Jobs

Table of contents

Page for this series

The Kastron Constitution

31) Jobs should be a source of pleasure

15 April 2024

Work is play, and play is work

Work and play are complex concepts

The culture that some of us consider to be "utopia" is considered to be "dystopia" to other people, and no matter what type of culture a person considers to be utopia, it requires dystopia in order to maintain it. Utopia and dystopia are just intangible concepts that are whatever we want them to be.

The concepts of "work" and "play" are just as confusing. Most people regard the word "play" to refer to an activity that we enjoy doing, and want to do during our leisure time, and we regard the word "work" as referring to activities that we do not want to do, but we must do. One of the confusing aspects of those definitions is that the activities that some people describe as "work" are what others would describe as "play".

For a simple example, to some people, taking care of a pet dog is a pleasant, leisure activity. They enjoy cleaning the dog, throwing a ball for it chase after, and taking it for a walk. To other people, taking care of a pet dog is unpleasant "work". Those people are disgusted by the ball covered with slimy, dog saliva; they dislike walking a dog and having to stop every few minutes so it can sniff something, pee, or poop; they are disgusted with having to pick up and carry the poop; and they are irritated by the dog hairs that get into their clothing and home.

In order to play, we must do some work

To confuse the issue of work and play, most of the activities that modern humans consider to be "play" are activities that require us to do "work" before, during, and/or after the play. For example, the people who enjoy playing in a swimming pool have to do some work in order to create and maintain the swimming pool, or they have to do some work to pay other people to do the work.

The people who enjoy horseback riding, snow skiing, or sailing have to do even more work in order to play those activities, which is why they are so expensive. The more expensive a play activity is, the more work it requires us to do.

Animals “work”, they do not “play”

We assume that animals are "playing" when they are involved with activities don't seem to have any purpose. For example, kittens seem to be playing when they chase after one another, but in reality they are preparing for a deadly battle. They are "working", not playing. They are analogous to a soldier who is in boot camp, and who is learning how to fight and defend himself, and who is developing his muscles and coordination.

Young animals, especially the more intelligent ones, need to learn how to use their muscles, eyes, ears, and other senses, and so they need to expose themselves to different environments and activities. They need to learn how to walk and run over rocks, grass, bushes, puddles, and crevices in the ground. They need to learn how to avoid obstacles, such as trees and cliffs. They need to learn how to identify the direction that the sound is coming from, and what different items smell like.

Their digestive and immune system of animals also need to be "trained". For example, baby koala bears must eat some of their mother's poop in order to pick up the bacteria they need to digest eucalyptus leaves.

The "playing" that the animals do when they are young is similar to the "training programs" that people create for AI software. For example, this baby elk is not "playing" in the puddle. It is learning something about its environment, such as what water is, and how to deal with water.

It makes no sense to describe animals as "playing". It makes more sense to say that they work all day, every day. Everything they do is for a purpose, and that purpose is survival and reproduction. To be more technical, an animal is just a group of molecules that react, and molecules do not play.

Describing an animal as spending some of his time "playing" is as senseless as describing a bacteria as spending some of his time playing. However, from the point of view of an animal, everything it does is "play". If animals had enough intelligence to speak to us, they would claim that they spend every day playing, and never do any work. The reason is because most people describe "work" as an activity that we don't want to do, but we must do, and most people consider "play" to be an activity that we enjoy doing.

Whether an activity is "play" depends on our genetic characteristics and, as discussed farther down, our environment.

For example, cats enjoy hunting mice and other creatures, and the result is that they choose to do that day after day.

From the point of view of a cat, spending hours every day to hunt mice is "playing" every day, not "working". Cats do not have fantasies about retiring from the "work" of hunting and being pampered by servants.

Many of the activities that humans considered to be "play", such as swimming, water polo, skiing, playing a guitar, and snorkeling, would be considered unpleasant and difficult "work" to a cat.

If a cat had to spend hours a day swimming in a waterpark or playing a piano in order to get food and a place to sleep, it would fantasize about retiring from that unpleasant, difficult "work" and doing what it wants to do, which is to chase after mice, birds, and grasshoppers.

Likewise, to a dog, chasing after animals is entertainment, and so is marking their territory and barking at anything that comes into their territory. This is why pet dogs spend so much of their leisure time doing such activities. To a dog, those activities are "play", not "work". They are "fun" leisure activities.

Work and play depend upon our genetic characteristics

Each of us has slightly different ideas on what is "work" and what is "play" because we have slightly different mental and physical characteristics and peer groups. For a few examples,

•	A person who has the physical abilities to play golf, soccer, tennis, or rugby, and who has the mental characteristics to enjoy those games, will regard them as "fun" leisure activities. He will regard himself as "playing" those games. By comparison, a person who has severe arthritis, or who does not enjoy those games, would have to be paid to play those games. He would not describe himself as "playing" those games. Rather, he would describe himself as "working at a difficult, painful, and irritating job".
•	Some people consider themselves to be "playing" when they spend hours a day fishing, whereas other people consider that activity to be boring, unpleasant "work".
•	Some people consider themselves to be "playing" when they spend hours a day watching television soap operas, reading the Bible or the Koran, or solving crossword puzzles, whereas other people would consider those activities to be unpleasant "work".
•	A child's mind is significantly different from an adult mind, and as a result, children and adults have disagreements on what is work and what is play.
•	Men and women have different physical and mental characteristics, so we have differences in what we regard as "work" and "play".

Work and play depend upon our environment

Since our behavior is the result of our brain processing information, our environment also has an effect on what we regard as work and play. What we regard as work and play depends upon the activities that we become accustomed to as we grow up.

Our peer group also affects what we consider to be work and play. The wealthy people, for example, have a tendency to "play" the activities that are expensive so that they can feel special, such as polo, yacht racing, and golf.

We inadvertently created the concept of “work”

Our prehistoric ancestors never considered themselves to be "working". When they woke up in the morning, the men did not whine about having to spend another day "working" to find food, and the women did not whine about the "work" of taking care of their children.

The men did not complain that every day was the same boring, monotonous routine, and the women did not whine that they were being forced by sexist man to stay home with the children. To our prehistoric ancestors, every day with another day in paradise.

They had evolved for that environment, so the men enjoyed looking for food, just as the wolves, cats, and antelope enjoy looking for food every day of their lives. The women enjoyed taking care of their children, just like the birds, cats, and prairie dogs enjoy taking care of their children.

They also enjoyed getting together in the evening to make a fire, cook food, and eat. They did not whine about the "hard work" of starting and maintaining a fire, cutting up a dead animal with flint tools, or cooking meat. They did not complain about the hard work of making spears, arrowheads, or clothing.

There were no weekends for them to "play", and they did not have any vacation days, sick days, or holidays. They did not whine about Monday, look forward to Friday, or fantasize about a four-day workweek. They worked every day of their lives, but they considered themselves to be "playing" every day. Even today we find men have such a strong desire to hunt for animals that they want to do it, rather than regard it as "work", and we can find women who enjoy taking care of children.

