are humans so deceptive and secretive?
Although human behavior is superior to
that of animals,
we have some undesirable characteristics. One is that
we have a tendency to be very secretive
about ourselves, and to deceive people with false
images. This behavior is so natural to us that
we rarely notice ourselves doing it, and our societies encourage
it without any shame
or embarrassment. For some examples:
• Every society automatically hides
our school records, job performance reviews, medical records, and
problems. If a person were to post that information on the Internet, he
would be arrested for invading people's privacy,
when in reality all he would be doing is exposing the truth about
people. We don't want people to know the truth about us. We
freedom to keep secrets from other
Why are we so deceptive? Why do we
want so much secrecy? Why are we so afraid of honesty? Why would humans
have such terrible qualities?
• Every society allows us to lie about cosmetic
surgery, the coloring
of gray hair, and hair transplants. It is not considered to be illegal
or immoral to lie about these activities. Nobody is even embarrassed to
lie about these issues. We want the
freedom to lie and deceive.
• When children are adopted, every society automatically hides the
identity of their
biological parents, and if the children try to discover
who their biological parents are, society interferes
investigation rather than provide them with the truth.
The answer is that these are not terrible
qualities, at least not in
the environment that they evolved for. In a prehistoric environment,
these characteristics are
||Our prehistoric ancestors grew up in such
close contact with one
another that they did not have any secrets.
They knew all of the
intimate details of one another's lives and bodies. They even knew how
people slept at night.
When the prehistoric men and women tried
to impress one another by grooming themselves and decorating themselves
with clothing and jewelry, it would not
accurate to describe them as creating a phony image of
themselves in order to
impress one another. The reason is because those people knew every
detail about one
another, so they were not deceiving anybody. It would be more
accurate to describe them as proudly displaying their best
We could summarize this by saying that our desire to deceive
is a actually a desire to impress. It is only in our
environment that our emotional qualities are
causing trouble. We are growing up in an environment in which we don't
know much about one another, and the result is that when we follow our
emotional cravings to impress people with our wonderful qualities, we inadvertently
deceive people about
what we really are.
Our new world requires that we evolve slightly different
qualities, and until we have those new qualities, we need to exert
self-control and push ourselves into doing what makes the most
intellectual sense rather than what we want to do. If we do what we
want to do, we will inadvertently hurt
one another with lies and deception.
Our emotions evolved for a competitive battle for
a mate. Our primary
concern is surviving the
battle, attracting a mate, taking care of our children, and
becoming the leader of our group. We never developed any desire to show
people our limitations, undesirable qualities, or embarrassing
features. Rather, we evolved a craving to impress people by showing
them our best qualities. We
have cravings to promote ourselves and make our competitors seem
to us. We want people to
notice our achievements and our good qualities, and we want them to
ignore our problems and failures.
Our culture changes
haphazardly through time because we are not yet making an effort to get
control of it and determine where it is going, but it does not
in a truly random manner. It changes to fit our emotional desires. As
a result, every society has developed culture that considers it normal
and sensible to allow people to hide information about
themselves. No society encourages people to be honest, and the reason
is simply because no animal or human developed an
emotional craving to be honest.
Our cultural attitudes towards children are also affected by our
emotions. The primary goal of every animal is to raise
children, and as a result, parents
have a strong craving to protect their children, and to regard them as
better than other people's children. Our culture evolved to fit this
bias. Specifically, every society considers it normal for
parents to be biased in favor of
their children. For example, when parents describe their retarded
children as "slow", or as "special", they are not
regarded as being
unrealistic, dishonest, or deceptive. Rather, we consider such bias as
"normal" for a parent. There is no pressure on parents
to be serious about their children.
Furthermore, nobody is under pressure to be serious about their competitors,
either, or other societies. Our natural tendency is to
attention to the imperfections and failures of other people
and societies, and to make them look inferior to us. We want
impression that we are better than other people,
and that our society
is better than other societies. Animals compete with one another by
biting, kicking, and growling, and humans also compete by
yelling, hitting, sabotaging, plagiarizing, and murdering.
craving for secrecy is a fear of being attacked
Certain animals, such as deer and
rabbits, live in constant fear of being attacked by predators. At the
other extreme, elephants, hippos, and lions don't show much concern
about whether other animals are observing them. When the animals that
are easily frightened are put into
zoos, they are difficult for us to see because they want to hide. By
comparison, the elephants don't care if we look at them.
