we see today. Therefore we are required to look even further at the notion of competition within economy where the market is portrayed as a playground where each compete as equals, exactly as it is also portrayed in sports, to understand why and how competition is lived differently than it is defined.

When looking further into nuancing competition as either friendly or not, specifically in relation to the money system, we must face that “…we have built war into our society’s economic design as competition” as noted by the Danish Philosopher Knud Ejler Løgstrup[4]

According to Løgstrup it is vital to distinguish between competition as a “hardcore fight” and competition as something encouraging, mutual and fun.  For Løgstrup it is the element of playing and having fun that is relevant in competition, and which validates competition, for example in the school system, where the purpose is not to win, but to test one’s boundaries  - exactly as in the original definition of “striving together”.

To understand why it is not so in fact, we require distinguishing between voluntary and forced competition, which is particularly interesting in relation to the definition of competition as a basis for the free market money systems because that is, as in Adam Smith’s definition, validated and legitimized through the idea of all being equal in participation. Because when looking upon the actual living out of the free market money system, it is clear that all do NOT have an equal opportunity to participate. In fact that opportunity is rather fictive and theoretical that pertaining to any real situation. Thus the money system as it exists today, actually defies competition as something mutual.

When competition is forced and not agreed to from an equal starting-point, the people participating are not equals. This is the money-system we exist within and it is not a game.

We do not have equal opportunities to participate in the money systems (or anywhere) and therefore it is not a game where everyone has fun. The same can be said about how sport exists, as sport is directly reflecting the rest of the world systems as sport exist dependent upon these systems.  In fact, sport as it exists today, has more to do with generating money than with having fun. It has more to do with winning honor in the form of money, than participating in or watching sport from a starting-point of self-enjoyment.

So why is forced competition, for example through how sport, generally supported by governments and politicians and accepted as valid? And if the money-system is indeed liberating and based on a free market, why are all not equally able to participate?

According to Løgstrup it is the State that is responsible for ensuring that the forced competition were restricted and regulated, exactly because a society’s economy and institutions are dependent upon the policy decided by the politicians. He says that: “when it is the State, that with its education (of children) delivers its most important factor for production, more important than land and capital, that is, the scientific and planning intelligence, should the State then not also decide the goal for that production?”[5]

Thus the State sets the frame for the structure of society and through this directs society in a specific direction. The State can then both oppress and support initiatives through its interventions, for example in the education system. We are currently existing within a system that on one hand claims to be “free” and “liberal” and that “everyone is equally participating”, yet in practice it is exactly the opposite. In the schools children are forced to compete with the goal of becoming successful adults which essentially means “make a lot of money”. People do sports specifically in the hopes of becoming one of the few that makes lots of money and will do anything to themselves (and their children) in order to fulfill this dream.  More than half the world’s population is more or less excluded from even participating in the education system and therefore from even participating in the competition. In all areas of life in the current money-system, competition is based on fighting against each other as that is the basis for the money-system itself.

The entire system as we all participate in it, promotes the idea that “anyone can win” for example through inserting and supporting a few poor people to be the stars and heroes of sport teams, giving anyone who could possible identify with that person a hope that they too can become famous, adored and make lots of money. Therefore, the system supports inequality through competition and those representing the system as the politicians are merely placing the policies that will keep the system running, exactly as the corporations will run on a momentum of having to make more and more money to keep running.

So the State is responsible for ensuring effective policies to restrict competition that does not support mutual agreement’s, yet the State as the governments and politicians are merely reflecting and representing us as human beings and the system with which we’ve agreed to manage our lives. Thus we are in fact all equally responsible for how we live and exist as fighting each other while we could in fact be existing in such a way, where competition merely is a way of playing where we come together and test our boundaries in a mutual and equal agreement.

In an Equal Money System, sports will not be based on winning or losing money or honor, because our system will not be based on having to fight each other to survive. Nor will it be based on winning or losing honor as all life will be honored equally. This means that sports will become much more focused upon the physical experience and expression as well as the actual self-enjoyment and perfection of skills in the particular sports that one is interested in. We will most likely see much more top-athletes as those that exist currently are restricted and excluded so that a point of a “hero” is held in place, to give everyone the perception that they too can “make it”, yet where very few actually are able to make money on doing sports. Some might also stop participating in the sport they have been participating in, because they were paced and pushed by their parents.