The situation changed dramatically when people settled into cities. Everybody had to do tasks that were unnatural for them because humans did not evolve to be farmers, carpenters, or blacksmiths.

The men who had a mind that was more similar to that of their prehistoric ancestors wanted to spend their time hunting and making tools, not farming or becoming an apprentice to a blacksmith. They considered farming, carpentry, and other jobs to be "work", not play. They became misfits, and that caused some of them to become "poor people", and some of them became criminals or beggars.

Those misfits would have reproduced slightly less often than other people, thereby allowing humans to evolve to enjoy the modern activities, but the evolution would have been much faster if our ancestors had been prohibiting the reproduction of the misfits.

As our ancestors improved their technology, their tasks became increasingly unnatural. Eventually children had to learn arithmetic and language, and how to use certain types of machinery and tools. Many people had to sit on assembly lines and do the same repetitious tasks over and over. Today many people have to spend hours sitting in a chair.

Or technology has changed the activities that we must do each day, and it has changed how children must prepare to be an adult, but our minds and bodies have not completely adapted to these changes. As a result, many of the activities that we must do today are so unnatural for us that we do not consider them to be "play". We consider them to be "work".

The concept of "work" is a side effect of developing technology faster than we adapt to it. If our ancestors had been controlling reproduction to such an extent that all of us today were completely adapted to our modern technology, then children would consider going to school to be so much fun that the "homework" would be "homeplay", and none of the adults would consider themselves to be "going to work" each day. Instead, they would consider themselves to be "playing" every day at the farms, offices, factories, and assembly lines.

The human race must evolve for our new activities

Everybody is a misfit in our modern era, but some people are more of a misfit than others. The people who are at the extreme edge of the misfit graph have trouble finding jobs that they enjoy. They torment themselves and ruin our social environment by whining about "work", Mondays, "hump day", bosses, rat races, and schools.

The people who advocate the four-day work week believe that they will have a better life because that will give them three days to play, but we cannot solve this problem by reducing the amount of time we spend "working".

The people who want a four-day work week, or who want to retire early, are not suffering because they have to "work". They are suffering because the modern jobs are unnatural for us. Although they will get more enjoyment from life if we allow them to do less work, that is an idiotic policy because it causes some people to become parasitic.

The only sensible solution is to provide everybody with a job that they enjoy. There are two techniques to accomplish this:

1)	Alter the jobs so that we enjoy them, which includes redesigning products to alter the jobs that are required to manufacture, maintain, and recycle the items, and to put more resources into developing machines to do the undesirable tasks.
2)	Restrict reproduction so that each generation gets more enjoyment from going to school, learning a useful skill, and doing the modern jobs.

This constitution advocates doing both of those. After many generations, the children of the future will love going to school to learn about the world and develop a useful skill, and they will become adults who love going to work and doing something useful for society. There will be no whining about jobs, no fantasizing about retirement, and no whining about Mondays.

We should enjoy working, not fantasize about being pampered

We must expect young children to want pampering by their parents, but adults should enjoy working and contributing to society. However, many adults are struggling to avoid work and be pampered by servants.

This Constitution does not permit a peasant class, and it does not allow people in leadership positions to have maids, butlers, or other servants. Everybody is required to contribute to the team, and nobody is allowed to have special privileges or pampering.

We must limit genetic diversity and degradation

One of the activities of prehistoric men was defending themselves, their family, and one another from predators and neighboring tribes. Although the men were undoubtedly frightened occasionally by the wolves and neighboring tribes, they enjoyed the challenge of defending themselves and their family and friends. Nobody made them do it. They defended themselves and their tribe because they wanted to; because they enjoyed doing it.

We can see this genetic characteristic in men today. For example, when confronted with a badly behaved person, many men have such a strong desire to defend themselves and their family that they have trouble resisting the temptation to attack the person who is irritating them. People who want to be policemen have to go through training programs to give them practice in controlling their desire to attack criminals, and those who don't have enough self-control are rejected from the training programs.

This characteristic is also noticeable with pet dogs, such as when a dog defends itself from a vacuum cleaner, an automobile, or a strange human or animal that enters its territory. The dog attacks those things because it wants to. It regards that activity as play, not work. It regards it as fun, not dangerous.

Since everybody is a unique jumble of genetic characteristics, some of the prehistoric men had less of an interest in defending themselves from danger, and a stronger interest in running away. There were also men who were more feminine or child-like, and who wanted to be taken care of and protected.

During prehistoric times, a man who did not enjoy defending himself and his family would have had much less success with life and reproduction. This resulted in every man having a desire to defend himself and his family. However, when people settled into cities, the men did not have to deal with predators very often, and there were fewer fights with neighboring tribes.

As a result, the men who did not have a strong desire to take care of themselves could survive without any problem. Likewise, the men who were feminine or childlike could also survive and reproduce. This has resulted in what we see today, and which men run away and hide from problems like a frightened child.

Those of us who have provided evidence to other people about the demolition of the World Trade Center towers, or the lies about the Holocaust, have encountered grown men who push the information away and refuse to look at it. Some of the men will look at the information, but then ignore it.

Although those men consider themselves to be brave and courageous, and although some of them are capable of yelling at people who irritate them, they should be regarded as "defective" men for being unable to defend and protect themselves, their family, and their society. They behave like children who want to run away and hide from danger.

The human race has degraded genetically to such an extent that those of us who want to defend ourselves and our society from crime and corruption seem to be in a small minority. The majority of men are capable of losing their temper and yelling, and dealing with trivial dangers, such as a badly behaved child, but they run away and hide when confronted with more dangerous situations, such as crime networks and corrupt government officials.

A man's job is to take care of his family and society

This issue complicates what we regard as work and play, and what we regard as jobs and leisure activities. For example, we could claim that part of every man's "job" is to participate in the protection of himself, his family, the women, the children, and his society. The men who ignore dangers could be described as childlike or feminine, and they could be described as unacceptable for a modern society.

An organization will function properly if a small percentage of its men are so feminine, neurotic, or childlike that they refuse to participate in the protection of the organization, but the organization will be destroyed if the majority of its men refuse to participate in its protection. The only way to prevent this problem is to restrict reproduction to the men who have the desire and ability to take care of their society.

Militaries require men to be able to protect themselves and their team from danger, but no society requires men to have participate in the protection of their society. However, every society should follow that attitude.

An organization can also tolerate a small percentage of men who exploit, abuse, rape, kidnap, and sell the women and children, but the organization will suffer tremendously if a large percentage of them are doing that, especially if they are in leadership positions.

The protection of the women, children, and the organization should be considered to be a part of every man's "job". Every man should consider that task to be a "fun" activity. We should enjoy taking care of our women and children, not run away and hide like a frightened child. We should also want to take care of our society, not demand that somebody pay us a high salary to do it.