If animals had enough intelligence to create cities, the rabbits and
deer would undoubtedly create homes in which they could completely hide
themselves. It is possible that they would not put windows in their
homes, and if they had windows, they might be afraid to open the
animals would prefer homes that are underground, and have only one tiny
entrance that is easily defended.
By comparison, elephants would undoubtedly create homes that are much
more open, and which may have many entrances and exits. They may enjoy
houses with large windows, and they may have so little concern that
somebody sees them that they don't have any desire to block their
windows with curtains.
Humans are not as fearful as rabbits, but we are more fearful than
elephants. Women and children are more fearful than adult men, but even
adult men are afraid of being observed.
Human children have a craving to find a
place to hide. Many children make
tiny homes out of pillows or cardboard boxes, or they climb inside
Children behave in this manner because it is "fun", and the reason it
is fun is because there is a section of our brain that generates fear,
which makes us uncomfortable, so when we hide, that emotion calms down,
allowing us to relax. That emotion is intended to cause an animal to
hide from predators. This behavior is an
indication of our animal qualities, and the dangers of prehistoric life.
We do not like being observed. We are
extremely sensitive to eyes and facial
expressions. We become
frightened when we see a set of angry eyes staring at us. I think it is
of being observed that causes us to want to keep our school records,
medical records, and other information a secret. When we think about
somebody looking at our school records or medical records, we
visualize their eyeballs looking at us, and that
triggers our fear of being observed.
Nobody has any intelligent justification for keeping information about
his life a
secret, which is a sign that they never put any intelligent thought
into the issue. Rather, every society is choosing to keep information a
secret because they are following their emotional
feelings. The only justification for keeping information a secret is
is "personal" information, but that is not an
Our craving to hide information is so
extreme that we sometimes hide information that normally is not
hidden. For example, in this
article about a father in China who carries his disabled son
miles to school every day, the child's eyes were blocked out
in all of
the photos, such as the one to the right.
How would the child be harmed if we could see the child's
eyes? The people who promote
this type of secrecy have no answer to that question because they
thought about the issue. They are simply following their
cravings, like a stupid animal.
The child in that particular article is
disabled, and since we have strong cravings to protect children, and
since we do not like disabled people, we react by trying to protect the
child by hiding him. However, hiding his eyes does not
help the child, or the reader, or anybody else. This is just senseless,
Furthermore, these photos encourage other people to
behave in this idiotic manner, and the children will mimic it,
thereby perpetuating this stupid behavior in the next generation. We
need leaders who can stop mimicking crude behavior
and start setting a good example.
and the police also hide photos and names of criminals
who are under
the age of 18. During prehistoric times, if a child were to misbehave,
everybody in the tribe would know about it, and his bad behavior could
affect who became his friend and spouse.
Today, by comparison, we consider
it normal and sensible to hide the bad behavior of people under the age
of 18. This is allowing people with bad behavior to get into
friendships, marriages, and business relationships with people who
would otherwise avoid them, or at least be cautious of them.
should pass judgment on which
squeaky wheel really needs grease
Humans and animals have a very
powerful craving to take care of children, and we become emotionally
stimulated to an extreme when we hear a child crying. We were designed
to stop what we are doing and help the child. We also have a strong
desire to help adults who are
It was sensible for our prehistoric ancestors to help
whiny children because they cried over sensible
issues, such as having a thorn in their foot. Today,
however, children are whining about hundreds of
issues of no importance, such as toys and candy
We cause ourselves even more trouble when we try to appease whiny adults
because adults today are whining over thousands of intangible
concepts that they have almost no understanding of, such as freedom,
discrimination, women's rights, gay
rights, abortion, and religion. Furthermore, it is impossible
to appease all of the whiny adults because they want conflicting
In this modern world, we should not rush to appease
a child or adult who whines about something. We should exert some
self-control over our craving to be a hero and help the person, and we
should pass judgment on whether he really needs our help. A simple
example is when children whine for a particular toy that they saw
Children today are whining for a lot of things they don't need, and
when parents appease those children, they are encouraging their
children to become spoiled brats. The parents can also cause their
house to become cluttered with toys, and cause their children to become
sickly and fat.
We cause ourselves even more trouble when we appease adults who whine
about something. The reason is because most of the time that people
whine about something, they are whining about emotional issues, not
issues that they are putting intelligent thought into. As a result,
they usually whine about something they don't need, or which is harmful
to them, or which is unrealistic.
