Every animal spends its entire life trying to please itself, and avoid whatever is unpleasant or frightening. We want to enjoy life, not suffer. Therefore, we should have the best possible understanding of happiness, fun, pain, suffering, and related issues.

This constitution requires the schools to put a lot of emphasis on teaching the teenagers about this issue. Ideally, everybody would be an expert on happiness so that they can make wise decisions about how to spend their life and how to treat other people.

When we have a good understanding of our emotions, we will realize that we are designing machines and robots to have emotions. For example, if we design a robotic arm with a temperature sensor, and design the software to reacts to high temperatures by pulling the arm away from the hot object, then that robot could be described as feeling the pain of heat, and trying to protect itself from harm. That robot would be doing exactly what animals and humans do when the temperature sensors in our skin send a signal to our brain.

The opposite is also true. Specifically, when we understand that machines that react to heat, light, or pressure are essentially machines with emotions, then it can help us to realize that we are biological robots.
(Some examples of robot emotions are listed here.)

This constitution uses the word "masturbation" to describe any type of self titillation, not just sexual titillation. With that definition, everybody masturbates on a routine basis, probably every day. For example, men have cravings for status, so we frequently titillate ourselves by giving ourselves praise of how smart, talented, strong, educated, coordinated, or good-looking we are.

Everybody masturbates, but we should pass judgment on whether a person's masturbation can be considered normal and beneficial, or whether it should be considered excessive, bizarre, or detrimental.

For example, women have cravings to look pretty, but we should pass judgment on whether a woman is spending an excessive amount of time with hair color, cosmetics, jewelry, and clothing, or whether her grooming activities should be considered bizarre.

If we had a People database with details of everybody's life, including video of them grooming themselves, then we could analyze the grooming activities of the women, and make a decision about what we should consider to be "normal", and why some women have abnormal grooming habits. For example, we might discover that lonely, single women tend to spend more time on grooming than the women who have a pleasant marriage and friendships.

When is a woman spending excessive amounts of time and resources on grooming?

That would suggest that the women who are involved with excessive or bizarre grooming are unhappy, and are either trying to attract a husband, or trying to make themselves feel better by titillating their craving to look pretty.

The women assume that they are enjoying themselves when they pierce their noses or make their hair green, or paint their toenails, but are they truly enjoying those things?

Do cosmetics truly improve a woman's life? Or are the women merely titillating themselves, similar to a man who titillates himself with sexual pornography?

How do we determine if something we do is truly enjoyable, or if we are doing it because we are unhappy and trying to stimulate ourselves?

Women also have strong cravings for children, and a People database might show us that the women who are most attracted to pet animals and dolls are those who don't have children, which would be an indication that their attraction to animals and dolls is because they are unhappy, and they are using the animals to masturbate with.

Women also have cravings for affection, and a People database might show us that the women who are most attracted to having massages, other than athletes with sore muscles, are the lonely women who don't get much affection, and are going to a massage parlor because they want someone to caress them, and a massage is similar to that.

The same concept applies to men. Men have strong cravings for status, so all of us frequently titillate ourselves with praise, and by insulting other people.

However, we should pass judgment on when a man is spending excessive amounts of time masturbating, or when his masturbation is bizarre. A People database would show us that some men spend more time than others trying to show off their material wealth, college diploma, or job title, and some spend more time boasting about traveling to exotic locations, eating expensive caviar, or knowing famous Hollywood celebrities.

How much time should a man spend each day on titillating himself with fantasies of being important? How often should a man masturbate sexually, and how does that change as he grows older? How does a man determine if he is enjoying his life, or if he is wasting a lot of time by titillating himself because he is actually unhappy or mentally defective?

The only way we could determine whether we are enjoying life would be to have thousands of different lives, each of them with different people, culture, technology, social activities, and jobs.

We are foolish to believe that we know what we enjoy, and what will bring us a pleasant life. We must control our arrogance and our fear of the unknown, and experiment with our lives. We must experiment with our meals, social activities, jobs, city designs, holidays, clothing, and all other culture.

We assume that we know when we are happy and when we are miserable, but in reality, none of us understand ourselves well enough to know if we are truly enjoying our life, or whether we are suffering.

The younger we are, the more difficulty we have in figuring out whether we are enjoying our life. An example are the children who grow up in homes in which pedophilia is common. They don't realize that they are having a miserable childhood until they become much older.

The free enterprise system and the democracies fool us into believing that we are happy by giving us whatever we want. Unfortunately, most of the things that we want are irrational, unnecessary, worthless, or detrimental because we make decisions according to according to our emotional cravings, what other people want, what we became familiar with during our childhood.

Give it to me!

Every culture is promoting the false belief that when we satisfy our desires, we are enjoying our life, and that we suffer when we cannot satisfy our desires. This crude culture encourages people to behave like spoiled brats who demand that we let them have whatever they want.

Ironically, we get the most pleasure from life when we allow ourselves to suffer. For example, we get the most pleasure from swimming in cool water when we suffer from hot weather, and we get the most pleasure from swimming in warm water when we are cold. We get the most pleasure from food when we suffer from hunger; and we get the most pleasure from relaxing after suffering from "work".

One way that we can get a better understanding of happiness and suffering is to observe our behavior as the environment changes. Three examples are:

Example #1: Pet animals

From March 2020 and throughout 2021, many people spent a lot of time at home because of the Covid lockdown. This survey shows that the number of people purchasing pet animals increase tremendously during that time period, especially during 2021.

The people who got a pet during the lockdown believe that they did so because they enjoy the pet, but if they truly enjoy pets, why did they not bother with a pet until the lockdown?

There are different ways to explain why many people decided to get a pet during the lockdown, but I believe it was because a lot of people became unhappy due to boredom and loneliness. When we are unhappy, we search for something to make us feel better, and some of the lonely people decided to use an animal as substitute for a friend, spouse, or child.

It would be incorrect to say that those people had improved their life, or were enjoying their pet. It would be more accurate to describe them as "lonely" people who were using an animal to titillate themselves. Evidence to support this theory is that many of those pets were abandoned after the lockdown was over. (More about the "Covid pets" is here.)