A similar concept applies to women. A prehistoric woman who did not want to take care of herself or her children was much less successful in reproducing. The battle for life resulted in women developing a desire and ability to take care of themselves and their children. They enjoyed grooming themselves, feeding their children, and making clothing. They considered themselves to be "enjoying life" when they did those activities, not "working".

Today the situation has dramatically different. It is now possible for women to survive and successfully reproduce even if they have no desire to do anything useful. For example, if a woman doesn't want to take care of her children, or is too incompetent to do so, the government will give her children to some other couple, thereby allowing her to successfully pass on her inferior genetic characteristics to the next generation.

If a woman marries a wealthy man, or if she inherits a lot of money, then she doesn't even need a desire or ability to groom herself, make meals, clean her home, or drive a car. She can hire maids, chauffeurs, and other people to do the work for her. She can also get food from restaurants. She doesn't even have to clean her home because it is now possible for people to survive as hoarders who live in a pile of trash, feces, and rotten food.

A woman today can even reproduce successfully if she become so obese that she cannot get pregnant. For example, some of them have had bariatric surgery, which allowed them to lose enough weight to get pregnant. There are also drugs that women can take to help them get pregnant.

We must start restricting reproduction at some point in the future. This requires that we determine the characteristics we want the future men and women to have.

We must decide what we want work and play to be

Work and play are whatever we want them to be. Since nature is no longer determining which of us survive and reproduce, we must make decisions on what we want the future generations to be in regards to their jobs and leisure activities.

Should we work five days and have two days of leisure, or should we work three days and have four days of leisure? Or should we work six days a week? How many holidays should we have each year? How much vacation time should we have?

Should we work from 9 in the morning to 17 at night? Or should we work from 7 to 15? Or should we work only five hours a day?

Regardless of how much leisure time we have, we have to decide which leisure activities to support, and which to prohibit for being too idiotic, worthless, expensive, or obnoxious. Should we promote mud racing, agility sports for dogs, wet T-shirt contests, skiing, beauty contests for babies, skeet shooting, or golfing?

After we decide what type of work schedule and leisure activities we want to promote, we must restrict reproduction to the people who enjoy that culture. Otherwise every generation will become more diverse in their desires, resulting in every generation having a larger number of people who whine about the jobs and the leisure activities.

Ignoring this issue is detrimental

Every government has imposed a lot of restrictions on our leisure activities and our work environment, but no government has yet put restrictions on the reproduction of the people who dislike our modern culture.

If we do not put restrictions on reproduction, every generation will become more diverse in their physical and mental characteristics, and eventually every person will be so unique that everybody will want different leisure activities, jobs, and work environments. Everybody will complain that the government is preventing them from enjoying their life.

Eventually some adults will be so childlike that they will play with cardboard boxes.

We must deal with the unpleasant fact that we must decide what we want for our leisure activities, jobs, meals, clothing styles, and other culture, and we must restrict reproduction to the people who enjoy that culture.

Ignoring this issue will allow humans to diverge into millions of different, incompatible species.

The Leisure and Social Club Ministers make decisions about which leisure activities are acceptable, and the Employment Minister is responsible for determining which jobs are acceptable.

The Employment Minister is also required to alter the unpleasant jobs to allow more people to enjoy their work. As mentioned earlier, this includes requesting products to be modified so that the jobs required to produce and maintain them become more enjoyable, and requesting the development of robots and machines to do more of the unpleasant tasks. The Employment Minister also provides recommendations to organizations on what their working hours and days should be, and how many vacation days we should have.

However, no matter what the Employment Minister does, there will be people who do not like any of the jobs, work environments, or work schedules. Those people must be prohibited from reproducing, or restricted to only a few children.

Jobs in a free enterprise system are abusive

Free enterprise provides unpleasant jobs

The free enterprise system puts us into competition for money, rather than to find improvements to our lives or culture. This creates two problems that this constitution is intended to improve upon:

1) Unsatisfying jobs.
2) Employees are tools.

1) Unsatisfying jobs.

Since a free enterprise system does not care how businesses make profit, many people have unpleasant jobs, such as the people who have to manipulate children into desiring a particular toy or candy bar; the people who have to sell worthless or deceptive products or insurance policies; and the engineers who have to design shoddy, idiotic, worthless, or joke products that they would never want for themselves or their friends.

The free enterprise system causes a lot of people to do their job only for the money. Since they are not proud of their work, they are in the same role as a prostitute.

By comparison, the employees of a business are team members who help one another. The employees of a business treat each other with more respect than they treat their customers and the employees of other businesses. For example:

•	The employees do not run telemarketing operations on one another in order to sell them worthless products or promote a particular political candidate.
•	The employees do not provide one another with tools, first aid treatments, or other items that are worthless, deceptive, or dangerous.
•	They employees do not try to manipulate one another into desiring a particular item by claiming that it is "New and Improved! Now with Lemon Freshness!".
•	The employees do not create advertising campaigns to manipulate other employees into desiring a particular candy bar, clothing item, or perfume. For example, the employees would never run an advertising campaign such as: "Diamonds are an employee's best friend!"

We would improve our social environment if businesses treated the public and other businesses the same manner that their employees treat one another. However, it would be even more beneficial if the management of the businesses improved the treatment of their employees, which is discussed next.

2) Employees are tools.

The people who are successful in the competition for money tend to treat their employees as if they are tools, rather than as friends. Employees are treated much better in 2024 than they were a few centuries ago, but that is only because dozens of labor unions have demanded better treatment of employees, and governments have created thousands of laws to reduce the abuse.

The laws and unions are analogous to a choke chain on a violent dog. A choke chain cannot make a dog become peaceful. A choke chain can only reduce the violence. The only way to get better behavior from dogs is to raise standards for the dogs and evict or euthanize those that are badly behaved.

Likewise, laws and unions cannot improve the brains or behavior of humans. Laws and unions can only reduce the abuse. Expecting a law or a labor union to improve the mind of a business executive is as stupid as expecting a choke chain to improve his behavior.


A choke chain cannot improve the behavior of dogs; it can only reduce their violence.		Laws and labor unions are analogous to choke chains. They can reduce abuse, but not improve a person's mind.

We cannot expect business executives in a free enterprise system to treat employees as "friends" or "team members" because putting people into a competition to make profit will always favor the executives who care more about profit than human life. In order to get better treatment, we must alter the economic system to put us into a competition to bring improvements to our city, products, work environment, attitudes, health, and culture.

Everybody is abused to some extent

Although the free enterprise system is most abusive to the children without parents and the mentally inferior people, it is abusive to everybody, including the business executives, and all of the people who are above-average in intelligence, education, and skills.

For example, many scientists are pressured to bias their research in order to promote the products of their business. Those scientists are in a situation that is as appalling as a car mechanic who is pressured by his boss to make unnecessary repairs to an automobile, or a prostitute who is pressured into doing sex acts that she does not want to do.

