Today the equilibrium is broken. Why Humanity has to escape from kindergarten
"The world has gone crazy." In 2021, just as in 2020, and many times before, we keep repeating this phrase while flipping through media headlines or just staring out the window. Outside the window of the 21st century citizen, no matter what part of the world he is in, there are lockdowns, prohibitions and quarantines. And tomorrow there will be even more restrictions. And even fewer freedoms.
We ask ourselves this question: why are our technical capabilities now at their highest level ever, but instead of trying to harness their potential and unite to meet the challenges together, we are increasingly withdrawing into ourselves? As individuals, as states, and as a world.
This article presents only the results of our reflections on the causes. The exit scenario is a separate conversation, which we have moved to a WhitePaper [why do you call it a WhitePaper? Explanation needed]. This is not aimed at any individual: we are looking at the connections within humanity as a whole, not its individual manifestations.
Who are we?
YourJustice is a decentralized platform for virtual tribes and jurisdictions with their own legislation, social rankings, courts, contracts, and economics. With YourJustice everyone can create their own jurisdiction or join an existing one. The unifying environment is Humanity.
All forms of human relations can be expressed and automated on this platform using the human-readable-writable markup language YJML or a visual editor.
Functionality, transparency and compliance with rules and laws within the jurisdictions created by this platform are provided by a full-scaled judicial and rating system based on game theory and smart-law technology.
From the moment of birth, humans find themselves in a system of rules that they do not understand and cannot affect. Even before they see themselves as a person, they become a citizen of their country, with all the consequences: ignorance of the law or disagreement with the law is not an excuse.
If a newborn is not registered (made a citizen) in one of the existing jurisdictions, it will not receive even basic rights. It will not get medical care, an education, a bank account, or be able to cross a border.
In fact, every newborn signs a contract, the terms of which it does not know, does not understand and will not be able to understand for many years to come. At the same time, the terms of the contract will be constantly changed without their consent. Throughout a person's life, educational, labour, family, political and other public institutions are likely to regularly provide a person with services that are not quite what they “order”. The larger the institution, the more complete the power it has over the individual, the easier it is for it to add something new to the contract or to remove an important part of it. In whose interests do these changes usually occur? The question is rhetorical.
In general, it is unusual to discuss a person's relationship with social institutions through the prism of this contract. The usefulness of services and the reasonableness of their prices could be evaluated, but in the case of public institutions it is rarely possible to clearly define what exactly is the service provided and whether there are alternatives.
For example, sources tell us that the largest items of expenditure in most countries are the military-industrial complexes and internal security agencies [USA, Russian Federation]. These same items of expenditures are also indirectly covered by other budget items, such as scientific expenditure which provides high-tech warfare devices. Usually, public institutions claim that it is possible to change everything that an individual member of society is unhappy with by using the mechanisms existing within the system.
But in reality, attempts to understand the validity and necessity of this or that "service", and especially express any dissatisfaction, usually end sadly for the initiator. You know these examples (this one, this one and this one. And many others). They are in the news.
Mass protest as a way to renegotiate the contract with the jurisdiction is a very labour-intensive process. It often leads to bloodshed and is not always successful. In addition, the goal of the protest is often not to change the system as a whole, but only to change its rulers. And this is not enough.
This is how we can characterize the current level of relations that have developed between the two sides of the contract. On the one side are government institutions, which treat members of society as unintelligent children and limit their influence on the processes of public life in every possible way. On the other hand, there is society itself, which agrees to these restrictions, not being used to taking responsibility for the consequences of its decisions.
The trend for 2020-2021 is the introduction of anti-epidemic restrictions. Universal vaccination, which is de jure voluntary, but de facto compulsory; restriction of freedom to move between states; introduction of "health passports"; business shutdown without full compensation for losses; prohibition to visit public places and even prohibition to go out. Restrictions were imposed quickly and there were no options not to follow them. The question of why people accepted the loss of some of their rights and freedoms as the norm is only one of many.
Here are some other similar questions.
- Why, in the case of a global epidemic, you have to force people to be vaccinated in order to save their lives?