Thus we will see a return of competition through sport as a mutual and equal agreement to come together to test one’s boundaries and expand ones skills and expression. To see what this will be like, all we have to do is to look at small children and how they compete without being concerned with winning and simply participate to enjoy themselves and each other in and as a physical expression of self. So If there is a sport you have always wanted to participate in, yet have refrained from either because you could not afford it, did not have time or perhaps refrained from because of the element of malevolent competition, you will in an Equal Money System be able to try and express yourself within any form of sport and enjoy the expression of others without fearing that they will win over you. Finally we will be able to have real fun and to perfect ourselves within the dreams we have always dreamt of living out and as, whether being snowboarding down the alpes or simply having a field to play soccer on.  An Equal Money System will be an entirely new world on Earth, because it will be based on equal self-responsibility where we will all direct the system as equals according to what is best for all.


[1] Montagu, 1952/1053, p. 143

[4] (My translation) 1972, p. 180, quoted from Korsgaard 2007, p. 142

[5]( My translation) Korsgaard 2007, p. 147

EQUAL MONEY FAQ – The Prison Industry now and in an Equal Money System

Q:

“Wont the places where you keep offenders be a lot bigger than the rest of the population and who will watch over this? 

A:

Firstly it is important to have a look at the context in and through which the question is asked, because that has a great impact on how the question will be answered. We shall present here two different perspectives on the context in which the question is asked and answer accordingly.

1. ) The person asking this question is picturing something in their mind largely based on having seen news about for example the regime of North Korea or memories of movies they’ve seen such as “Children of Men”, “I Robot”  and books such as “1984″ – (of which all are excellent depictions of the extremity of where mankind has ‘evolved’ and is ‘evolving’ to.)

The person is imagining that the rules or laws in an Equal Money System will be so ‘strict’ that there will end up being more ‘offenders’ than active or legal citizens. Obviously if this was so and if the Equal Money System was a fascist regime, we could end up with a large population of “incarcerated” people. In a fascist regime they would most likely be sentenced to work camps where they would provide products for the “elite” minority population on the other side of the fence. This obviously has nothing to do with an Equal Money System and such a question is asked out of fear based on a reliance on the collective drive of fear through dependency on movies/media to interpret one’s reality.

2.) The question is based on not understanding that the Equal Money System is actually going to be an entirely new way of living, which means that we will also not act from within and as the same patterns as we are now. So for example regarding the question “Wont the places where you keep offenders be a lot bigger than the rest of the population and who will watch over this? ” - it is clear that this will not be relevant in an Equal Money System.

When people don’t have to fight each other to survive, when they don’t have to scheme and deceive each other, they commit a lots less crime. Most crime is in fact due to economic inequality, where those that do not have or who are excluded from the general participation in the system, will do what ever they can to get by, even if it means committing crimes. And ironically so, the people who do not understand this behavior or way of living, is in fact people who already has money.

Therefore people will not offend nearly to the same degree as they do not in an Equal Money System. Most that become criminal will then do so due to genetic dispositions that are effecting their mental states.  They will be supported to re-align themselves to live as equals and if not, they will be supported to live a dignified live within the frame of ensuring that they are of no harm to others.

When we look at the prison system, the way the prison system is currently existing, it is actually expanding exponentially especially in the US. According to a article from Global Research, “no other society in human history has imprisoned so many of its own citizens.” as the American and then increase in private prisons has gone up from only 5 private private prisons ten years ago to now being over 100. Why is this? Because someone is able to profit from the incarceration of others. Because prisoners provide as an almost  free workforce and the owners get tax subsidies and political support.

