A Short Course in Comprehensive Thinking – Part 20 – All Dominant Ideologies are Based on Scarcity

Abundance makes them all obsolete.

I doubt that I can overstate the impact that reading Bucky Fuller’s work had on mine. One of his pupils called me a comprehensivist in late 2002, soon after I completed my site, largely as it stands today. I did not know what he meant, so he had me read some of Fuller’s work in early 2003, and the lightbulb finally went on. Fuller was the professional grandfather that I did not know that I had. My work has been consciously comprehensive ever since. I resumed my science studies in earnest around the same time, and I always brought a comprehensive orientation to them.

As I emerged from my monster of a midlife crisis, I wrote this essay in 2007, which brought Brian O’Leary back into my life, after the disaster of our free-energy efforts. That essay has been a touchstone of my work ever since, from my contrast of conspiracists and structuralists to the levels of free energy awareness to failed approaches to the free-energy issue to paradigm shifts. But that essay’s chapter that I will discuss in this post is about humanity’s dominant ideologies.

I preserved some of my pre-Fuller writings. I can see what I was groping toward, but without the experience of reading Fuller’s work, my work would not have come together how it did, and I can only be grateful. I can’t recall the exact moment when it hit me, but near the beginning of the process of conceiving and writing that essay, I realized that all of the world’s dominant ideologies were rooted in assumptions of scarcity. The three main population-management ideologies on Earth: nationalism, capitalism, and organized religion, were explicitly founded on the scarcity concept. With territorialism, the “law” of supply and demand, the idea that heaven only has so much room in it, and other concepts. I eventually realized that they were all founded on scarcity assumptions, and their primary upshot was justifying violence against the out-group. It was all just a fancy variation of how chimps act, but it took more years of study before that became clear to me.

I eventually realized that since scarcity is all that humanity has known, that all of its ideologies would be rooted in scarcity should not have been surprising. But it really hit me as I prepared to write that essay. I also realized that adopting those ideologies provided benefits to the adherents: in-group membership. The vast majority of humanity is indoctrinated into those ideologies while young and they are set for life. Not only will they never question those ideologies, but they will defend them to their deaths. I have watched people embrace certain death over questioning their indoctrination, including my recently departed college roommate. I tried with him for about ten seconds, before he made it clear that he would ride orthodox medicine to his grave, and orthodox medicine may well have given him his fatal disease. I have never convinced even one person to try an alternative cancer treatment, as I watched them die. I had not even tried in over 30 years when I spent those ten seconds with my roomie, but I did send this to his family. I did what I could and then tried to make his last days as good as they could be.

When people choose certain death over questioning their indoctrination and relinquishing their addictions, the chances of questioning their nationalistic or capitalistic indoctrination, for instance, are going to be very slim.

I also noticed that intellectuals are seduced by a more sophisticated set of ideologies, and I have called them Enlightenment ideals. In short, they are materialism, rationalism, and scientism. They are also rooted in scarcity, but more subtly and insidiously. Materialism is really just another religion based on a false foundation. So are scientism and rationalism, and they justified a host of evils, such as animal experiments (another expendable out-group).

All of humanity’s dominant ideologies are rooted in scarcity, and to one degree or another were why people remained opposed to the idea of free energy and abundance. Those levels of denial and fear were all rooted in scarcity-based assumptions about our reality, and the “smart” were even more entrenched than the mindless, with their seemingly sophisticated objections to the idea of free energy. But those objections were only recitals of the catechisms of their indoctrination and conditioning. Those kinds of reactions led to Brian’s question of whether we are a sentient species.

When I wrote that table of free-energy awareness, I did it off the top of my head in less than an hour, as I had witnessed thousands of reactions by that time. As I studied for what became my big essay on energy and the human journey, I created my Epochal framework, and I eventually realized that until now, nobody in the human journey had ever seen the new Epochs coming. They were unable to even imagine them. It made me far more sympathetic to those reactions of denial and fear: they were normal. I was the freak.

People dig into their survival niches and won’t budge. As I saw when I had my career epiphany, which could have improved millions of lives, the beneficiaries of my idea might have become the most resistant of all.

I encountered mystical explanations for what I was seeing, such as that most souls have chosen to sleepwalk through their lifetimes so that they learn through the agonies of karma, as they slaughter and abuse each other. Maybe that is true, but we do it far less than we used to (1, 2). So something has changed, and I won’t stop imagining what a world of abundance looks like and how to get there. For starters, all of those ideologies will crumble in a world of abundance. They will no longer make any sense.

But I also realized that until abundance ruined those ideologies, the masses were not going to budge, so I realized that I needed to find people who had awakened beyond them, and I know who I am looking for. But they also need to learn to think comprehensively, for what I am doing, and that is what I am here for.