Book Review: Zero Marginal Cost Society by J. Rifkin
He has done it again........ Jeremy has written the book I would have loved to.
A few significant differences from other "new paradigm" or philosophical understandings from myself in the Electronic Civilization White Paper; The Third Wave by Alvin Toefler, Quantum Society by Ervin Lazslo, The Turning Point by Fritjof Capra, The Critical Path by Buckminster Fuller, The Venus Project of Jacque Fresco and Zeitgeist Movement of Peter Joseph, include:
1. I use the term Electronic Civilization for what he calls the Third Industrial Revolution.
2. He does not depict the collapse of the Industrial Civilization as inevitable.
3. The book does not establish the foundational mechanism of society changing from
Domination by Force to Cooperation by Sharing.
and maybe a few other points which I can't remember now ....he he ... one should laugh a bit , life is far too important to be taken seriously folks !!!
Point 1. seems to be just a semantic issue, but no, the significance is clear, this new way is not an outgrowth of Industry. It is rather a exponentially advanced production mode, in that it is not centralized production, massively distributed which is the definition of INDUSTRIAL. Now , yes I know he actually is very clearly stating that we will move away from centralized, mass distribution etc. but calling it Industrial is misleading. It is not a addition to our civilization of Industrial Capitalism which has as the top values Money/Boss , the boss provides you with a job and a job provides you with money with which you play the monopoly game. The monopoly game always results in economic collapse when the rich take too much and the rest cannot afford the price of necessities. Jeremy goes into far greater detail, examples, footnotes and has the authority to write this fantastic book which I admire. However in this correction I wish to state that all the above authors and myself conclude that what we are dealing with is a totally new Civilization model. The first Hunter/Gatherers used hand tools , fire and their own muscles in a Hide and Seek game to advance beyond the other apes, with the advent of agricultural methods we started the first civilizations: Agricultural; basically a chess game society using animal power and simple machines, cthen as we advanced to Industrial civilization we used fossil fuel power and engines to create the monopoly game society. Now we are moving to a Direct Democracy, Robotic Production, Solar/Hydrogen fueled Collaborative society game (yet to be named..... computer cyberworld simulation game) in which it is unlimited with sustainable methods and philosophies. So it needs a new civilization name ; hence : Electronic Civilization .
Point 2. I wish it was otherwise and argued/debated with my friend , Rani for nearly 2 yrs. at which time I conceded defeat. In short; Evolution from Fish to Amphibians or Amphibians to Reptiles or Reptiles to Mammals.... it is always the demise of the former which leads to the rise of the latter. This is no different; the old must pass away to make room for the new. The clash of values between the Civilizations resulted in wars and collapse of the old forms. For example the American Civil war, the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution were all fought between the new Industrial powers and the old monoarchial Agricultural Czars, Kings and Agricultural South which wished to instate a King if they won. The incompatibility between the profit system and the near zero marginal cost society leads to an either or situation. It must collapse before the new "free" and sharing system can really go worldwide. Until then it must begin and it must grow , but it cannot " fight" or "win" against the powers of the present system anymore than a mouse like mammal could fight or win against a velocaraptor dinosaur, but in time dinosaurs went extinct and the little mammals became us, writing things like this...ha ha ha ....... .
Point 3. Sure he does go on quite clearly about becoming the collaborative society and leaving behind top down mean profiteers and he offers the best summation I have ever read on it ! However again the issue is more complex and has another critical dimension not mentioned and possibly not known or understood.
We have the situation that the mechanism of Domination by Force or Law of the Jungle in other words, is what we have lived with for so many generations it is quite literally in our DNA, it is genetically conditioned to defend female mates even if met 2 minutes ago ! To fight other males for females and social status... hence football players public cases of domestic violence. We are raised in cultural conditioning that just like the dog and the bell, we behave in ways we are conditioned to.
The Bonobo show that society can function with the mechanism of sharing quite well for millions of years , literally. But it requires a complete reversal of the mechanisms we have in place. In short: our sex negative culture creates violence and the use of force in all relationships, adversarial intentions are the norm. We smash the opposing sports team, play bloody video games and revel in fighting for our rights. A sex positive culture results in harmony. Sex as Alfred Kinsey discovered is not "some" thing it is "Everything", it is what we live and die by. We males will do anything for money to buy sex in the form of cars, houses, trips, clothes, child care,,,, and females will do anything for male validation even genital mutilation and wearing burkas, getting made up like clowns and wearing 6 inch heels. We aren't even aware how much this influences our personalities usually.
There is much more on the subject , which I have written about and you find yourself , but for here/now I'll just say the book in review does not consider sex positive society and what the implications are.
Now that I've cleared up those small descrepancies, lets review the book;
Its is FANTASTIC YOU JUST GOT TA READ IT !!!!
I've given it to my favorite cohorts and we all are reading it, and finding it excellent in its clarity, documentation and basic tenets. Lots of Love, Theodore
He has done it again........ Jeremy has written the book I would have loved to.