“The private contracting of prisoners for work fosters incentives to lock people up. Prisons depend on this income. Corporate stockholders who make money off prisoners’ work lobby for longer sentences, in order to expand their workforce. The system feeds itself…”

People make money on enslaving other people as they have been for thousands of years. This is what will change in an Equal Money System. This is exactly why we are pushing for an Equal Money System. So to ask if it will not be “worse” in an Equal Money System, if there will not be more offenders, shows that the person asking the question, has been effectively brainwashed to believe that was is here now is cool and should not be changed. Mean while, billions of people are suffering at the hands of other peoples greed.

We can clearly see that the scenario that was presented within the initial question directed towards an Equal Money System, is actually depicting exactly what is going on in our societies today. It is not the Equal Money System  we should fear as being fascist and locking people up with out just cause – it is the fact that we are already doing this, yet turning a blind eye to what is going on, right here, right now. What we fear, is what we are already living – yet it is also what we have separated ourselves from in abdication of self-responsibility – it is therefore we feel powerless and afraid of being “taken over”, yet not realizing that we already are.

 

Will I lose my individuality in an Equal Money System – Will everyone be the same?

To answer this question we will look at two common misconceptions in relation to the definition of individuality in an Equal Money System and in general. Let’s first have a look at Equality and how it is currently defined.

What is Equality?

Equality does not mean that everyone is exactly the same and has to be treated as such. Equality means that we a here as equals. Equality is how everyone and everything on Earth essentially consist of the same molecules and the same atoms. Therefore we are all, by definition –and in the most practical sense – Equal. This does not mean that we in a system based on actual Equality must treat the rat the same as the pig or the mountains the same as the rainforest in order to “adhere” to this Equality.

Realize that; we already ARE equal by the fact that we ARE all Equally Here on this planet and that the Equality we live, as the wholeness of us all, is the oneness that is the entirety of life on earth.

Currently that Equality and Oneness – the “who we are” as a whole – is a world that is unequal, abusive, self-destructive and deceptive. Human beings reign though a self-delusion that they are superior beings and all other life-forms including the  animals has long been “bent” at our hands. So even though we are equal, we do not live as such. We live as  life  in competition with itself over who gets to be the dominant species or who gets to survive. And one only has to take one self-honest look at this world to realize that: no one wins.

The horse is one of the animals that has been the most “bent” in terms of how human beings have captured and bedridden it to be used for labor, transport and later leisure as well.  Horses subsequently have come to accept themselves as slaves or subjects to human beings. (To explain why horses do that, it is easy to imagine how life becomes more comfortable once one accept one’s situation as enslaved rather than continue to fight it with no hopes of getting free.)  So the horse accepts it and even goes to the length of supporting the human being unconditionally, of forming a sort of mutual relationship with the humans.

Now – the horse is still enslaved – this is the reality we must face and take responsibility for. They have as an entire race as a unique expression of life that is their “horse-ness” submitted themselves to human beings, believing and accepting themselves to be inferior. Thus Equality does not mean that we will suddenly let all the horses out of their stables and let them roam free. In fact it means to take all and everything into equal consideration where we consider how absolute Equality is possible from the perspective of establishing an equal relationship here that is best for all considering the current nature of reality.

We cannot expect that the horse can take equal responsibility for us immediately from the get-go. Its ability to respond within its current “state of nature” is simply not equipped for such a task. We, on the other hand, are able to consider both the horse and ourselves and we must thus begin considering everything from the horses height, weight, background and temper and look at how we can establish an equal relationship, from the perspective of how reality is here and now. Then it is simply a matter of seeing where and how we can stop existing in a relationship of enslavement, for example where we force the horse or whip it into obedience even though it is not necessary. Eventually the horse might simply follow us willingly through there being established a form of communication wherein both parties are equally participating. Yet this communication is still taking the current nature of reality into consideration.

This is why we at Desteni say that “We’re all equally fucked”. This refers to the fact that we’re all in the same boat so to speak – everyone is influenced by the actions of each other. If the Earth as a whole is in bad shape, because of what we as humans have allowed ourselves to create and exist as, it does in fact influence all of us, even though some are not directly experiencing the consequences at this current time. It also means that we are then all equally responsible for changing what is here. No parts are separate from the whole and so we walk a process of bring ourselves back to living as equals.