However, no culture describes those scientists as "victims of free enterprise", or as "abused people". Rather, since our culture evolved to give us what we want, and we want to avoid blaming ourselves and our culture for our problems, we prefer to blame that problem on mysterious concepts, such as funding bias. That allows the business executives to avoid taking responsibility for pressuring the scientists into being deceptive, and it allows the scientists to avoid taking responsibility for going along with the deception.

There are also some scientists who are pressured to do worthless or deceptive research by governments and other organizations. An example are the scientists who do research about the Earth's climate, but who are under pressure to lie about the issue. Another example are the scientists who develop rockets and satellites, and who are pressured to remain silent or lie about the Apollo moon landing and the dangers of outer space.

Engineers are also abused. Instead of using their talent to create beneficial products, many of them are under pressure to create products to titillate consumers, and which they would never want for themselves or their friends.

There are also lots of carpenters, plumbers, engineers, and other skilled people who waste their life and the talent by creating luxury products for a few wealthy people, such as giant yachts and private jets, rather than do work that is beneficial for themselves and society.

The people who provide medical products and services to transform a person into a Ken doll or a cat could also be described as "victims" of free enterprise because they are doing a service that could be described as idiotic, and which almost nobody wants, instead of using their talent to do something beneficial for the human race.

We must stop plucking feathers

To make some people's jobs even more unpleasant, no culture is encouraging people to understand their animal emotions, or to control them. The end result is that most people occasionally insult, ridicule, or torment people who have "low status" jobs. For example, factory workers, waitresses, and garbage men are frequently insulted as being losers.

The concept that some jobs are "low status" is the result of following our animal cravings for status. When we don't understand and ignore our craving for status, we will compete to be at the top of the hierarchy, and we will regard people below us in the hierarchy as inferior to us, and we will enjoy tormenting the people below us. This behavior is beneficial to animals, but it is detrimental in a modern society.

We are no longer in a deadly battle for life. We no longer need to pluck the feathers out of the inferior people. Instead, we need to become friends and team members with everybody.

It is not a person's fault if he happens to be stupid, or if he has trouble with school, or if he has physical disorders that make it difficult for him to work. There is no benefit in a modern society to torment people who are stupid, uncoordinated, lazy, or sickly.

Animals torment the inferior members because that is a method to reduce their chances of survival and reproduction, but tormenting the inferior people in a modern society does not reduce their chances of reproduction, or increase their chances of death. Instead, it creates a miserable social environment for everybody by causing the inferior people to suffer from low self-esteem, or become angry, or become rebellious. And it encourages the rest of us to be arrogant, cruel, jerks.

It is not a person's fault if he is born stupid, ugly, uncoordinated, or with a defective liver, hands, heart, or eyes. Our physical and mental characteristics are the result of a haphazard jumble of genes, and nobody should be ashamed of his jumble, or boast about it.

Stop boasting about random events.

If a person were to throw dice and get two sixes, and then boast that he is superior to the people who got lower values, we would consider him to be uneducated, stupid, and/or arrogant for not understanding that the value we get when we throw dice is random.

If a person is truly intelligent and educated, then he would realize that our intelligence is determined by the non-intelligent "tossing of genetic dice", so he would not boast about his intelligence, or insult other people for being inferior to him.

We must accept people for what they are, and help them to become as productive as possible. If a person is so stupid that the only job he can do is removing weeds from a city park, then he is doing something beneficial by doing that job. We cannot improve our lives or society by tormenting him with insults, or by treating him as inferior. We should appreciate what he does, and he should be proud that he is helping to make the city more beautiful.

Likewise, if a person can do only two hours of useful work each day because of old age, injuries, diseases, or mental problems, he would have trouble getting a job in a free enterprise system, but it is better for him and society to let him do two hours of useful work every day than to be unemployed.

Instead of tormenting the "inferior" people who do not like school or jobs, or who can do only the simplistic jobs that are slowly being taken over by machines, it is more sensible to restrict reproduction to people with better genetic characteristics.

However, the concept of "accepting" the inferior people is not the same as tolerating abusive people. People who are abusive must be evicted, even if they are intelligent, talented, and good-looking.

Jobs should be a major source of pleasure

We spend most of our life working

Every culture promotes the attitude that the best way to enjoy life is to quit "working", be pampered by servants, and spend our life doing what we want to do. This constitution promotes a different attitude towards "work". Specifically, that we get more enjoyment from life when we are under pressure to work, but only if we can do work that is beneficial to our team, and only if we can enjoy the work.

We spend most of our adult life working, so everybody should enjoy their job, be proud of their work, and enjoy the people that they work with. We should enjoy going to work just as much as the hummingbirds enjoy searching for nectar.We should not fantasize about retiring and have other people pamper us with food, material wealth, and services.

If everybody could enjoy the work they do, then our job would be our primary source of pleasure.

People who cannot enjoy working are misfits

People who cannot enjoy school or jobs are going to suffer, and if we allow them to be uneducated or unemployed, they become parasites. The unemployed people will become bored, suffer from low self-esteem, and get involved with idiotic activities to relieve their boredom. Some of them might also get involved with destructive activities in an attempt to feel better about themselves, such as committing crimes so that they can imagine that they are so talented that they can outsmart the police.

Some of the people who don't like school or jobs might have been wonderful people 10,000 years ago because they might have loved to hunt animals and fight predators, but the qualities that were beneficial in that era are not necessarily beneficial today. The human race must evolve for this new era. A person today who does not like school or jobs is as much of a misfit as a beaver who doesn't want to make a dam.

This constitution requires the government to provide as many people as possible with jobs that they are proud of and get satisfaction from. Achieving this goal requires a significant change in attitude towards humans and life. As mentioned earlier, There are two techniques to reducing this problem, one of which is to restrict reproduction to the people who are better adapted to the modern era.

The other is to alter our jobs to make them more suitable to the human mind and body. However, that requires the people in management positions to understand that humans are animals. They must design jobs to fit the mental and physical characteristics of an ape, not some creature of a religious or Freudian fantasy.

Jobs must be designed for apes

One of the mental characteristics that our leaders must understand in order to design jobs properly is that animals are inherently lazy and that we evolved to be under constant pressure to work. We also enjoy and benefit from competition. Therefore, our leaders must put us under pressure to work, and put us into competitions.

This requires our leaders have enough of an understanding of human behavior to create pressure that is beneficial rather than abusive, and to design competitions that inspire us to do better work rather than encourage us to fight or cheat.

Employees must realize that they are apes

Employees must also have an adequate understanding of the apelike characteristics of humans. Otherwise, they might react to the pressure to work by whining that their boss is demanding, abusive, oppressive, insulting, or cruel. They might waste their time fantasizing about being their own boss, and doing what they want to do. And they might react to competitions like an animal that fights with its competitors and tries to win the competitions.