It would also be incorrect to boast that our free enterprise system allowed people to get the pets that they wanted, and thereby enjoy their life. It would be more accurate to describe the businesses as "exploiting unhappy people".

Example #2: Candy, television, suicides, and fights

The consumption of candy increased during the Covid lockdown, and there were surveys that showed that people spent more time watching television, and there were reports of an increase in suicides and domestic violence.

The people who were doing those things might claim that they did them because they "wanted to", but it would be more sensible to conclude that those people did those things because they had became unhappy from loneliness and boredom, and they were trying to find a way to relieve their misery. Some of them relieved their misery by titillating themselves with candy, and others distracted themselves with television. Some people could not reduce their misery and they became angry or suicidal.

Example #3: Abnormal relationships

Charles Dodgson, who wrote Alice in Wonderland, and Michael Jackson had abnormal friendships with young children. Many people accuse them of being pedophiles, but what is a "pedophile"?

A significant percentage of the population today has a close relationship with a pet dog, and a small percentage of them have sex with their dogs, but are any of those people "dog-ophiles"?

There are also a lot of people who form friendships with fictional characters, such as the characters in television programs, Harry Potter books, and Hollywood movies. There are also lots of people who believe that they have a close relationship with Jesus.

Are the people who form relationships with fictional characters "fantasy-ophiles"?

One man has such an attraction to Peter Pan that he has dedicated his life to becoming Peter Pan. Is he a "Peter Pan-ophile"?

I pointed out in a previous document that some of the homosexual men do not seem to be truly homosexual. Rather, they seem to have gotten involved with men because they had trouble forming a relationship with a woman.

They are lonely, and they want sex, but instead of dealing with it by masturbating or getting a inflatable sex doll, they got involved with other men.

We cannot assume that a person is doing something because he actually enjoys doing it. An alcoholic is not necessarily a "alcohol-ophile" who loves alcohol. Rather, he may be suffering from some type of physical or mental problem, and is using the alcohol to distract himself from his misery.

Likewise, the people who claim to enjoy marijuana, heroin, or cocaine me not actually like those drugs. They may instead like how the drug relieves or masks some of their misery.

Both Charles Dodgson and Michael Jackson had trouble forming relationships with adults. They were social misfits who were more comfortable around children. Children are less finicky about their friends compared to adults, so the socially awkward adults have an easier time forming a friendship with a child.

Dodgson always seemed sad.

Charles Dodgson was a social misfit because of his physical and mental disorders, such as migraine headaches, stammering, deafness in one ear, and possibly epilepsy.

Every photograph of him makes him look unhappy. Although the photographic technology at that time was so crude that everybody had to remain motionless for a long time, thereby causing everybody to look serious, Dodgson seems unhappy rather than serious.

If Charles Dodson truly had an genetic attraction to children, then he would have remained attracted to children even if he had been cured of his headaches, stammering, and other problems.

However, if he became attracted to children only because his disorders caused him to be a misfit among adults, and extremely lonely as a result, then if he had been cured of his genetic disorders, he would have formed friendships with adults instead of children.

When we are bored, we look for something to do, and that can cause us to do something that we don't truly enjoy. Charles Dodson is an example of a similar concept. Specifically, some people will get involved with relationships and activities that they don't truly care for simply because their genetic disorders have caused them to become lonely misfits. Therefore, if those people could be cured of their genetic disorders, they would want to change their life.

Michael Jackson was also a social misfit. Although it's possible that he had some type of mental disorder that interfered with his ability to form normal relationships, it is more likely that he became a misfit because he was constantly surrounded by adults who were trying to exploit or control him. He probably felt more comfortable around children since they did not try to exploit him.

An adult who has abnormally close friendships with children is not necessarily a pedophile, and he does not necessarily prefer relationships with children.

Likewise, the people who form abnormally close friendships with dogs or imaginary characters, such as Jesus or Harry Potter, do not prefer animals or fictional characters over humans. Rather, they are suffering from loneliness, probably due to genetic disorders, but possibly because their childhood was abnormal.

Alcoholics are another example of this concept. They are not attracted to alcohol because alcohol is exciting to humans. Rather, they are suffering from some physical or mental disorder, and they are using the alcohol to relieve the misery. Therefore, if they could be cured of their genetic problem, they would lose their interest in alcohol.

This concept also applies to the billionaires. The billionaires believe that they are enjoying their life because of their wealth, but are they truly enjoying their material wealth? Or are they attracted to absurd amounts of wealth for the same reasons that some people are attracted to alcohol, cocaine, and marijuana; specifically, because they are suffering from some type of genetic disorder that is causing them to be miserable, and they are trying to relieve the misery through wealth and status?

Nobody can claim to have a perfect mind, but some of the billionaires have admitted to having mental problems that are worse than the "normal" people, and I suspect all of the others have serious mental problems, also. It does not seem possible for a person in "good" mental health to become a billionaire. Therefore, if the billionaires could be cured of whatever their problem is, they would become more interested in friendships, and less likely to commit crimes and exploit people.

The billionaires seem to be more intelligent than the ordinary people, and have a much greater initiative to do something, so curing them of their mental problems might cause them to become very impressive people.

Human behavior is animal behavior

The people who refuse to believe that humans are animals are creating idiotic theories about their own behavior, the behavior of other people, and what they like and dislike.

In order for us to create sensible analyses of ourselves and other people, and in order for us to create better recreational activities, holiday celebrations, government systems, and other culture, we need a realistic foundation to base our theories on, and that requires acknowledging the evidence that humans are a species of ape.

As with animals, human behavior is the result of our mind analyzing the information in our memory and coming from our eyes, ears, and other senses. Therefore, the three factors affecting our thoughts, behavior, and happiness are:

1)	Our emotions. Our emotions are the result of a haphazard jumble of genetic characteristics, so we have no control over them. We all have the same emotions, but there are subtle differences in the intensity of them, and the duration at which they remain stimulated, and how easily they are stimulated.
2)	Our processing ability (our intelligence). Our intelligence is also the result of a haphazard jumble of genetic characteristics, so we have no control over our intelligence, either. This also results in each of us having slightly different intellectual abilities.
3)	Our information. Each of us picks up slightly different information during our life, and we see different things with our eyes, so even if we have identical intelligence and emotions, we will produce different thoughts.