- Why is there universal military service in many countries, and draft evasion during wartime is a crime?
- Why is it permissible to work only from the age of 18 rather than 14, even though children grow up faster now?
- Why do jurisdictions basically compel us, instead of clearly explaining to people why exactly they should follow their rules?
We believe that the problem lies in the long-established hierarchy of power delegation. Society deliberately creates a compromise by transferring some of its rights and powers to influence the world to public institutions. In return, society receives a well-established system in which a citizen is "led by the hand" through all stages of socialization, from the maternity home to the last days of his life, surrounded by restrictions of varying stringency, awarded with bonuses for "right" actions and issued with penalties for "disobedience".
Complex state systems gravitate towards stable conditions. The possibility of change in this system, whether it is "democratic" or "authoritarian", is available in theory but not in practice. “Citizen-children” are not ready for them, and “state-educators” do not know what to change.
Historically, people who were not satisfied with the rules of their community gathered like-minded people, left for other parts of the planet and founded new tribes, cities, and countries there. Now all the hospitable territories are occupied by states and their jurisdictions. There is no opportunity to form an alternative system of values and rules "under the sun". If you physically move to any part of the planet, you will simply fall under the guardianship of the next "overbearing parent" or "strict educator". Space and the ocean remain undeveloped territories, but life there is expensive and land-dependent.
The Catalans, the Sicilians, some of the Northern Irish, the people of Kosovo, the Kurds - there are communities that choose to defend their right to self-determination. And they have been doing it with varying degrees of success.
But most people use less radical methods to escape from their surroundings. It can be religion, meditation, entertainment content. Now people also have virtual reality.
So, it is not possible to break the system of relationships between "children" and "educators" within the system itself. We believe that most people are aware of this. As a result, in the 21st century, society, imprisoned in a soft but inescapable "kindergarten", focuses its attention on instant gratification. The common attitude nowadays is to take what you can manage, and let the future be a concern for thenext generation! The activity most encouraged is commercial activity: creating businesses that "make the world a better place" by converting people's time and natural resources into money. Factories produce billions of items each year, which will be sold due to marketing, but a year later will end up in a dump; natural resources are used as if they were endless; renewable energy is developing too slowly because it does not bring in "enough" profit. We can try to shut our eyes and notice nothing, thinking that humanity will restore the march toward progress and prosperity itself when "the time comes”. But time, on the contrary, is running out.
If humanity really wanted progress and prosperity, our news would be not about armed robotic dogs and new flagship phones with "innovative" processors, but about the disappearance of terminal diseases, the rejuvenation of the aged, the greening of the Sahara, zero-emission transport and space elevators.
The UN needs help
It is the duty of the UN to promote the sustainable development of humankind and to develop responses to new challenges. Obviously, the power of one organization is not enough to solve the problems.
The environment is in its worst state since the existence of mankind. The level of uncontrolled consumption does not correspond to the capacity for recycling. The planet is covered with garbage (both ordinary and space garbage). Oil from tankers pours into the ocean, ozone holes reach the size of Antarctica. The planetary temperature has already increased by 1 degree from 2020 to 2021, while the increase from 1850 and 1950 varied within 0,5 degree. Scientists suggest that warming and increasing water acidity could cause almost the entire Great Barrier Reef ecosystem to die by 2100.
A key solution suggested in forums on environmental issues is that "humanity must limit consumption". Some suggest using science, but no meaningful or breakthrough discoveries have been made in recent decades that would make the oceans and air in cities cleaner and emissions and ozone holes smaller.
And most importantly, it is not clear who exactly is going to limit consumption. Who takes responsibility for cleaning up the ocean? What is the plan of action? The wealth divide between states is growing. In many parts of the world, people (including children) are forced to work for food or $1 a day. Girls are forced to marry without their consent. The death penalty is actively used. In most countries prisons do not help people to reform. Torture is prohibited, but some states have legislated or secretly made "exceptions" for themselves. Local conflicts and hybrid wars, starving Africa, catastrophic fresh water problems are all part of the reality of planet Earth. The reality we are used to. Let us focus concretely on freedom of movement. The UN Conference on International Travel and Tourism was held in 1963, but the situation with visas and passports has not changed much. Visas are used everywhere, the abolition of passports is out of the question. Moreover, the level of restrictions is increasing. The coronavirus pandemic has effectively locked citizens from some countries within their borders - they have no access to WHO-recognized vaccines and expensive tests.