For example, some vegetarians whine about people
who eat meat or use animal skins for clothing. Their whining can
trigger our craving to appease them, but they don't need our help. They
need to be suppressed. They have not thought about
the issue and
developed an intelligent analysis for us to discuss. Rather, they have
become emotionally stimulated over the thought of killing animals, and
they are reacting like a child who wants a candy bar.
In other documents I suggested that we prohibit demonstrations and
require people who disagree with our culture or the government to put
their opinions in a document and post it on the Internet for
everybody to read. We benefit from intelligent analyses, but not from
people who are chanting slogans and throwing rocks. We need to make a
distinction between when a person is "whining" about
something, and when they are providing us with a proposal
or an analysis.
When we appease the whiny people, we make our life more
complicated, and we encourage the people to whine even more. For
example, when restaurants and airlines appease the vegetarians
by providing them with special meals, they add a burden on the airline
personnel, and the vegetarians become accustomed to having special
meals, which can cause them to want special meals at business
cafeterias, Navy ships, schools, weddings, and Christmas parties.
Furthermore, I suspect that the adults who whine the most have
the lowest quality minds. Their behavior is like a
child who screams, throws objects, or bites us when he doesn't get what
he wants. This behavior should be considered as "disgusting" and
"animal-like", not as a "first amendment right". When we appease the
whiny adults, we
are modifying society to fit the inferior people.
|People who resort to temper
tantrums in order to influence society should be regarded as inferior
to the people who can create documents for us to read and discuss.
The adults who will not
or cannot write a
document to describe their complaints or suggestions should be regarded
as a "talking monkey" rather than a human. We should not feel sorry for
them and allow them to yell at and kick us. They should be regarded
as inferior creatures who are unfit to influence our lives and our
future. We should stop feeling sorry for them, and stop pandering to
We should prohibit all types of demonstrations,
temper tantrums, and
whining. When a person doesn't like a particular policy, he should
provide an intelligent analysis of it so that we can think about it and
By following that philosophy, a society will have conflicting proposals
to deal with rather than conflicting protests. This requires that our
government deal with those conflicting proposals rather than ignore
Requiring government officials to read through people's
proposals might seem to be putting an incredible burden on them, but
the leaders of businesses and militaries already do this without
complaining about it.
Business executives are expected to read the analyses, complaints, and
proposals from other managers, customers, and
employees, rather than ignore them, and they are expected to
make intelligent decisions about them.
Furthermore, we can reduce the burden on government officials by
keeping track of what everybody does and holding them accountable for
it. In other documents I suggested that the people who make a lot of
stupid proposals be classified as intellectually inferior
and told to shut up, thereby reducing the burden on
the government officials who have to read the proposals.
Businesses and militaries keep track of what their members do, and
those who are substandard are demoted, fired, put on restrictions, or
told to shut up. A government should follow the same policy.
In that type of environment, people will be under pressure to develop
their opinions, and to refrain from saying something unless they have
put some thought into it. By comparison, in our world today,
people are not held accountable for their decisions. Voters are allowed
to select government officials in secrecy so they cannot be held
accountable for their decisions; people can join protests in the street
without it being recorded in their history; and people can whine about
government policies without being held accountable for any of the
stupid remarks they make.
and deception are detrimental today
Our craving to show people our best
qualities and hide our
undesirable qualities was
acceptable during prehistoric times
because there was no secrecy, but in the world today, we have the
ability to hide our unpleasant qualities to such an extreme that we can
deceive people about our true qualities, and this hurts all of us,
except for the truly disgusting people. For some examples:
• We are marrying people we don't know
In 2013, Canadian police arrested
348 adults for involvement with child pornography, and they "rescued"
nearly 400 children. What were the children rescued from? What were the
adults doing? We provide people with so much secrecy that we don't even
provide details about these crimes. There is no database that we can
access to find out who those people are, and what they have been doing.
• We hire people for jobs, including government offices, without
knowing much about their past job performances, medical problems,
mental disorders, or physical problems.
• We live among neighbors we know almost nothing about.
• We send children to schools and hospitals to be in contact with
adults we know nothing about.
The article says that 40 of the people were teachers,
9 were doctors and nurses, 6 were in law enforcement, 9 were church
officials, and 3 were foster parents. We are providing people with so
much secrecy that doctors, policemen, and teachers are able to get
involved with child pornography and pedophilia without anybody
noticing. This was impossible during prehistoric
times. A group of adults in a small prehistoric tribe would not have
been able to kidnap or rape children on a regular basis without
the other people noticing.