Our emotions and intelligence are genetic, so we have no control over them, but each of us has total control over the information that we put into our mind. Therefore, we can and should ensure that we have accurate and beneficial information. Unfortunately, no culture yet has any concern about the value of the information that we are provided.

Every culture allows criminals, religious fanatics, Jews, lunatics, government agencies, and businesses to provide us with deceptive, false, and irrational information. Each of us believes that we know how to enjoy life, but our desires are manipulated by the people and groups that are competing to provide us with information. This is why this Constitution authorizes intellectual trials.

All of us could be described as a puppet of the religious fanatics, businesses, Jews, the FBI, their peer group, or whoever we accepted information from.

None of us knows what makes our life pleasant. We need to experiment with our culture.

We all believe that we know what will make us happy, but we make those decisions with information that is incomplete, inaccurate, deceptive, and false.

An example are the people who believe that they know how to eat a Cadbury cream egg, or an Oreo cookie. Those people are puppets of the businesses that sell those products.

If we could live our life over and over, each time in a different environment, we would discover that what we enjoy is influenced by our environment. For example, if Isaac Newton had grown up in a city in which the majority of people had his level of intelligence, he would have been an ordinary person rather than a misfit, and that might have allowed him to have pleasant friendships and a pleasant marriage. He would have been unknown, but he would probably conclude that life is more pleasant for an ordinary person who has satisfying relationships than for a famous and lonely misfit.

None of us knows much about ourselves. We don't know what will provide us with the most satisfying life because we have never experienced any other type of life, and we don't understand our mind well enough to be able to figure out why we like or dislike certain things.

Do pet animals improve our lives? The only way to truly determine that is to experiment with different environments. I suspect that if we were living in an environment in which we enjoyed the people that we were living with, we would consider pet animals to be a burden, and a waste of life. Every animal prefers to form relationships with its own species.

We cannot assume that we are enjoying life simply because we are doing what we want to do. We must consider the possibility that we enjoy doing something simply because we want to mimic other people, or because we are lonely, or because we are bored, or because we are suffering from physical or mental disorders, or because we are following the culture we picked up as a child.

The only way we could determine what provides us with the best life as if we could live life over and over, and each time in a different environment. We would have to experience millions of different types of cities, recreational activities, foods, friends, jobs, homes, and clothing styles.

To confuse the issue of what makes us happy, something that we dislike can become desirable in a different culture. An example is bicycle riding. Many people do not like to ride bicycles, but is that because they truly do not enjoy bicycles?

It is likely that some people do not like riding bicycles because of our existing culture. The free enterprise system, for example, requires everybody to purchase bicycles and deal with their maintenance and storage. It also results in businesses competing to design bicycles that attract consumers, rather than designing them to be comfortable, practical, and reliable. Furthermore, our cities do not provide us with many pleasant bicycle paths.

This constitution creates a city in which the government has bicycle stores scattered around the city, and everybody can take any bicycle from any store, ride it, and then give it back to the city. The city handles the maintenance and storage.

Furthermore, this constitution puts the transportation system underground, and that allows the city to have lots of beautiful bicycle paths. Furthermore, by making many of the bicycle paths one-way, (as in the image below, which is supposed to show blooming Jacaranda trees), the people do not have to watch out for head-on collisions:

By making bicycle paths cross over or under other bicycle and foot paths, none of the people walking or riding have to worry about collisions at intersections.

Everybody will have to worry about collisions from the people next to and behind them, but eliminating the head-on and side collisions makes bicycle riding more relaxing and less dangerous.

That type of city will make it easier for people to enjoy the scenery and chat with their friends. Many of the people who dislike bicycle riding in our existing cities are likely to discover that they enjoy it in that type of city.

The AI software has trouble with the concept of paths that cross over other paths, but these images might give you some ideas of what is possible.

The same concept applies to swimming pools. It is unpleasant to swim in an ugly, rectangular, concrete pool with water that has extreme levels of chlorine, and in which people are peeing. It is also unpleasant to realize that most of the people in the pool have filthy butts because they prefer to use toilet paper rather than washing their butt.

If we were living in a city that had hundreds of beautiful swimming pools, and in which the people were clean, many of the people who don't want to go swimming in public pools might discover that they enjoy it

We are foolish to think that we know what we like and dislike. We need to remind ourselves that we don't understand ourselves, and that we should experiment with our city, social activities, apartments, holiday celebrations, and other culture.

In addition to describing us as puppets for being manipulated with false and deceptive information from businesses, government agencies, Jews, crime networks, and religions, we could also describe ourselves as victims of those people.

I've given examples in other documents, such as how businesses exploit young girls with wedding pornography, thereby causing many girls to develop unrealistic and very expensive goals for their wedding. Although those girls could be insulted as "puppets" or as "gullible fools", they could also be described as innocent victims of deceptive, abusive businesses, and that they were exploited because of our natural tendency to trust the people we live with.

When a person takes advantage of a retarded person, such as selling him something worthless, we do not insult the retarded person. We realize that he has been manipulated. We don't tell the retarded person "buyer beware". We don't expect retarded people to be able to deal with dishonest and abusive people. We should apply that policy to all of the other people in society.

Specifically, the government should be in the role of parents who protect their children. They should not tell us "buyer beware" when we are cheated by businesses, and they should not advise us to install security devices when our homes are burglarized.

We should restrict the top government positions to people who have exceptional intelligence, education, and self-control, and they should protect the citizens from false and deceptive information. Unfortunately, men have a strong craving to be dominant, so we don't want to be treated as a child. Each of us believes that we should be the dictator of the world, not protected by a government.

Our craving to be dominant results in us preferring a government system that considers everybody to be equally talented as a leader, voter, parent, and juror.

This constitution changes the situation dramatically by regarding the majority of people as ordinary, and half the population as below-average. The government is required to treat the majority of people as children, and protect them from false and deceptive information.