At the moment we cannot even comprehend the extent to which we have allowed our oneness and Equality that is this one earth and all the life on it and as it, to exist in and as inequality and separation. We cannot even comprehend what actual Equality means. Walking to a point of absolute Equality will take time within and as practically and physically changing what is here as relationships of separation into equal living expressions.

What is Individuality?

It is important to realize that the individuality that most people perceive to be “who”  they are as their “unique” personality, is in fact generic and pre-programmed patterns that we’ve copied from our parents as they have from theirs and more general physiological “profiles” of which there is a limited nr. This is why people often can meet others that seem like they have a similar mind-set. So – as we currently exist, there is no real individuality. There is however a mutual pre-programmed belief that we ARE individual, original and unique. However if one starts to investigate this, for example comparing one generation to another or one period in time to another, one will see that it is merely history repeating itself in various constellations. The individuality we perceive to be “who” we are is thus Impulsed into us by the very system, in which we are created and designed as generic copies. The system we speak of here is not specific individuals, but the actual system itself as it is manifested in and as this world as the collective agreement of all of us that we have given permission to manage our lives – the money-system.

We’ve created a reality of separation, where we exist as subjects to a competitive money-system, where all is supposed to fight each other to survive. We perceive ourselves as a-part from all other parts that is here as life and because we fear loosing ourselves, the system can keep feeding us  which we want to hear; that we are special, unique, “the one” and what cashes in: the system.

An example of “individuality” as it is perceived to exist:

Everyone buys their clothes in the same shops. There are huge chains like Top shop, GAP and H&M, where people go to “purchase their individuality” and as they walk around and try on the clothes, they perceive themselves as individuals expressing their unique point of views. But in the end everyone walks out of the store with the exact same clothes, yet everyone has a “feeling” that this represents “who” they are.

So we buy and shop and decorate our houses, our bodies, our children and our relationships, to display “our point of view” or “uniqueness”. We say stuff like; “in my opinion” or “everyone is special” all the while we don’t realize that we’re all being Impulsed to purchase “who we are” in fear of losing who we perceive ourselves to be.

The current money-system is thus – ironically – set up to support us to live like endless copies. Oneness becomes monopolies and Equality becomes that we are all consumers.

So – Will I lose my individuality in an Equal Money System – will everyone be the same?

In the Equal Money System, we will actually for the first time, regain a point of individual expression because who we are will not be determined by money. Through re-educating ourselves to understand the reality we’ve created for and as ourselves and to learn to take self-responsibility, we can actually start living as individual expressions – and discover who we really are, under the generic pre-programming to fit into and survive in the system of inequality.

The Equal Money System supports everyone equally and when each exists according to what is Best for All, it subsequently means that their life-experience is the best it can be as well. Therefore each will finally be able to do the things that we love the most.

Think of all the musicians and artists, who’s only dream is to do what they love all day, but who has been forced to do wage-labor to survive and has to settle to call their passion in life “a hobby” – they will finally be able to live out their dream. Because their basic needs will be cared for – by the equal system set up by all as a whole in agreement. They no longer have to fear for their survival or fight and compete with others to survive in this world. Others might even realize that they have other talents or dreams than they could have ever imagined about themselves. Because each finally has the opportunity to be self-honest and to start expressing oneself unconditionally without fear. THAT is real individuality. And it is facilitated by a system that is based on equal support of all.

So everyone will not be the same in an Equal Money System. In fact, everyone is the same now. They’ve simply diluted themselves into a collective agreement that everyone is unique, simply to keep the motors of the money-system running through their having to shop their personalities and individualities to “feel whole.”

In fearing to lose one’s individuality and thereby opposing an equal money system, one is in fact holding onto oneself as a copy and a slave to a one-dimensional system of inequality and abuse – one is in fact being a slave of fear and that is the “individuality” that one is trying to preserve. Have a look: it is all in reverse.