Employees cannot judge their boss according to whether they "like" him, or whether they want to be his friend or spouse. They must judge their boss according to the effect he has on society. That is a complex analysis.

It is easy for a boss to be "liked" by his employees. All he has to do is give them whatever they want. However, that will encourage his employees to become lazy, arrogant, bored, and unhappy.

This is another example of why we must control reproduction so that humans evolve for our modern era. People today need more intelligence, and better control of their emotions, than prehistoric people. People today must have a certain understanding of genetics and evolution. People today must realize that humans are a species of ape.

Each of us performs differently at jobs

Another concept that people today must be able to understand is that each person is a haphazard jumble of genetic characteristics, and this results in each of us having different abilities and limitations. Therefore, in order to allow people to enjoy their work and be productive, every job must be adjusted to fit each employee's physical and mental characteristics.

We cannot expect everybody to do the same amount of work, or to be equally talented at their job. For an obvious example, a strong, young adult man can do more physical work than an elderly woman. Therefore, instead of treating both of them as identical, unisex creatures, the elderly woman should be allowed to do less physical work, and the young adult man should be expected to do more physical work.

This policy requires acknowledging that each person is unique, and that men, women, pregnant women, and elderly people need different work environments. However, every culture today is promoting the opposite philosophy. Specifically, that we are all identical, unisex creatures, and that everybody should be treated in the same manner.

This constitution does not tolerate the DEI fantasy. Instead, the people in management positions are restricted to people who understand that each human is slightly different, and that we should be treated differently. This Constitution allows "unequal" treatment, and "discrimination".

This requires that the employees understand this concept so that they refrain from whining about an employee getting special treatment, or that he is being discriminated against.

Some jobs are inappropriate for humans

This Constitution requires people in leadership positions to understand that certain tasks are inappropriate for human minds and bodies. For example, some jobs put more stress on our wrists, shoulders, or knees than our body was designed for, and that can result in the employees developing health problems after many years of working at the job. Therefore, those type of jobs need to be adjusted to make them more appropriate, such as restricting them to a few hours a day, or one hour a week, in order to reduce injuries.

There are also jobs that our mind regards as monotonous or unpleasant, and those jobs should also be adjusted, such as restricting them to a few hours a day.

Unlike a free enterprise system, this Constitution puts human life ahead of profit, so it is acceptable for the government to authorize the development of a machine to do the unpleasant and inappropriate tasks, even if that machine would be considered "too expensive" in a free enterprise system.

For example, we do not enjoy sitting on an assembly line to pull guts out of dead chickens, but in a free enterprise system, businesses are hesitant to develop a machine to do that because of the difficulty of finding people with the talent to create such a machine, and the expense of creating it.

This constitution considers it more important to provide us with jobs that we enjoy than to provide us with entertainment products for our leisure time. Therefore, the ministers have the authority to divert resources away from entertainment products and put them into the development of machines to do the unpleasant jobs.

This requires the ministers to pass judgment on which machines are worth developing, and which entertainment products should be suspended or terminated. The ministers have to make decisions about when they are putting "too much" resources into developing machines to do the undesirable jobs.

For example, would we be putting "too much" of our labor and resources into developing a robot that can hunt and kill rats and mice so that people don't have to waste their time with mousetraps or poisons? Would we be wasting our technical talent to develop a robot that can harvest avocados, or pull weeds from a farm, or clean public bathrooms? More details about eliminating undesirable jobs are described farther down.

This issue is similar to the dilemma of whether we are making our city's apartment and office buildings "too decorative", or whether we are providing "too many" beautiful swimming pools, recreational areas, foot paths, plazas, and bicycle paths. For example, is the cluster of office buildings in the image below surrounded by "too much" grass and trees?

Should we put more buildings into that neighborhood? Or should the buildings be taller? Should the buildings be less decorative?

If we were to provide a business neighborhood with canals, ponds, and swimming pools, as in the image below, would many of the employees want to spend part of their lunch time swimming or floating around in a rowboat or kayak?

Or would we get more satisfaction from other projects, such as sports stadiums, movies, video games, strip clubs, or breeding more varieties of pet dogs?

An “undesirable” job is a personal opinion

Designing jobs and work environments to make our lives more pleasant is a difficult task because every person has slightly different physical and mental characteristics. A person might enjoy a particular job, and never suffer physical injuries or pain, whereas another person consider the job to be monotonous or frustrating, and another person might complain that the job is causing physical injuries, exhaustion, or pain in his neck.

As a result of this complexity, the government cannot tell the executives how to design jobs. Everybody in a management position has to experiment with jobs in order to make them fit each employee. Most people are typical, so they will not need their jobs to be adjusted for them, but the people who are not in the middle of the bell graph need to have their jobs adjusted to fit their characteristics.

Jobs should be adjusted for each employee

By adjusting a job to fit the employee, we will reduce or eliminate a lot of the anger and complaints that we have in the world today, such as employees who complain that they have to pee in a bottle, or that they are suffering from carpal tunnel syndrome, or they don't have enough time to deal with menstruation or health issues.

For example, an employee who has a problem with his bladder or kidneys could be placed closer to the bathrooms, or given more time to go to the bathrooms. If he is forced to follow the same bathroom schedule as everybody else, he will be tormented, and his unpleasant attitude will degrade the work environment. The bottles of pee - and especially the bags of poop - will further degrade the work environment.

There is no benefit to forcing an employee with a bladder problem to follow the same bathroom schedule as other employee. It is even more abusive to expect the physically weaker people to do the same physical labor as the younger and stronger people.

However, in order for us to be successful with providing employees with slightly different work environments, all of the employees must understand this concept. Otherwise they are likely to whine or complain that some employees are getting "special treatment". Their whining and anger will degrade the work environment. Their anger will also degrade their family environment, and the environment of the city.

Managers must meet high standards

The only way jobs can be adjusted for each employee is if the manager is aware of this concept, and is willing to put some of his time and effort into becoming aware of each employee's abilities and limitations, and experimenting with adjustments to the jobs. Therefore, the people who don't want to put the time and effort into dealing with these issues should not be promoted to a management position.

In a free enterprise system, most people regard management jobs as "status jobs", and many people also assume that they will be able to do less work as a manager compared to an employee. This Constitution reverses that situation by setting higher standards for the people in leadership positions, and prohibiting them from having special privileges.

A job is stressful only to “misfits”

Many people complain that their job is "stressful". That complaint is another example of how humans are so arrogant that we resist looking critically at ourselves, which in turn makes it difficult to provide ourselves with intelligent analyses of our problems.

A job is stressful only if a person is a "misfit" for that particular job. For example, if Mozart were hired to write music, he would consider the job to be easy. However, if an ordinary person were hired as a musician, and if he was expected to create music that was comparable to that of Mozart, he would be under tremendous stress. He would have to spend an enormous amount of time trying to create music, but no matter how hard he tried, he would be criticized for producing unacceptable music, and he would eventually be fired.