This constitution will have a dramatically different effect on the lives and attitudes of the people. For some examples:

•		Instead of regarding religious people as intelligent and educated, this constitution regards them as too dumb to understand evolution, and/or emotionally unable to accept it. This constitution regards the religious people as victims. The government is required to protect them from religious propaganda rather than encourage them to believe that they can figure out how the universe was created. In order to protect people from religious nonsense, the Schools Ministry is required to teach children that nobody knows how the universe was created. Everybody is free to believe the universe was created by supreme beings, a Big Bang, or something else, but they must keep their opinions to themselves, not form organized religions, become a member of an organized religion, or push their beliefs on other people, including their children. Parents do not have the right to control the education of their children, or determine what their children believe. Every child is regarded as an independent, young adult who has the right to have access to honest and accurate information. Everybody also has the right to be free of the intimidation by the people who want to control their behavior or beliefs. That includes intimidation by parents, friends, and neighbors.
•		The people who celebrate Easter by having their children search for candy are considered to be victims of religious fanatics and candy businesses. The Events Ministry is required to protect the people from idiotic holidays and other events, and develop events that are more beneficial.
•		The photo to the right shows a couple that got married in an "exotic" and "exciting" location. Some of the wedding cakes are so extreme that they should be described as absurd. The people who want such unusual and extravagant weddings are regarded as victims of idiots, mentally ill people, and businesses. The Events Ministry is required to protect the people from idiotic concepts about weddings. They are required to develop weddings that are more beneficial.

Since men want to be dominant, we will not enjoy having a government that treats us as children, but if we can provide ourselves with excellent leadership, the benefits will be worth the "suffering".

By providing ourselves with leaders who experiment with our culture, we will slowly improve our holiday celebrations, work environments, recreational activities, social affairs, school systems, economic systems, city plazas, music concerts, and other culture. Eventually the future generations will have culture that is so advanced that they regard our culture as crude, idiotic, ape-like, and miserable.

Although we cannot figure out what the future culture will be, we can imagine a city that consists of clusters of tall buildings surrounded by nature, and which puts the transportation system underground.

That type of city provides everybody with easy access to a variety of restaurants, social clubs, lounges, recreational areas, swimming pools, bicycle paths, foot paths, and plazas. Everybody can get out of their home or office and into the social and recreational areas simply by taking an elevator ride to the ground floor and walking a short distance.

Furthermore, by eliminating money, evicting criminals, prohibiting different classes of people, and raising standards for people, everybody will be free of the stress of crime, finances, unemployment, and people whining about racism, sexism, white privilege, and anti-Semitism. That will create a city that is so friendly and safe that we will want to spend our leisure time with other people rather than sitting at home by ourselves.

In that type of city, many of the activities that we enjoy today will seem idiotic, crude, or miserable. For example, a person in that city is not likely to be interested in spending his leisure time with a pet dog. The reason is because humans prefer to form relationships with humans, not with dogs, and we do not get any pleasure from walking a dog, picking up dog poop, feeding a dog, or removing hair and fleas from our clothing and furniture. We would likely regard a pet dog as a filthy, noisy, and irritating burden.

If we were living in that type of city, we would be more interested in spending our leisure time having a casual meal at a restaurant, riding a kayak in the creeks or canals, relaxing in the city plazas, riding a bicycle along the beautiful paths that meander around the city, swimming in one of the beautiful pools or ponds, getting involved with a social club, or relaxing with other people in one of the video or lounge rooms.

What will give us the best life? How do we know if we are truly enjoying ourselves or merely relieving boredom and misery? None of us know. The ministers must have the courage, intelligence, and education to experiment with our culture in order to help us answer such questions.

We need to occasionally masturbate sexually because our sexual cravings build up to the point at which we must either masturbate or we have orgasms when we are trying to sleep. However, the people who masturbate more often than "typical" are not experiencing more pleasure in their life. Rather, their excessive masturbation is likely to be a sign that there is something wrong with them. (This concept is also discussed in this section.)

Likewise, the people who get involved with dangerous sports claim that they are enjoying life by getting close to death, but it is more likely that they are suffering from something, and that the risky activities are helping to distract them from their misery and provide them with some pleasure.

Anybody who does something to excess should be investigated to determine if there is something wrong with him. This includes people who spend a lot of time praising themselves, or insulting other people. They are likely to be suffering from loneliness or low self-esteem.

An example of this behavior is Elliott Rodger. He was extremely envious of the men who had wives and girlfriends, and he was angry that neither men nor women wanted to be his friend. He was lonely and suffering from low self-esteem. To make himself feel better, he repeatedly praised himself and insulted other people.

Tim Cook considers "being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me". Tim Cook doesn't have any evidence that homosexuality is a gift, or that it's better than heterosexuality. He believes that homosexuality is a gift simply because he wants to. He is creating a pleasant fantasy for himself. This should be considered evidence that he is upset that he is homosexual, and is struggling to make himself feel better.

When we praise ourselves, we are masturbating. Although everybody does this occasionally, we should pass judgment on when a person is doing it "excessively".

Praise can be detrimental because it can encourage us to become even more arrogant than we already are. Praise can encourage us to boast about or ignore our problems rather than look for ways to reduce them and become a better person. And insulting other people can prevent us from learning from them, as well as becoming an irritation to other people.

Insults are a type of masturbation.

The people who praise themselves or insult other people to an excessive amount are likely to be suffering from something, and are trying to make themselves feel better. This behavior is similar to that of the fox in Aesop's fable of the Fox and the Grapes.

The fox was upset that he could not get the grapes, but rather than accept reality and deal with it calmly, he created the fantasy that the grapes were sour.

By insulting something that we want, we can suppress our craving for it. This is a type of masturbation in which we suppress an emotion rather than stimulate it.

Everybody occasionally behaves like that fox, but some people do it much more than others. For example, many of the single men and women claim that they do not want to get married, and that they enjoy being single. They frequently insult the opposite sex for having terrible qualities.

In reality, nobody wants to be single, unless they have a serious mental disorder. However, a lot of people have trouble facing reality, so they deceive themselves with the fantasy that they enjoy being single, and that the opposite sex is horrible.

Animals are not very good at masturbating, but humans have developed the ability to masturbate in a variety of manners. We should pass judgment on when our masturbation is beneficial, and when it is destructive to us and/or other people. Furthermore, we should pass judgment on whether we are doing an abnormal amount of masturbation. Excessive amounts of masturbation is likely to be a sign that the person is suffering from something.