Our emotions want us to fight with one another for status, food,
material items, and mates, but we no longer need to behave like
animals. There is plenty of food, material wealth,
and potential spouses for
everybody. We should push
ourselves into regarding other people as friends. We should compete for
fun, and to inspire one another, not to hurt one another or fight over
We are afraid to be honest about ourselves
because we worry about being denied a job, insulted, or denied
health insurance. We also worry that we will not be able to attract a
spouse. These are
valid concerns, but remember the advice I have
provided many times: instead of becoming frightened by problems, react
to problems by analyzing them and looking
In regards to marriage, it is true that by being honest, a lot of
people will not want to marry us, but we should not be afraid of that
because that is what we need! Our emotions want to
be deceptive, but deception will give us the opposite of what we need;
namely, a compatible spouse. Deception will cause us to form a
fraudulent marriage that is likely to be miserable for us and our spouse,
and which will waste both of our lives.
By comparison, if we exert some self-control and force ourselves to be
honest with potential spouses, a lot of people will reject us, which
will hurt our feelings, but that is for the best. We will create a more
successful marriage if we control our emotions, stop acting like stupid
animals, and look for a spouse who is attracted to us for what we truly
In regards to health insurance and jobs, it is true that a person today
who admitted to his genetic flaws and
limitations would likely be denied some
jobs and health insurance, but one method to deal with that problem is
to change our economic
system to what I suggest in which everybody has their basic necessities
given to them for free, and the government helps people find jobs.
Nobody would have to
worry about unemployment. Instead of
person's medical history, school records, and other information to
insult him or deny him a job, the government would use that information
to help him find a job that he can do properly, and in a team that
he fits in with.
That type of government would behave like responsible parents. Most
parents know a lot of intimate details about their children's mental
and physical characteristics, but they do not use
that information to
ridicule their children, or to deny them health care. Rather, they
use that information to make wise decisions about meals, activities,
and chores. Many parents also use the information about their children
to provide them with advice about jobs and hobbies.
Likewise, an athletic coach, military drill sergeant, and supervisor of
a construction crew will use information about a person's physical and
mental characteristics in order to help the person and
the team, not hurt him.
If we were to create a new city and restrict it to people who are
capable of behaving like responsible parents, then nobody would
ridicule other people for their genetic defects or limitations, and
nobody would boast that they are perfect. People would quietly accept
the fact that everybody has imperfections, and they would use the
information" about one another to help each other find
friends, a spouse, a job, and leisure activities. The information about
people would be regarded as valuable knowledge
about the person, not as "personal
information" that must be kept secret and which we should be
embarrassed or ashamed of.
The only people who would suffer by eliminating secrecy are
people who have undesirable behavior. For example, eliminating secrecy
would show us that we are living among people who are kidnapping and
raping children. However, we should not provide secrecy for those
people. We should not design a society to appease
the misfits. It is
better for the human race that those people be exposed.
Our culture should encourage us to learn about ourselves, discover our
strengths and weaknesses, and be honest about what
we really are. Our culture should also encourage us to appreciate
other people's talents rather than look for opportunities to
criticize other people. We should inspire one another to develop their
talents rather than try to suppress or insult one another.
My proposal is to stop the secrecy completely. All
of our school records, job performance reviews, medical data, and other
aspects of our lives should be put in a public database for everybody
to see and analyze. We should encourage people to be honest
We should regard people who want secrecy, or who boast about
themselves, or who ridicule other people, as behaving like animals
rather than humans.
If we were living with that type of culture, we would discover that
each of us has a different ability to handle and accept honesty. We
would discover that some people put up more resistance to being honest,
and some people have more trouble appreciating the talents of other
The people who have the most problems with honesty, or who are the most
unfair in their treatment of other people, need to be regarded as inferior
people. They are troublesome in this modern world, especially if they
get into influential positions. For example, if a government official
cannot appreciate other people's talents, he is likely to look for ways
to suppress and eliminate his competitors rather than encourage us to
develop our talents. Those type of leaders are hurting society by suppressing
talented people. They will try to use the police and military
as their personal attack dogs.
It makes sense for society to suppress people who are destructive, but
we should not tolerate people who suppress people simply because they
are envious of their talents, or to eliminate their competitors. In
this modern world, we are a team, and we should appreciate and inspire
one another, not sabotage or suppress one another.