Likewise, if Isaac Newton were to be hired as a mathematician, he would consider the job to be easy, but if an ordinary person were to be hired as a mathematician, he would be under tremendous stress, and eventually be fired.

The Schools Ministry is required to teach this concept to children, and help them figure out what their talents and limitations are. Everybody should realize that if a job is stressful, then they should consider another job. They should not blame the job for being stressful.

The prehistoric, nomadic men enjoyed hunting animals, they did not regard that to be a stressful job. Likewise, the prehistoric women enjoyed their tasks, such as taking care of their children and looking for vegetables, fruit, and eggs. They did not consider those chores to be stressful.

Modern jobs are stressful because they are unnatural to us. Since none of us can change our genetic characteristics, each of us has to figure out which jobs are most appropriate for our particular characteristics.

The complicate this issue, some jobs are stressful because they were not designed for apes. As mentioned earlier, we must design our jobs to fit our true mental and physical characteristics, but most people have an unrealistic view of humans.

The people who have jobs that have been improperly designed are going to be under stress. For example, the human mind was not designed to sit in front of a radar screen eight hours a day, five days a week. Therefore, that type of job should be redesigned, eliminated, or taken over by a machine. For an example of how it could be redesigned for people, the employee could spend 30 minutes at the radar screen, and then spend an hour or more on some other task, and then another 30 minutes at the radar screen, and so on.

One way to determine whether a job needs to be redesigned, or whether the person who complains about the job needs to find a different job, is to determine whether the majority of people find the job stressful. If only a tiny percentage of the people consider a job to be stressful, then the people who complain about the job are likely to be misfits for that particular job. However, if the majority of people consider a job to be stressful, then we should consider that the job is inappropriate for a human mind or body, and that it should be redesigned, eliminated, or taken over by a machine.

We should enjoy the business we work at

Although factories have become cleaner, safer, and quieter during the past few centuries, many of them are still ugly and filthy. We enjoy spending our leisure time visiting the forests, gardens, and decorative buildings, but we do not want to spend our leisure time visiting the factories in Gary, Indiana or Pakistan.

This constitution promotes the opposite philosophy. Specifically, our city should be so clean and beautiful that we enjoy spending our leisure time walking or riding a bicycle around it, taking tours of the factories and farms, exploring the city in a rowboat on the canals of the city, and enjoying a view of the city from the restaurants and lounge areas at the tops of buildings

Our city should feel as if it is our home, and the factories and offices should feel as if they are rooms within our home.

This brings up the issue mentioned earlier. Specifically, the ministers have to make decisions on when they are putting "too much" of our labor and resources into making our factories and offices "too pleasant".

For example, 3D printers and CNC machines allow us to easily create decorative windows, wall moldings, light fixtures, and doors for all of our factories, offices, restaurants, and lounges. Every building can have unique designs so that we enjoy wandering around the city to look at the buildings. Every factory could have decorative doors and windows, like the door in the image below:

A different door in that same factory, or a door in a different factory, could have beveled glass inserts, or stained-glass, similar to the door below:

Doors could also have specific designs for specific purposes. Some examples are here.

Our factories and offices could be artistic decorations in the city, but would we be wasting our labor and resources by making such decorative factories and offices? Would we get more satisfaction from life by putting our resources into creating more ski resorts or golf courses, or by sending people to Mars?

There is no right or wrong answer those questions. It is a personal opinion as to what we should do with our labor and resources. The ministers have to experiment with our culture, and pass judgment on what is providing the City Elders with the most satisfying life.

Mothers should have job satisfaction, also

These concepts apply to mothers, but it is emotionally unpleasant for us to accept this. Specifically, a mother should enjoy taking care of her children, but how many mothers enjoy taking care of children who are neurotic or retarded? Although some women claim to enjoy taking care of children who are defective, every mother is frustrated and upset by it.

The defective children also interfere with their social life because those children require a lot more of their leisure time, and they frequently put the women into unpleasant moods.

Therefore, in order to allow mothers to have job satisfaction, and in order to allow them to have plenty of leisure time for their friends and activities, we need a quality control agency to set standards for children, and euthanize those that are troublesome. However, that is a emotionally difficult policy for most people to accept.

Most mothers dislike the idea of euthanizing a child, but we cannot give people what they want. We must do what is best for the human race and the future generations.

We have a tremendous craving to take care of babies, but that emotion was intended for a prehistoric environment in which nature was constantly killing most of the babies. Now that we prevent nature from killing babies, we must suppress that emotion and make intelligent decisions about which babies should live and which should die. (More about this concept is here.)

We have total control of our economy

We can decide what our future will be

The free enterprise system does not allow anybody to control the economy, so businesses have to wonder which products will be successful, and which research programs will be funded. This results in a lot of wasted resources and labor as businesses experiment with different projects in an attempt to figure out what will appeal to the consumers.

By giving the government control of the economy, we have control of every aspect of the economy, such as our work environments, work schedule, the products that we produce, and the research programs. We will also be able to make long-term plans.

However, giving the government control of the economy puts a big burden on them. This section explains some of the options, dilemmas, and responsibilities of the government.

Employees are a limited resource

In a free enterprise system, a business can hire as many employees as they can afford, and they can purchase as much land and other items as they can afford. Money is used to distribute the employees and other resources among the businesses.

This constitution does not use money, so businesses have free access to employees, supplies, office buildings, factories, and equipment. Businesses do not have to pay employees, or provide them with healthcare, and they do not have to pay for furniture, supplies, electricity, or the building that they work in.

The Economic Division of the government controls all aspects of the economy. The businesses are analogous to different departments of a corporation. This requires the economic ministers to determine how large of a facility to provide each business, what type of equipment they can choose from, and how many employees they can hire. The executive of a business chooses his employees, but he can hire only as many employees as his minister allows him to hire.

The executive of each business will determine what he needs in regards to employees, equipment, and supplies, but he must request what he needs, and the minister in control of his business will either approve or deny it. The concept is similar to a manager of a department within a corporation requesting employees or equipment from his boss.

Businesses cannot fight for employees

As mentioned earlier, employees in a free enterprise system are treated as tools. This results in businesses fighting one another for employees, and importing employees from other nations.

This constitution changes the situation dramatically. Businesses cannot import people. This constitution does not provide anything analogous to an H-1B visa, for example.

Businesses cannot give job offers to employees in other businesses, either. If an executive wants an employee who is working in another business, he has to send his request to his minister, not to that employee. No person or organization is allowed to behave like the "headhunters" of a free enterprise system that try to take employees from other businesses.