Another example of excessive masturbation are the parents who have a defective child, and who repeatedly tell themselves that they love their child, and that God has given them a retarded child for a purpose. They repeat those phrases over and over because they are trying to make themselves feel better and distract themselves from the realization that they are wasting their life on the care of a retard.

The farmers and managers of zoos are aware of this concept. Specifically, they observe the behavior of the animals, and when they notice abnormal behavior, they assume the environment is inappropriate.

For example, if the zoo notices that the monkeys are masturbating excessively, they don't assume that the monkeys have discovered how to improve their lives. Rather, they assume that they have done something to ruin their lives, and they experiment with changes to the social environment in order to make their behavior become more normal.

We must restrict government officials to people who can understand this concept. Specifically, when they notice that people are changing their behavior, such as spending more time masturbating with sexual pornography, or wanting more pet dogs, or wanting to eat more candy, or spending more time grooming themselves, they should not assume that the people have just discovered how to enjoy themselves. They should instead consider that they have made made the culture worse, and that they need to experiment with changes to improve people's behavior. (This concept was discussed in the mouse utopia document.)

The ministers cannot determine whether they are improving the culture by asking the people if they are enjoying themselves. They must analyze the behavior of the people, just like the managers of a zoo analyze the behavior of the monkeys.

Nobody knows what will provide us with the best life. We must experiment with our culture in order to determine what type of behavior is a symptom of bad culture, and figure out what will provide us with a truly satisfying life.

When an animal experiences a problem, it assumes that the problem is coming from outside of its body, such as from a thorn, the weather, or another animal. It does not consider that the problem is coming from inside its own mind or body.

Humans inherited that attitude. When we are suffering from something, such as internal pains, or failures with our relationships or jobs, our natural reaction is to assume that something outside of us is causing the problem, and this causes us to blame something idiotic, such as our parents, wealthy people, anti-Semites, sexism, bad luck, poverty, or a lack of opportunities. This can cause those people to whine about, hate, or attack the people or things that they assume are ruining their life.

People who blame other people for their troubles are dangerous and should be evicted.

An example are the non-white people in the USA who blame "white" people for their misery and failures. They don't want to look critically at themselves and consider the possibility that their problems are the result of their bad attitudes, or they are inferior and/or defective genetic characteristics.

They prefer to blame other people for their troubles, and that can cause them to become so angry at the people they blame that they want to kill them. Those people are dangerous because they are stimulating their anger emotion.

The people who react to problems by hating other people are dangerous because they are stimulating their anger. The Courts Ministry has the authority to pass judgment on when a person is going too far with his blaming of other people for his troubles, and they must evict those people.

The people who react to their problems by searching for happiness can also be detrimental. Those people can be a problem because they assume that happiness is something that they must acquire, and this puts them on an endless quest for pleasure. They are a disruption to society because they spend their time searching for happiness. They focus on pleasing themselves, rather than on becoming a productive team member who participates in society.

For example, some of them spend their life trying to become wealthy or famous. Some of them experiment with bizarre sex activities, pedophilia, dangerous sports, and drugs. Some of them travel to "exotic" locations, or have extravagant weddings or birthday parties. Benjamin Sifrit and his girlfriend wondered if burglary would improve their lives, and when that failed, they wondered if committing a random murder would bring them some excitement.

The Schools Minister is required to ensure that children are taught that humans are just a jumble of monkey genes, and that that the first thing a person should do when he is unhappy is to consider that his misery is coming from his own mind or body, such as from allergies, an improper diet, hormone disorders, mental disorders, a defective liver, or faulty kidneys.

The people who cannot understand this concept, or who cannot apply it, and end up blaming other people for their problems, or searching for happiness, must be regarded as potentially dangerous misfits by the Courts and Behavior Ministries, and must be put on restrictions or evicted.

The free enterprise system gives us warped views of happiness because the businesses compete to convince us that we will have a more pleasant life when we purchase their particular products and services.

Fictional books, television programs, and movies are also distorting our view of happiness by making it appear as if the happiest people in the world are those who have lots of material wealth, fame, servants, sex, and that mysterious substance we refer to as "power".

The James Bond movies promote gambling and alcohol.

The movies also make gambling look like a fun activity, and most movies promote alcohol.

The movies and television programs also tend to give us very unrealistic views of women, such as showing women giggling at lewd remarks; showing beautiful, intelligent women falling in love with stupid, clumsy, ugly men; and showing women who are almost as promiscuous as men.

Every culture believes that we protect children by censoring information about sex, childbirth, and digestion, and by promoting religion, but we would protect them by letting them have access to that information, and by censoring the idiotic and deceptive information.

The only way to improve our lives is to provide ourselves with leaders who have the courage to experiment with our activities, work environments, clothing, holiday celebrations, and other culture. We need to experiment with our attitudes and beliefs in order to figure out what brings us the most satisfaction from life, and what merely provides some momentary pleasure.

Our leaders cannot conduct experiments with culture if the public refuses to participate in the experiments. The majority of the public must be willing to participate in the experiments.

We could force everybody to participate, but that does not give us "participants". That gives us "prisoners" who do something only because they cannot figure out how to avoid it.

The public must be willing to participate. They must become team members, not prisoners who do something only because they are afraid to do something else

This Constitution prohibits the government from trying to force people to change their behavior. The government must let people do what they want, if it doesn't cause trouble for other people. Instead of trying to change the behavior of the misfits, the Reproduction Ministry prohibits them from reproducing, or put restrictions on how many children they can have.

Children adapt to culture very easily, but adults are resistant to changes in culture. As a result of this characteristic, when we experiment with a new food, recreational activity, holiday celebration, clothing style, work environment, or other custom, we must be willing to try it over and over, possibly over a span of several weeks, before we can make a determination of whether it is beneficial or not. If we try something only once or twice, our natural resistance to change can cause us to assume we dislike it.

Our mind is not a computer. It is a monkey brain. We cannot depend upon it to make intelligent decisions. When trying to determine if we like a new food or activity, we have to try it many times. I discussed this years ago in regards to the first time I made beef burgers.

We must also be aware of our tendency to mimic other people, which can cause us to like or dislike something simply because they like or dislike it.