Against this background, the need to migrate is increasing. Victims of local conflicts are trying to reach safe First World countries, often risking their lives. Educated individuals with high incomes are also leaving their countries in search of greater freedoms.
Every second person on the planet has access to the Internet. How is this valuable resource used? Does it unite us in the common urge to save the planet, change the supply chain or clean up our littered yard?
Most people scroll, swipe and like in their free time, trying to distract themselves from the difficulties of everyday life, dictated by the current situation. Their behaviour is understandable, because prices are rising, resources are becoming more expensive, taxes are going through the roof, there is not enough time and money for proper rest, it is difficult to find a tolerable job, and being unemployed is also not an option.
In turn, technological giants, that in the current system are focused on profit for the benefit of shareholders, form interfaces so that they can keep people in the virtual world as long as possible. They need to show some more advertising. Some more this evening, and tomorrow, and next month. Addictive technology, which is booming right now, is grabbing the maximum amount of attention. We love kitties and cheesecake too, but the question is who controls who – do we control kitties or they control us?
Every year the Internet looks more and more like a giant bakery designed to release pleasure hormones in everyone who comes in contact with it. Exciting short films, tokens, stock charts, account numbers, shares, likes, views, unread messages, cute icons, quick pleasures. Just as with fast carbs, the effect is very addictive. And we, as Homo Sapiens, have not yet developed mechanisms for protecting ourselves from addictions caused by the Internet and the variety of goods.
It is unlikely that there is a villain on the planet who has devised the system to work this way. It's just the way it is - thanks to information technology, mass production, financial systems and power delegation.
And we feel that it is time to turn the situation the other way around.
To summarize: the state of the people as things are can be described as apolitical, disjointed. People are focused on quick and understandable pleasures, on getting and keeping them. They are distracted from the long-term perspectives that affect us as a species as a whole. And it's not about the people themselves, it's about the way we have organized society.
One Person's choice
What can one person realistically do to change the environment?
At the moment, the only way to change the legal system you live in is to vote in elections to change your citizenship. There are 198-250 countries in the world, which, at first glance, are very different from each other.
At the same time, the complexity of the procedure for changing citizenship is unprecedented. It is necessary to prepare dozens of documents, physically move to the desired country, live there for a long time and then pass the final exam. At the same time remaining a citizen of the previous country before being admitted to the new one. But what really drives people who decide to take such a drastic step? Let's assume that it is not a keen interest in a passport of a certain colour. When choosing to make the change, a person is usually looking for an opportunity to join a community of people who share the values most important to them. To feel that their life is meaningful and that they influence events around them. And even the change of citizenship does not help much in this case, because the established legal systems are very similar to each other.
But that’s only for now.
We believe that humanity deserves a better world in the 21st century. A world with more stability and equality, less violence. A world where people can choose the values that are important to them, not follow those imposed by social media, celebrities, politicians or anyone else. We believe that in this world everyone will want (and be able) to influence what happens around them.
Unfortunately, the current systems of government do not offer solutions that could bring humanity closer to this better world.
There have indeed been brilliant, incandescent years of technological advancement on the planet in recent decades, with information spreading like a blast wave. But this has not been enough for humanity to break out of the vicious cycle of delegating the control of life and authority to "strict educators”.
Working on a virtual, decentralized platform to unite independent motivated people, we are sure - there is a way out.
We see that every day more and more people on planet Earth are ready to grow up. There are many changemakers in the world - people, communities, organizations and even states developing alternative strategies hoping to influence the future. They are willing and able to get things done if given the chance.
We believe that together we can affect the equilibrium of large systems for the benefit of mankind. Our task is to find each other. Then we will improve the chances for everyone.
We will devote a WhitePaper to how we see the New Equilibrium and what technological possibilities will lead to it.