The government distributes employees

The government is responsible for distributing employees among the organizations. Some important benefits of this are:

	1)	The most useful businesses get the most employees In a free enterprise system, the businesses with the most profit can hire the most employees, but those businesses are not necessarily beneficial or honest. For example, the gambling businesses in the USA have hired a lot of engineers, computer programmers, technicians, carpenters, plumbers, and other people to provide them with very large and advanced buildings and gambling machines. By comparison, some scientists who are doing research into human health issues are struggling to afford supplies and employees. When the government controls the economy, the ministers can make intelligent decisions about which businesses are the most beneficial to us, and provide them with the most employees, the largest facilities, and the newest equipment and supplies. This allows the government to support businesses that don't have much profit potential in a free enterprise system, such as the businesses that develop industrial machinery and do research into human health.
	2)	The government does the "headhunting" Although the businesses cannot do any headhunting, the executives are allowed to send a request to their minister for an employee in another company. If the minister agrees that it would be more useful to society for him to switch jobs, then the minister will send him the employee the request to switch jobs. The employee does not have to accept the request, but most of them probably will. This allows the minister to put the more talented scientists, engineers, technicians, plumbers, carpenters, and other workers on the tasks that are the most useful, and to have the trainees, less experienced, and less talented people on the jobs that are not so critical. Furthermore, since this economy encourages part-time jobs, the minister can also offer a person the option to work part-time at both companies. That will allow a talented person to provide his talent to both companies.
	3)	We can plan for future jobs When new technology is developed, or when cultural changes cause changes in some businesses, the ministers will be able to make plans to shut down or reduce the affected businesses, and make plans for their employees to switch to another job. This will prevent the chaos, inefficiency, and waste that occurs in a free enterprise system when businesses struggle to remain profitable even when it is obvious to many people that they cannot prevent their slow deterioration. It will also prevent the chaos that occurs from layoffs and bankruptcies. An example of this problem is when digital cameras began reducing the need for photographic film. A free enterprise system cannot prepare for that type of change, so it resulted in lots of suffering and waste.

Ministers must reduce the number of undesirable jobs

There are a lot of jobs that we do not want to do because they are mentally or physically unpleasant, or they are dangerous. Examples are mining coal, cleaning sewers, and processing trash. The ideal situation is to develop machines to do the undesirable jobs, but developing those machines requires a lot of labor and resources.

Every existing society allows a peasant class, and this causes businesses to resist the development of machines to do undesirable chores and use those people is a low cost source of labor. However, this Constitution prohibits a peasant class, so we must find ways to reduce the undesirable chores. This requires the ministers to make decisions about when they are putting "too much" labor and resources into reducing the undesirable chores.

In a free enterprise system, businesses don't care if people enjoy their jobs, and this results in businesses putting a tremendous amount of labor and resources into entertainment products rather than making their jobs and city more desirable.

For example, many Hollywood movies have budgets of several hundred million dollars. If that money had been going into the development of coal mining machines, we might by now have a machine that can mine coal without people traveling into the coal mines. The machines would also be able to remove more of the coal because we don't have to be so concerned about a coal mine collapsing on machines.

The free enterprise system is so chaotic that we don't know how our technical talent and other resources are being used, but it is possible that there is more technical talent and resources going into pet products, cosmetics, jewelry, television programs, gambling operations, and sexual pornography, than into improving CNC machines, researching health issues, and developing robots.

Furthermore, the free enterprise system inhibits the development of machines because businesses will not share their technology with one another. This results in a lot of companies that have to waste some of their labor and resources to develop components or software that some other companies have already developed.

This constitution promotes the attitude that jobs are a significant aspect of human life, and therefore, we will have a much more satisfying life if we provide as many people as possible with jobs that they enjoy and are proud of. We should be willing to make "sacrifices" in order to make our jobs more pleasant. Two of the sacrifices are:

Eliminate the businesses that we don't truly need.

This Constitution advocates against producing "joke gifts" for Christmas and birthdays, so we can eliminate those businesses, thereby eliminating the jobs of designing the products and the factories, working in the factories, and disposing the trash that is created when people discard the worthless gifts.

We can also reduce the quantity of certain products, rather than eliminate the products entirely. For example, by prohibiting women from dressing in sexually titillating manners while they are working, we can reduce the production of delicate clothing, jewelry, and cosmetics.

Develop machines to do the undesirable jobs.

Although developing a machine to do an undesirable job eliminates the job, we do not have the technology to develop a machine for all of the undesirable jobs, so we need to make decisions about which jobs we should develop a machine to do. We don't waste our technical talent on the development of a machine that requires decades or centuries to develop, as is happening with fusion reactors and flying automobiles.

The ministers are also required to make wise decisions about which jobs we should eliminate first. For example, mining operations are very important for us, and those jobs are miserable, boring, and dangerous, so it would be beneficial to develop machines that can go down into the Earth to do the mining for us, and develop machines to transport the raw materials to the factories.

However, we do not benefit by creating toys that children don't need, or which encourage idiotic or obnoxious behavior, so developing machines to produce those toys should have less priority than developing machines to do mining.

A lot of labor and resources have been put into the development of self driving automobiles, but it would be more beneficial to develop self-driving, computer-controlled bulldozers, backhoes, dump trucks, lawnmowers, and other industrial vehicles. Those vehicles would become "mobile CNC machines", or "CNC vehicles".

Some industrial vehicles perform such
simplistic tasks that a computer should do it.

Those vehicles would be able to transport coal and iron ore to the factory; excavate the foundation for a building; dig a swimming pool; process the dirt in preparation for planting crops; and mow the grass in a city garden.

Instead of having a group of people operating the equipment to dig the foundation for a building, one person would create a 3D map of the land where the building will be located. He then draws the shape and depth of the foundation in a CAD/CAM system, and he draws the path for the dump trucks to follow to dump the dirt. He could specify that the dirt be spread out evenly, or piled into an artificial hill to provide the city with a more decorative landscape, and to reduce the wind. Then he creates a CNC program to control the bulldozers, backhoes, and other vehicles.

The vehicles would follow the CNC program, but unlike a "dumb" CNC machine, the CNC vehicles would have some artificial intelligence software to give them the the ability to make simple modifications to the program to deal with certain problems, such as overheated engines, rain, and unexpected objects in their path.

Those CNC vehicles would eliminate a lot of the jobs that most of us regard as monotonous. Furthermore, the lawnmowers and many of the other CNC vehicles could work at night so that they don't bother us.

Every society currently uses large amounts of herbicides and labor to remove weeds from farms, gardens, parks, foot paths, and plazas, but it would be better to develop a robotic weeding machine.

A person would create a map of the area that he wants the robot to remove weeds from. He would draw a boundary around the base of each plant to show the robot where to stay away from. He would also identify each plant within each boundary area, and the robot would have a database of the images of plants so that it could use a camera to identify the plants that it is supposed to avoid.

Any plant that was growing outside of the boundary area would be removed, and any plant within a boundary area that didn't match the visual image of what is supposed to be there would be either removed, or a message would be sent to a human to deal with it. The robot could also be told to keep the desirable plants within a certain width and/or height, and to trim those that were too large.



	Developing robots that remove weeds would improve our lives more than creating another Hollywood movie.		Robots that can kill rats, pigeons, and other unwanted animals are more beneficial than a gambling casino.