The ministers in the Social Division are a group of zoologists who specialize in human behavior, and who experiment with the culture of the city in order to provide the people with the most pleasant and beneficial life.

The ministers are restricted to people who have shown an above-average understanding of evolution, and that we need to design our city and culture to fit our genetic characteristics.

An example is that we have a genetic desire to be surrounded by nature, and the Neighborhoods Ministry is required to satisfy that desire by designing the city as clusters of tall buildings surrounded by parks, gardens, and creeks. The people are prohibited from having plants, aquariums, and fountains in their apartments and offices.

If aliens from another galaxy were to take a group of humans back to their planet to create a terrarium of humans, they would create an inappropriate terrarium if they asked the humans how to design the terrarium. The reason is because the humans would design their terrarium to fit their emotional cravings, which would give them what they want rather than what they benefit from.

The humans would create a terrarium for themselves that causes them to become as sickly, obese, lonely, miserable, and bored as they are here on the earth. They would also have as much crime and corruption.

The proof for that accusation is that we have think creating that type of environment for ourselves here on the earth for centuries.

If we were taken to another planet and allowed to design our terrarium, we would create the same miserable environment that we have here on the earth. Likewise, if dogs were taken to another planet, they would continue to behave like the dogs here on the Earth. An animals behavior will not improve simply by changing its physical location in the universe.

If the aliens were to put Russian Jews into the terrarium, then the terrarium would suffer from the same problems that the Jews are causing us today.

We cannot create a better world by giving people what they want. People have been giving themselves what they want for the past few thousand years, and that has resulted in fights, overpopulation, false flag operations, pollution, abuse, and lots of other problems.

The ministers have control of culture, but they are not allowed to pander to people. They must behave like the manager of a zoo who is trying to figure out how to provide the animals with the most beneficial environment.

The manager of a zoo is not concerned with what the animals like or dislike, or whether the animals approve of him. He is not trying to be popular with the animals. He is trying to figure out what is best for them.

Farmers have a similar attitude. Farmers do not care what the animals like or dislike. They do what they think is best for the animal. For example, chickens have a desire to peck at one another, so the farmers trim their beaks. The chickens do not like that, but it reduces the violence and injuries.

The ministers in the social division must regard the city as a zoo for humans. Their goal is to create a city and culture that causes the people to be relaxed, friendly, productive, healthy, and capable of forming stable relationships.

This type of government regards people as animals, but that will be a problem only if we have incompetent, abusive, or neurotic government officials. As of 2024, all of us are in living conditions that we would consider appalling and unacceptable for animals at a farm or zoo.

We cannot have a "perfect" government, but it should be easy to improve upon the leadership in the world today. The democracies and free enterprise systems are allowing people to get into the top positions of society by blackmail, crime networks, inheritances, and other types of cheating. We would have to be incredibly stupid to fail at providing ourselves with better leaders than what we have right now.

We can provide ourselves with better government officials simply by restricting the officials to people who have enough of an understanding of evolution to realize that humans are apes. By also requiring our leaders have the attitude of the manager of a zoo, then we can have government officials who ignore what we want and try to figure out what is best for us.

Those type of government officials will ignore what we want and try to understand what is best for us. Two examples of how they will analyze problems like a zoologist rather than pander to us like democratic officials or exploit us like business executives are:

The Behavior Minister has the authority to determine whether women should shave their body hair, and if so, which body hair; what type of devices or chemicals to provide the women to remove their hair; and whether the women should do this in their home, or whether the city should provide hair removal salons.

However, the Minister must make those decisions according to their effect on human life, rather than according to what men or women want. The Minister must consider the advantages and disadvantages to the different options.

Furthermore, after the Minister creates a policy, he must occasionally give his policy a "job performance review" to ensure that it is as beneficial as he expected, and he should look for ways to improve it. He should never assume that he has created a perfect policy.

What are the advantages and disadvantages to having women shave the hair from their legs, armpits, or crotch?

The disadvantages are that we must put some of our labor and resources into producing and recycling the devices or chemicals to remove the hair; the women must spend some of their time involved with the process; and removing the hair armpits and crotch causes their skin to rub against itself, which can be uncomfortable.

The only advantage to shaving body hair is that it makes women more sexually attractive when they are at a enough of a distance from us that we don't see the stubble, but is that really an advantage? Or does that cause trouble by stimulating men more than we were designed for?

We will not know the answers to those questions until we experiment with our culture, but I suspect that making women more sexually attractive is a disadvantage.

Women are removing their body hair in most societies today because our emotions prefer hairless women, but we should not do something simply because we have an emotional craving for it. We should consider what is most beneficial to us.

This constitution recommends experimenting with the custom of requiring women be more natural, and not providing them with any hair removal products. The use of cosmetics and jewelry should be restricted to certain social affairs, rather than for everyday use. That will give us an environment that is more similar to what we evolved for evolved for, so it should provide us with a more pleasant and relaxing environment compared to what we have today.

Our emotions want us to have control of all of the land that we see, and all of the water and air. We want to chase everybody off of our land, just like the animals do.

Those emotional cravings cause us to create cities in which we live on large plots of land, and with fences around the boundary to define our territory. Since we want to impress other people, we want to have a giant house to make ourselves look important. However, will that type of city give us the most satisfying life?

We will not know for certain until we experiment with different types of cities, but I suspect we will have a more pleasant life if we "suffer" with a city that is similar to that in the image below, and which I've described in many other documents. Specifically, clusters of tall apartment buildings that are surrounded by nature, walkways, and bicycle paths, and in which the homes are small, don't have kitchens, and are primarily for sleeping, grooming, and resting.

That type of city will give us an environment that is more similar to what we evolved for, which is to live among flowers, trees, and creeks, and to live close to other people.

Those two examples are intended to explain the concept that we can improve our lives by forcing ourselves to "suffer" from the emotional pain of denying ourselves what we want.

Many people understand and apply this concept to food. Most people realize that they must control their cravings for food and force themselves to "suffer" with meals that are smaller and healthier than what their emotions want. Although many people don't have enough self-control to do that, they can understand the concept of designing meals with their intelligence rather than their emotions.