The people who cannot become productive team members should be regarded
as inferior people. We should stop promoting the
attitude that all people are equal and face the reality that some
members of society are so disruptive that they need to be restricted to
jobs, or evicted.
will hurt yourself if you cannot accept your imperfections
Our emotions want us to ignore our
imperfections, pretend that we are better than everybody else, and
criticize other people. This is resulting in
a society in which the people are struggling to make
themselves appear better than other people. This in turn is having the
undesirable effect of causing people to become self-conscious of their
imperfections and limitations.
Very few people are capable of calmly
admitting that they have imperfections, or seriously discussing their
imperfections. Of the people who are capable of admitting that they
have imperfections, most of them can do so only in a joking, sarcastic,
or deprecatory manner.
might be easier for you to understand why this dishonesty is
detrimental if you consider how it applies to people applying
for jobs in a free enterprise
system. All of the people who are looking for a job are in competition
with one another, so if some of
them are getting jobs by exaggerating their good qualities, lying about
their education, and hiding
their criminal history, mental problems, and other
undesirable characteristics, all of the other
people will be under pressure to be just as deceptive in order to
Eventually the situation will get to the point that we see here in the
United States in which businesses cannot believe a person's resume, and
they cannot trust his references, and they are forced to do their own
background checks. The people who get jobs with their deception believe
that they are benefiting from deception, but it is hurting
by encouraging everybody else to be deceptive, and by causing
to distrust our resume.
same concept applies to athletes. If one athlete cheats, he will have
an advantage, but his cheating will encourage the other athletes to
cheat in order to become equal to him.
If all of them cheat, they once again become equal,
in which case none of them benefit from the
cheating. It would be better if they were honest.
The same concept applies to businesses in a free enterprise
system. They are in competition to attract consumers, so when some
businesses are attracting customers by
exaggerating the good qualities of their products and ignoring the
undesirable qualities, the other businesses will be under pressure to
be just as deceptive in order to compete.
If any business were
to advertise a product in an honest manner, they would include a
description of the limitations and disadvantages to their product.
Their product would appear inferior when compared to the products that
are boasting about their wonderful qualities and ignoring their
limitations and disadvantages. Therefore, when one business decides to
deceive customers about their product, they put pressure
other businesses to be equally deceptive in order to compete.
all of the businesses are honest, they are equal, and when all of the
businesses are equally deceptive, they are equal. Therefore, when all
of the businesses are deceptive, they don't benefit from the deception.
A business will benefit from deception only when they are more
deceptive than the other businesses.
all businesses are equally deceptive, none of them benefit from the
deception, but their deception hurts society by causing consumers to
become suspicious of the claims that businesses make. It would be
better for everybody if the businesses were so honest that we could
enterprise also encourages idiotic
a free enterprise system, businesses are sometimes deceptive simply
because they are selling a product that consumers don't understand. For
example, the Libby's company sells
canned pumpkin for pumpkin pie that they claim is "100% pure pumpkin",
but other people claim that is actually a variety of squash,
not "pumpkin". What is the difference between a "squash" and a
"pumpkin"? How many people know?
Libby's does not want to be honest and
describe the product as "Squash for pumpkin pie" because
they worry that consumers are too stupid, ignorant, and/or neurotic to
understand that the squash makes a better tasting pie with a better
consistency than pumpkin. So they treat the consumers like
animals and deceive them into thinking that they are eating
My suggestion is to design society
according to the best behaved people, not the worst members of society.
Squash would be referred to as "squash", not as pumpkin. This
would actually be beneficial because it would help people to realize
that "pumpkin pie" does not have to be made with "pumpkin".
article claims that Red Kuri squash makes the best pumpkin pie. I have
never tried that, but I think yams make an
excellent pumpkin pie
because they are thick and tasty. If you cook the yams as I've
suggested, that is, at a lower temperature, and don't let them get to
the point at which they have turned to mush (which they
apparently did in that article, judging by the appearance of
they retain such a thick consistency that you don't have to do anything
further to make them into pie. You don't have to add eggs, for example.