A few significant differences from other "new paradigm" or philosophical understandings from myself in the Electronic Civilization White Paper; The Third Wave by Alvin Toefler, Quantum Society by Ervin Lazslo, The Turning Point by Fritjof Capra, The Critical Path by Buckminster Fuller, The Venus Project of Jacque Fresco and Zeitgeist Movement of Peter Joseph, include:
1. I use the term Electronic Civilization for what he calls the Third Industrial Revolution.
2. He does not depict the collapse of the Industrial Civilization as inevitable.
3. The book does not establish the foundational mechanism of society changing from
Domination by Force to Cooperation by Sharing.
and maybe a few other points which I can't remember now ....he he ... one should laugh a bit , life is far too important to be taken seriously folks !!!
Point 1. seems to be just a semantic issue, but no, the significance is clear, this new way is not an outgrowth of Industry. It is rather a exponentially advanced production mode, in that it is not centralized production, massively distributed which is the definition of INDUSTRIAL. Now , yes I know he actually is very clearly stating that we will move away from centralized, mass distribution etc. but calling it Industrial is misleading. It is not a addition to our civilization of Industrial Capitalism which has as the top values Money/Boss , the boss provides you with a job and a job provides you with money with which you play the monopoly game. The monopoly game always results in economic collapse when the rich take too much and the rest cannot afford the price of necessities. Jeremy goes into far greater detail, examples, footnotes and has the authority to write this fantastic book which I admire. However in this correction I wish to state that all the above authors and myself conclude that what we are dealing with is a totally new Civilization model. The first Hunter/Gatherers used hand tools , fire and their own muscles in a Hide and Seek game to advance beyond the other apes, with the advent of agricultural methods we started the first civilizations: Agricultural; basically a chess game society using animal power and simple machines, cthen as we advanced to Industrial civilization we used fossil fuel power and engines to create the monopoly game society. Now we are moving to a Direct Democracy, Robotic Production, Solar/Hydrogen fueled Collaborative society game (yet to be named..... computer cyberworld simulation game) in which it is unlimited with sustainable methods and philosophies. So it needs a new civilization name ; hence : Electronic Civilization .
Point 2. I wish it was otherwise and argued/debated with my friend , Rani for nearly 2 yrs. at which time I conceded defeat. In short; Evolution from Fish to Amphibians or Amphibians to Reptiles or Reptiles to Mammals.... it is always the demise of the former which leads to the rise of the latter. This is no different; the old must pass away to make room for the new. The clash of values between the Civilizations resulted in wars and collapse of the old forms. For example the American Civil war, the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution were all fought between the new Industrial powers and the old monoarchial Agricultural Czars, Kings and Agricultural South which wished to instate a King if they won. The incompatibility between the profit system and the near zero marginal cost society leads to an either or situation. It must collapse before the new "free" and sharing system can really go worldwide. Until then it must begin and it must grow , but it cannot " fight" or "win" against the powers of the present system anymore than a mouse like mammal could fight or win against a velocaraptor dinosaur, but in time dinosaurs went extinct and the little mammals became us, writing things like this...ha ha ha ....... .
Point 3. Sure he does go on quite clearly about becoming the collaborative society and leaving behind top down mean profiteers and he offers the best summation I have ever read on it ! However again the issue is more complex and has another critical dimension not mentioned and possibly not known or understood.
We have the situation that the mechanism of Domination by Force or Law of the Jungle in other words, is what we have lived with for so many generations it is quite literally in our DNA, it is genetically conditioned to defend female mates even if met 2 minutes ago ! To fight other males for females and social status... hence football players public cases of domestic violence. We are raised in cultural conditioning that just like the dog and the bell, we behave in ways we are conditioned to.
The Bonobo show that society can function with the mechanism of sharing quite well for millions of years , literally. But it requires a complete reversal of the mechanisms we have in place. In short: our sex negative culture creates violence and the use of force in all relationships, adversarial intentions are the norm. We smash the opposing sports team, play bloody video games and revel in fighting for our rights. A sex positive culture results in harmony. Sex as Alfred Kinsey discovered is not "some" thing it is "Everything", it is what we live and die by. We males will do anything for money to buy sex in the form of cars, houses, trips, clothes, child care,,,, and females will do anything for male validation even genital mutilation and wearing burkas, getting made up like clowns and wearing 6 inch heels. We aren't even aware how much this influences our personalities usually.
There is much more on the subject , which I have written about and you find yourself , but for here/now I'll just say the book in review does not consider sex positive society and what the implications are.
Now that I've cleared up those small descrepancies, lets review the book;
Its is FANTASTIC YOU JUST GOT TA READ IT !!!!
I've given it to my favorite cohorts and we all are reading it, and finding it excellent in its clarity, documentation and basic tenets. Lots of Love, Theodore
No comments:
Post a Comment