However, very few people are applying this concept to other issues, such as material wealth, fame, status, sex, babies, and crime. For example:

•		Is our culture encouraging sexual problems? Humans evolved for an environment in which the children routinely see women give birth, breast-feed babies, poop, and clean up menstrual fluids. Today children are being raised in an abnormal, unnatural environment in which they are ignorant of those activities. Although people today assume that we are protecting the children by keeping them ignorant about human bodies, we should investigate this issue as a zoologist would. We should consider the possibility that our unnatural modern culture is creating problems for us, such as causing men to develop obsessions with women's bodies, and making it difficult for men and women to discuss issues about sex and digestion without giggling, awkwardness, idiotic jokes, and embarrassment. What type of culture will produce adults who have the most satisfying lives and relationships? Are the women who want breast implants, Brazilian Butt Lifts, and other types of cosmetic surgery developing those cravings because our sexual attitudes are inappropriate? Are the men who worry about the size of their penis or their muscle developing such concerns because the environment is inappropriate? Do our abnormal sexual attitudes interfere with marriages? The only way we will be able to understand these issues is to experiment with our culture. Therefore, the ministers have the authority to control sexual attitudes. They can do such things as require the children to be exposed to naked bodies, breast-feeding, and childbirth, and they can restrict breast implants to women who have had breast cancer, and they can prohibit Brazilian Butt Lifts. I suspect that when the ministers force adults to "suffer" with occasional nudity and breast-feeding, and with schools that provide an education about human bodies, the relationships between men and women will improve significantly, and our lives will be more relaxing, less awkward, and less embarrassing. It will also make it easier for us to swimming because we won't have to be concerned about bathing suits. We will be able to take our clothes off and jump into the pool, or a hot tub or sauna. The businesses that produce waste heat could warm up some of the pools during the winter, and employees would be able to take off their clothes, and enjoy the warm water during their breakfast break. Those particular pools could also be designed with insulation to maintain their warmth, and and have insulated covers when they're not in use.
•		Should we practice recreational activities? We enjoy competing with one another, and this has resulted in us developing a lot of competitive activities. We also have intense craving for status, so our competitive activities have evolved to provide the winner with some type of award ceremony and a prize and so that he can feel special. There is so much emphasis on winning a recreational event that a lot of people practice the activity, and many schools and businesses provide both children and adults with training in a variety of recreational activities. Are the people who practice recreational activities improving their lives? We will not know for certain until we experiment with our culture, but this constitution believes that the emphasis on winning recreational events is causing us to waste a lot of labor and resources on the development of technically advanced golf clubs, soccer balls, racecars, and trophies, none of which are providing us with a better life than simplistic and primitive equipment. Furthermore, the people who practice recreational activities are wasting a portion of their short and precious life on the development of a worthless skill. It is especially detrimental for children since they have such a short childhood. Most people are willing to force themselves to eat healthy meals, but not many people are willing to force themselves to control their cravings to win their recreational activities. Some people cannot even refrain from cheating during casual recreational activities with their friends. The Leisure Ministry is required to design activities according to what is most beneficial for us, not according to our cravings. They must analyze activities according to the benefits and disadvantages that they have on our attitudes, behavior, and society. They must design activities that will provide us with a satisfying life, and without wasting resources or causing injuries. The Leisure Ministry also has the responsibility to determine what type of training programs are available for leisure activities. For example, they can authorize a program to train children to ride bicycles and electric vehicles, while prohibiting programs that train them to do tricks on vehicles, or to race the vehicles. The Leisure Ministry also determines the equipment that is available for leisure activities, such as the types of bicycles, electric vehicles, snorkeling equipment, kayaks, and inflatable balls. The Leisure Ministry has total control of the equipment, so they can do such things as design electric vehicles for children with computers that prevent them from driving off the paths that they authorized for children. They also determine the speed, size, weight, lights, and other safety features on the vehicles. This will allow the children to ride the vehicles safely, and without bothering the adults, even at night. The Leisure Ministry cannot manufacture the recreational items. Instead, they must post their request in the Requests category, and the Economic Division has the authority to turn down the request if they don't believe it is beneficial or practical.

Ideally, all of us would enjoy reminiscing about our life when we become elderly. Nobody should regret their life, or be ashamed or embarrassed of any of it. However, an analysis in 2011 claims that about 90% of the adults have "deep or existential regrets about their lives".

Even if the researchers overestimated the value, the fact that a large percentage of the population has regrets should be considered evidence that modern culture is a failure, and that we should push ourselves into experimenting with improvements rather than continuing to follow it, like stupid animals on a migration path. It is idiotic to boast about a culture that so many people regret.

Prehistoric culture encouraged the people to do what they enjoyed. That is the Marquis de Sade attitude, and it was beneficial for prehistoric people. For example, prehistoric culture encouraged everybody to become "wealthy", but that was beneficial because it encouraged people to create better tools and furs, and to find more food.

Today, however, encouraging people to become wealthy can result in them suffering from debt, frustration, arguments with family members, and homes that are excessively large and cluttered with items that they don't need.

It is not likely that many prehistoric people regretted what they did during their lives because they would have spent their lives on activities that they were proud of; specifically, taking care of themselves, their family, and their tribe.

Today, however, children are raised in an unnatural environment, and there are thousands of businesses, religions, the Zionist groups, feminists, lunatics, and government officials trying to exploit and manipulate us. We have lots of opportunities to waste our time, hurt other people, and hurt ourselves.

We must update our culture to fit our modern era, and suppress our craving to follow traditions.

The goal of the government is to create an environment that causes us to enjoy reminiscing about our life when we become elderly. However, the government cannot assume that they are providing us with a pleasant life simply because a lot of people claim to be enjoying life.

An obvious example of this concept are the children who believe that they are having a wonderful life when their parents provide them with lots of candy, praise, and pampering, and when the schools give them good grades no matter what they do.

Those children believe that they are having a wonderful life because they are frequently titillated by the gifts and pampering, and because they can avoid doing whatever they dislike.

However, if each of us could live our lives over and over, each time in a different environment, we would discover that we have the most satisfying life, and better health, when we are not pampered.

It is absurd to ask children what they want in life because children don't have much experience with life, they are not very intelligent, and they do not enjoy learning, researching, or thinking.