All you do is mix in some molasses, spices, coconut oil, or whatever
you like, and put the mixture into a bowl or a pie shell. You don't
even have to bake it any further. Or, you can mix in some frozen,
concentrated orange juice and make an orange flavored pie.
free enterprise system, businesses do what is best for profit, and that
causes them to be deceptive and abusive. If we get rid of the
free enterprise system, businesses will treat us with respect
rather than as profit opportunities, and they will do what makes the
most sense for society rather than what will make a few executives and
investors absurdly wealthy.
flaws will be less embarrassing
if we live among honest people
Now consider how these concepts apply to you
your personal life. We are currently living in an environment in which
boasting about themselves and hiding their unpleasant characteristics.
We don't know the truth about other people. Rather, we know
only the false images that they
have created for themselves. This creates the impression that we
surrounded by incredibly talented people. Unless you are extremely
arrogant, their false images can intimidate you
into causing you to feel inferior.
Most of us are aware that we have some physical and mental
limitations and problems. When we are living among people who are
constantly boasting about
themselves and hiding their unpleasant qualities, it can cause us to
feel inferior because it makes us wonder:
• Are we the only person who occasionally pouts
or has a temper tantrum?
When we are surrounded by people who are constantly boasting about
themselves, we will want to keep the unpleasant aspects of ourselves a
secret because if we were to expose that information, we would appear
to be the only person with those undesirable qualities. We would feel
like a freak among perfect people.
• Are we the only person who has
trouble understanding how to use the remote control for a television,
or the features of a cell phone?
• Are we the only person who
picks his nose?
• Are we the only person who occasionally has crude
Even worse, being surrounded by perfect people can make us
afraid to try something we've never done before because it can cause us
to worry about failing, which would make us look inferior to all of the
talented people. We become afraid to try something new because we are
afraid of being ridiculed by all of the perfect people.
During prehistoric times, by comparison,
everybody knew the intimate details of everybody else. As a result,
when somebody boasted about himself, the other people realized that he
was simply advertising his good qualities and ignoring his
unpleasant qualities. The other people were not
believing that he was superior. He might have been more
talented in some characteristics, but the other people realized that he
was just another human, like the rest of them, and that he had
unpleasant qualities, also.
People are becoming
intimidated and introverted
The fear that we are inferior to other
people, and that we will be criticized for our
inferiority, is interfering
with our leisure activities and relationships. An example that I
mentioned years ago here
is that most people today are afraid to sing, play music, or dance in
front of other people because they are afraid other people will
criticize them for being substandard.
In previous centuries, there were no electronic devices to provide
people with entertainment, and so the people had to provide their own
people who enjoyed singing would do so, and the people who enjoyed
making music would do that, and the people who enjoy dancing would
My grandmother said that when she was a teenager, the girls would
usually dance by themselves or with other girls because most of the
boys preferred to watch rather than dance. The girls in her small town
did not need boys to dance with. They
were not embarrassed to dance by
themselves or with their girlfriends.
When I was a young child, there were still a lot of mothers who would
occasionally sing to their children, and the adults would sometimes
sing or play music in the evenings after dinner. However, during the
decades, that type of activity has almost completely ceased.
Some people might respond that the reason we no longer create our own
entertainment is because we prefer to watch professionals on
television, but I suspect the reason is because people have
become intimidated, and they are afraid
to do what they want to do because they worry about being ridiculed.
To support my assumption, consider how many people will sing when they
are alone, such as in their shower
or automobile. There are so
many people who sing in the bathroom that the Wikipedia has this
entry for the issue. I find it even more interesting that Hyundai recently
collected data on 1000 British automobile drivers, and one of the
results of their analysis was that 54% of the people
said that one of
the things that they enjoyed while driving was singing.
Why do so many people sing in their bathrooms or cars? This
website claims that people sing in showers because we are relaxed and
happy in the shower, and the Wikipedia claims that people sing in the
bathroom because the hard walls create a pleasant acoustic
environment. However, nobody designs music theaters to simulate
the acoustic environment of a bathroom or automobile.
I think that a bathroom and automobile are terrible
acoustic environments, and I don't think people are singing in their
showers or cars because they are relaxed. I think the explanation is
much more sad.
If we could go back in time thousands of years, we would
find that the men tended to wander away from the
campsite every day to hunt animals and make tools, but in the evening
was usually at the campsite. I think we would find that on many
evenings, one or more of the people would sing or dance, especially the
women. I think that
singing and dancing were a regular part of life during prehistoric
times. Eventually people began making musical
instruments, and they sometimes decorated themselves for the dances
with special clothing items, jewelry, hairstyles, and colored pigments.
natural tendency is to:
during the daytime,
during the evening.