Once we develop a robot that can use a camera to identify things, we could easily make variations of it, such as a robot that searches the city at night with heat sensors and microphones, and eventually odor sensors, to locate rats and other unwanted animals. It could kill them with a laser or Taser. This policy requires the majority of people to understand that we should not capture wild animals and release them somewhere else (described here).

We could also provide robots with sensors that can differentiate between plastic, metal, glass, and certain other items, and that would allow them to replace humans who recycle trash.



	Robots that recycle trash are more beneficial than drugs for Alzheimer's victims.		Robots that maintain plazas and walkways are more beneficial than a new video game.

The robots could also deal with a routine problem in modern cities; namely, tree roots that cause cobblestones, tiles, rocks, and other materials in our walkways, plazas, and bicycle paths to shift position. The robots could pick up the cobblestones and tiles, cut the tree roots, and reset the cobblestones and tiles. We could also develop a waterproof, submarine robot that picks up trash in ponds, rivers, and oceans.

Ministers must explain their priorities

In the free enterprise systems and democracies, a lot of technical talent, labor, and resources are put into the development of entertainment products, rather than useful projects. Furthermore, people are allowed to make those decisions anonymously and secretly, and are never held accountable.

For example, there were reports that the US government wants to fund research into creating organisms to terraform Mars into a planet that we can live on. The U.S. Constitution allows such incredible secrecy that nobody is certain if this project still exists, and if it does, how much labor and resources will go into it, who created it, and who supports it.

We also do not know who authorized NASA to put an enormous amount of labor and resources into the Artemis program, or why they chose to send people to the moon instead of robots. We do not even know whether somebody has bothered to do an analysis of this project to determine whether sending people to the moon provides more benefits than disadvantages compared to sending robots.

Likewise, the executives of the cosmetic companies can put labor and resources into creating additional varieties of lipstick and hair dyes without justifying their decisions, or identifying themselves. They are also free to be secretive about the amount of labor and resources that they put into those projects.

By comparison, this Constitution requires all government officials to document their decisions. When the ministers make a decision about supporting or rejecting a project, they must post their reasons in the Explanations category so that we can pass judgment on whether they are making intelligent decisions.

This will enable us to replace the ministers and presidents who make the worst decisions. This will allow us to create a government that supports projects that are truly beneficial to us.

Farmers can have a more normal life

Farmers do not live on the farms

In a free enterprise system, farmers frequently live on the farm, and that results in their family being separated from other people by long distances, which in turn results in them wasting a lot of time and resources traveling to and from schools, medical facilities, markets, their friends, and the social and recreational activities.

Many farmers would rather live on a farm than in a city, but that is because all of the existing cities are so miserable that most people want to avoid them. Most cities have high levels of crime, overcrowding, unpleasant and inefficient public transportation systems, ugly buildings, noise, and an increasing number of immigrants who whine about "white privilege" and racism.

Our mind makes decisions according to the information we have gathered, but since all of us are only familiar with the life that we have lived, we can easily come to idiotic conclusions about life.

An example I mentioned here is that some people who insisted that they did not like cantaloupe discovered they loved them when I gave them a cantaloupe from a particular farm.

A lot of people dislike cities and want to live on a large plot of land, and they want an automobile for transportation, but they are basing that decision on what they know about cities and transportation systems. Their only experience with cities are those that exist in the world today. They are ignorant about the virtually infinite number of ways that we could design cities, apartments, and public transportation systems.

Although the AI software gives us unrealistic cities, it can stimulate our imagination, such as the image below of an apartment building that is placed in a botanical garden in which we move the rocks and dirt to create hills, creeks, and waterfalls.

This constitution is based on the theory that humans are social animals, and that we prefer to be in close contact with other people, not isolated on gigantic plots of land. The only people who prefer to be isolated are those with unusual or defective mental characteristics.

This constitution advocates designing culture for the people we regard as desirable; the type of people we want more of in the next generation. The USA should be used as proof that it is absurd to design culture for the wretched refuse, huddled masses, underdogs, criminals, alcoholics, and social misfits. That type of society will slowly degrade into retards, criminals, and freaks.

Not many people want to live in the cities that exist in the world today, but our reaction to the miserable cities should be to experiment with methods to improve them. We should react to problems by looking for solutions, not by running away and hiding from them, like a frightened animal.

This constitution is based on the belief that it is possible to design cities that are more desirable than living in independent houses on separate plots of land. Although it will require some experimentation to figure out how to do this, if we succeed, then farmers will prefer to live in the city rather than on the farm.

For example, farmers might prefer to live in a cluster of apartment buildings that are within or adjacent to the farms, as seen in the images below.

Those neighborhoods would be intended for the whoever works at farms, such as the farmers; the mechanics who maintain the farming machinery; the veterinarians who take care of the farm animals; and the people working in the food harvesting and processing businesses.

Those neighborhoods would significantly reduce the amount of time that the people waste on traveling. The children would be able to get to schools, recreational facilities, parks, and swimming areas by taking a ride in an elevator and walking a short distance. Their parents would not have to waste any of their time driving their children around in automobiles.

Every farm neighborhood would have unique architecture, and they would be connected to one another and the farms with underground transportation systems. Only the large, heavy machinery would travel on the surface. The adults would be able to get to the farms by taking an elevator to the basement and then a short trip on an underground transportation system.

It is especially useful to reduce the time that children spend traveling because our childhoods are short, so the more time a child wastes on traveling, the more of their precious childhood they waste.

The farming neighborhoods would have surface roads, but only for tractors, trucks, and other equipment, and they would be used only by the farmers, so the farmers would not have to be concerned about having accidents with non-farmers.

The farming neighborhoods would provide the children with all of the conveniences of a city, such as modern recreational facilities, schools, and bicycle paths, but it would feel as if their living on a farm.

By putting more resources into the development of robotic farming equipment and drones, the farmers will be able to do more their work from an office in their neighborhood. The farmers would travel into the farms only to deal with the situations that robots could not handle.

Although no business has bothered to create useful robots for farmers, we have the technology to create robots that can provide a farmer with more information about soil, crops, and animals and he can gather with his eyes and hands. For example, a robot can have video cameras that are sensitive to infrared and ultraviolet light, as well as terahertz cameras. A robot could have telephoto and macro lenses, and directional microphones.

A robot could also carry sensors to measure the moisture, temperature, and pH level of the dirt. When robots have the ability to detect odors, they will be able to provide a farmer with information about the levels of ammonia and other chemicals.

Eventually the robots will be able to wander among the animals at a farm and determine whether any of them are showing signs of trouble, such as limping, obesity, injuries, or disease. The robots would then notify the farmer of the potential problem.

By having the technicians who maintain and repair farming equipment working or living in the same neighborhood as the farmers, the farmers will have easy access to maintenance compared to the situation today in which the technicians and farms are scattered over very large areas.