However, when the children become adults, they don't transform into super intelligent, super educated geniuses. Rather, they become less ignorant and stupid. Therefore, it is absurd for the government to ask the adults what they want from life. None of the adults know what they need, and very few are interested in putting time and effort into researching and discussing the issue.

This constitution requires the government officials to give guidance to both children and adults, rather than pander to them. This requires the public be willing to accept a culture in which they are treated by their government in the similar manner as employees are treated by their managers.

Most adults should be able to handle that because they already deal with it at their job, but they might have a difficult time with a government that treats their children as employees.

Not many adults can regard children as "young adults". Rather, there are so many adults who regard children as "bundles of joy" that that phrase is listed in dictionaries, and there are businesses using that phrase in their names, such as the "Bundle of Joy University", and the "Bundles of Joy Diaper Bank".

We have such a strong attraction to children that many parents, retail store clerks, doctors, and other adults will submissively ask children what they want, rather than provide guidance to the children.

This Constitution requires the government officials to have the opposite attitude. Specifically, the ministers are restricted to people who can provide guidance to children, and who dampen the tendency of adults to pander to children. The ministers are restricted to people who can analyze both adults and children in the same serious manner that zoologists analyze animals.

Whenever a person in a leadership position imposes something on his members that they don't want, there is the possibility that some members will become upset, angry, rebellious, sad, apathetic, or violent.

This is a routine problem in families because parents must frequently make decisions that their children do not like. However, it doesn't cause much trouble because children are very submissive. It only causes trouble with the children who are abnormally independent, arrogant, selfish, or suffering from some type of mental or physical disorder that prevents them from accepting their situation.

However, many adults, especially men, become very upset when the government imposes policies that they do not like. Therefore, in order for the government to be successful in controlling culture, the adults must react to policies that they dislike by discussing the issue rather than becoming angry, apathetic, or violent.

This is a complex issue, and it is discussed in more detail in the documents about diversity and setting higher standards for the citizens.

The Leisure and Social Clubs Ministers are required to pass judgment on which activities are beneficial, and which should be discouraged or forbidden.

An example is the concept of a "bucket list". In a free enterprise system, journalists, travel agencies, and other businesses encourage us to believe that we must create and complete a bucket list in order to truly enjoy life. As would be expected with a free enterprise system, businesses promote the activities that provide them with a lot of profit.

A person who believes in the concept of a bucket list will get enjoyment from doing the activities on his bucket list simply because he has convinced himself that he must do them, not because those activities are truly improving his life.

This concept can be most easily understood by observing children. For example, many children become convinced that they must have a certain toy, candy bar, or clothing item. They insist that their life will be miserable if they cannot have those items. In reality, if they become miserable when they are denied what they want, it is because they made themselves miserable.

An adult who believes in a bucket list is behaving like a child who gives Santa Claus a list of candy bars and toys that he believes he must have. Likewise, a business that promotes the concept of a bucket list is as detrimental as a business that convinces children that they must have a particular toy in order to enjoy life.

The concept of a bucket list is absurd, and it encourages detrimental attitudes. There is nothing in particular that we need to do in order to enjoy life. We do not have to travel to an "exotic" location, or try bungee jumping, or climb Mount Everest.

The government officials have the authority to move the documents and videos that promote bucket lists, (such as this entire site), and other destructive or wasteful attitudes, to the Detrimental category.

An even more absurd bucket list is this one which encourages us to travel simply to look at something. For example, #3 in that list is traveling to a certain location in Indiana where the Chicago skyline can be seen in front of a setting sun. That view will last for only a few moments, and it is visible only if there are no clouds or fog obstructing the view.

It would be more sensible to have somebody film it with a high resolution camera, and all of the other places in that bucket list. That would allow everybody to look at those images in a comfortable video room on a giant, high resolution monitor.

It is idiotic to encourage people to travel somewhere just to look at something for a few seconds or minutes.

A related and equally detrimental concept that is frequently promoted by journalists, businesses, and people who want to attract our attention is the concept that some foods, shoes, beaches, activities, hotels, restaurants, sports, or swimming areas are "The Best".

For example, Trip Advisor has documents promoting The Top 25 Beaches, The Trending Destinations, and The Top Overall Experiences. The author of this article claims that there are 30 places in the USA that are so beautiful that we should visit them at least once. All of the documents that promote such nonsense should be moved to the Detrimental category. There are areas all around the world that are beautiful. The only areas that are disgusting are those that have been destroyed by humans, such as our cities, garbage dumps, and polluted rivers.

The people who promote those concepts are exploiting us and encouraging bad attitudes, rather than providing us with intelligent advice.

Since everybody is held accountable for what they do, when somebody's document is moved to the Detrimental category, that action will be listed in their database entry as a "failure". The more failures a person accumulates, the more difficult it will be for him to get into influential positions, and the people who are extremely troublesome risk being put on restrictions or evicted.

The ministers have the authority and responsibility to pass judgment on the value of our activities, goals, and attitudes. They must provide intelligent guidance, and dampen or prohibit the detrimental or wasteful attitudes and activities.

For example, by 2008, at least 82 children had died as a result of playing the "choking game". The CDC responded by releasing this warning to the public, but a warning does not protect children. Rather, that promotes the buyer beware attitude.

Although most older children have enough sense to avoid dying from the choking game, all children occasionally pick up idiotic attitudes and behavior.

No society is doing anything to prevent children from picking up dangerous attitudes, activities, or goals. Instead, thousands of individuals, businesses, religions, Zionist organizations, homosexuals, pedophile networks, and sports groups are competing to manipulate children's desires for their own selfish purposes. Children in every society are exploited and manipulated

A government does not protect the children by encouraging the buyer beware attitude. The ministers must take an active role in investigating and dealing with the people who are a bad influence on children. The ministers need to either put the troublesome people on restrictions, or evict them.

Everybody is held accountable for what they do, including children. For example, if a person promoted something similar to the choking game, then he would have that listed in his database as a failure. That would make it more difficult for him to get a job in the government, especially in the Social Division, and it would reduce his chances of being able to reproduce.

Conversely, people who create activities that are judged to be beneficial will have that listed in their database entry as a success, and that will make it easier for them to get into a leadership position.