A lot of songs have lyrics that are nonsensical, but we enjoy them
anyway because our mind treats songs differently than conversations.
When someone speaks to us, we try to decode their words into a concept,
but when people are singing, our mind treats their words as a form of
acoustical artwork. Instead of trying to decode the words, we
let their voice entertain us. This allows us to enjoy songs
even if we cannot understand the words, or if the singer is speaking a
foreign language, or if the singer is making noises like
"beep" and "bop" rather than using words.
For example, I think this woman
sings "Hey Diddle Diddle" so well that I find it relaxing,
even though the lyrics are senseless. Somebody who does not know
English might love the way she sings it. Unfortunately, the music is
awful, or maybe it is just too loud. I have to struggle
to focus on her voice and avoid the music.
That "Hey Diddle Diddle" song reminds me of when I was young and my
mother and grandmother would sing songs like that to us. I
think mothers have been singing silly songs like that to their children
for much longer than the anthropologists want to believe, and during
the evening, the women would entertain the men. My
dad occasionally sang a song, also, but men don't have as much
of an interest in singing as women.
During the past few thousand years, and especially during the past
century, our social environment has been deteriorating. We are living
in a significantly more unfriendly environment compared to our
prehistoric ancestors. We are living among people we don't know, don't
like, don't trust, and don't feel comfortable around. We are also
living among people who boast about themselves and ridicule other
people. People do not
want to get
together in the evening with their neighbors and coworkers, as our
prehistoric ancestors did. Rather, many
people today stay inside their houses in the evening, and lock their
doors and windows.
Our prehistoric ancestors were essentially on an eternal camping trip
with their friends and relatives. When the men arrived home after a day
of hunting, they walked into a small campsite that had a friendly
environment. They knew and enjoyed all of the people, and they trusted
everybody. They all spoke the same language, ate the same foods, and
had the same beliefs.
They had no concept of professional singers, musicians, or
entertainers, and so none of them felt inferior at providing
entertainment. The people who enjoyed singing and playing music would
do so without
fear of being ridiculed.
I think that the reason so many people today are singing in their car
and shower is because they want to sing,
but they feel so inferior to other people that they are afraid to do it
around other people. In order for people to sing in front
of other people, they must feel comfortable around the other people.
However, I don't think many people today feel comfortable around other
people. I think that is why so many people spend so much of their time
alone with a dog, television, video game, or cell phone.
In other words, I would say that the enormous
number of people who sing in their
shower and car are a symptom of a miserable social environment.
They are not singing because they are enjoying
life, or because they
enjoy the acoustical characteristics of their bathroom. They are
singing in their cars and their showers because they want to sing, but
uncomfortable to sing around other people because they
are afraid that people will criticize them.
In order for a person to sing in a pleasant manner, they must be
able to relax and use their voice as an instrument. They must be able
to create auditory artwork. A person who is self-conscious will not be
able to do it. We need to be in an environment in which we feel relaxed
around one another.
Incidentally, it is ridiculous for people to be embarrassed
about singing with their friends because when everybody
is singing, nobody hears anybody else because their
own voice is louder than the other people. Therefore, you
not notice if somebody else is doing a terrible
job of singing, and they won't notice if you
are not singing very well, either. Therefore, you are a fool
to be embarrassed to sing with a group of people.
Are you are enjoying your
A lot of people assume that they are
happy, but I don't think many
people truly are. I think most people are somewhat lonely and
since they have never had any other life, and since they cannot imagine
other type of life, they don't realize that their life could be
people sense that they are not enjoying their life very much,
most people react to their unhappiness by struggling to titillate
themselves, usually through sex, food, babies, dogs, or fame. Other
people try to ignore their misery with drugs, religion, Star Trek
fantasies, or video games.
Unfortunately, we are not going to
improve our lives simply by titillating our emotions. That only
provides us with some momentary pleasure. And drugs, religion,
and other distractions do nothing to improve life, either.
Are you enjoying your life? If you could live your
again, would you live it in the exact same manner? Or would you
There are some people who have claimed that they
have enjoyed their life so much that they would not make any changes to
if they could live a second life, but we cannot determine whether
a person is truly enjoying his life simply by asking him. In order to
determine whether our societies are providing us with an appropriate
life, we have to analyze the behavior of the people.