When we realize that we already are whole – that we have nothing to lose, that we cannot possibly lose ourselves, we can start exploring, discovering and expanding ourselves in actual individuality. As the horse has expression as “horse-ness”, each of us has an expression of “us-ness” and at the same time, all expressions are possible and available for us to “try on for size” – because in an Equal Money System, there is no longer categories that determine who get’s to do or be what. There are no longer unequal education systems, where some actually get an education and others get none. Everyone will have an equal starting-point of existing here valued and dignified as life.

More on individuality in an Equal Money System see these links below: 

A New Individuality for New ALLitics, a New World

Individuality, Free Choice & Equal Money

Will You Lose Individuality in an Equal Money System? pt1

Will You Lose Individuality in an Equal Money System? pt2

A Chance of Winning the Lottery has got you by the Balls

“All are inclined to believe what they covet, from a lottery ticket up to a passport to paradise.” (Lord Byron)

 

We do in fact all play the lottery in one way or another, through how we live, participate and exist in this world. Where ever we are born determines whether we’ll have an estimated life span or 30 years or 80 years, whether we will grow up eating dirt to fill our bellies or eat strawberry cheesecake till we burst. If we’re born with light skin or symmetric facial features our chances to succeed are that much greater.

For most people the lottery is seen as a fun and not so serious form of entertainment. Some buy lottery tickets or other forms of ‘games of chance’ odds games regularly every week, while others do it occasionally and some don’t do it at all. Studies have shown that poor people are much more likely to play the lottery than those with a higher income.

If we put $50 on one lottery, the odds of winning are 3,838,380 ÷ 50 = 76767.6 to one.

The secret of the lottery or why we’re so willing to play even though the odds are basically non-existing is the idea of and belief in the concept of winning. Because of the ‘chance to win’, we accept the risk of losing, even if this risk is more like a certainty. We’re willing to lose in order to win.

It is not only within the lottery that this ‘game of chance’ is played, but actually and in fact in all areas of living, as a rule of life that everyone agrees to participate within, tacitly and indirectly or directly:

“Because I have the chance to win, I accept losing”

We live this in every aspect of our lives, from relationships to health issues to national economies. It is used to justify the abuse and exploitation of countries and people with poorer odds than ours, because as they’re existing on this earth as well, they too are playing this game and have thus accepted to lose to have the chance to win.

This principle is the foundation of capitalism and all capitalist justifications from the trickle down effect to Wall Street speculation and interest rates.

It is all based on the same principle of acceptance: To win, we must accept to lose. What is then promulgated is that idea that everyone does in fact have an equal chance to win – whatever the prize may be; the lottery, happiness, a life without suffering or eternal life.

So we’ve got two point that are required to be in place for this game to work:

  1. That we all agree and believe that everyone has an equal chance to succeed and win.
  2. That we are willing to lose or accept loss to exist so that we can win

When we cannot understand how millions are allowed to starve, this is the explanation, simplistically, that it is acceptable for others to lose so that we can win, because they essentially have an equal chance to win and if they don’t it is their loss, their own fault and certainly not our responsibility.

The principle of winning and losing as a integral system within which we exist does not only exist at a physical level in the very ways we live together, but unquestionably also within and as our relationships and even in our own mental experiences.

We believe and accept that if we are not constantly winning according to whatever we perceive winning to be, collectively or individually, we must be losing. As living slots machines, we will measure odds and chances by comparing points and people with each other and constantly align ourselves accordingly. We will dismiss someone because they do not add to our perceived maximum score – basically we will do anything to win. This is how people make money on other people.

If we dared to be willing to give up the delusion of the ‘chance to win’ as the principle of the lottery as life, we would start realizing that winning is not even possible and that within submitting ourselves to the thrill and addiction of winning, we’re allowing so much abuse, suffering and war to exist. We would dare to realize that it is not worth it and we could finally start living in a way that is not determined by a deceptive notion of an ‘equal chance’, while in fact everything is pre-determined, fixed and conditioned so that it is the same people that win and the same that lose and even more so, that everyone actually always loses.

We all know that the game of chance is fixed so that the house always wins and still we keep playing – this oughta raise some questions in even the most hard core player.

What happens when we dare giving up the concept of winning all together?

Let’s find out: The Equal Money Movement stands for a life lived dignified for all