I mentioned this concept years ago here
when I pointed out
that when we design exhibits for zoo animals, we will know when the
exhibit is providing the animal with a proper environment when the
behavior of the animal is "normal". When an animal in a zoo exhibit
displays unnatural behavior, we must come
conclusion that there is something wrong with the environment, and
that the animal is miserable.
The people supervising zoos have noticed that one of the most obvious
symptoms of an inappropriate environment is that the males and females
have trouble forming stable
relationships and raising families, resulting in the animals rarely or
If we were to apply that concept to human societies, then we would come
to the conclusion that our modern societies are inappropriate for us
because during the past few centuries, men and women have been having
an increasingly difficult time forming relationships and raising
Unfortunately, the majority of people have a tremendous resistance to
the concept that humans are just a different species of monkey, and
that the concepts that apply to animals apply to us. Our
arrogance is so extreme that we want to think of ourselves as being
completely different from all of the animals.
There are so many people who refuse to believe that humans are animals
that even the Nature programs avoid admitting that humans are
animals. For example, in 2017 this
series of documentaries were completed that showed video of animals
that was taken by cameras that had been put into robotic animals. At
the beginning of the documentaries the narrator says that the
cameras are showing us a view of animals that:
change our perception of animals forever. Could animals be more like us
than we ever believed possible?"
His remark might seem intelligent, but it shows the arrogance
of humans. A less biased, more realistic remark would have
been phrased like this:
may change our perception of humans forever. Could
humans be more like
animals than we ever believed possible?
Even the zoologists who study animals have trouble facing the
that they are just an educated monkey. They don't want to believe that
humans are like animals. They would rather believe that animals are
like humans. The difference is subtle, but important.
Humans are an advanced branch of the monkey category of animals. Therefore, it
more sense to say
that humans are like animals rather than say that animals are like
humans. However, our arrogance causes us to want to stand on a tall
pedestal and look down on all of the
animals and plants. When we see some animal behaving like us, we want
to bring him up to our pedestal rather than lower ourselves to his
I mentioned this concept in a previous document when I pointed out that
when we encounter a person with exceptionally good athletic talents,
math abilities, music abilities, or artistic abilities, our tendency is
to make a remark such as, "He has
exceptional talent!" We have a tendency to
put him on a pedestal.
Because we are arrogant, when we encounter somebody who has better
qualities than us, we have a tendency to praise that person rather than
criticize ourselves. For example, my grandfather never had any tooth
decay, headaches, or medical problem until he was 78 years old. He
never missed a day of work because he was never sick. Some people might
describe him as having exceptionally good health, but I would say it
makes more sense to describe him as having "normal" human health, and
that those of us who suffer from diseases,
tooth decay, headaches, and other medical problems are "defective".
If we could go back in time tens of thousands of years, we would find
that humans were as healthy as the wild animals. We would find that the
rarely got sick, and that tooth decay was rare, also. We would find
that the people living in the colder climates were capable of dealing
with the cold, and that everybody could qualify as an athlete.
Unfortunately, during the past few thousand years, humans have been
degrading as a result of not controlling reproduction. Today
a significant percentage of the population is mentally and/or
defective and sickly, and the situation is getting worse during every
Unfortunately, people are still about as arrogant as they ever were.
Therefore, when we encounter somebody who is in good physical or mental
health, we don't want to regard them as "normal" humans. We want to put
them on a pedestal. The reason is because each of us wants to stand on
a very tall pedestal and imagine that we are better than everybody
else. Therefore, if we regard somebody in good health as being "just
a normal human", that means that he is not
on a pedestal. He is simply standing on the ground like other normal
people. Since most of us are sickly, that means that we
should get off of
our pedestal, dig a pit into the dirt, and lower ourselves into it so
that we can be "below normal", with all of the other
defective, sickly people.
We don't want to be in a pit with defective people. Therefore,
encounter somebody in good health, we want to put him on a tall
pedestal. We want to describe him as
"exceptional" so that we can continue pretending that we are
In reality, the people who are in excellent health
are actually just "normal" humans, and most of us
are better described as "sickly, defective"
creatures who are suffering from a lot of genetic problems. If
we could go back in time 50,000 years, we would likely discover that
of people had what we would regard as excellent
If we were to control reproduction, then eventually everybody would be
in even better health than the wild animals and our prehistoric
ancestors. Nobody would have tooth
decay, get sick, have headaches, or have allergies. There would only
be a few doctors and dentists in the world, and they would be needed
only to deal with accidents and elderly people.
social environment is disgusting
If some aliens in another solar system
were selling humans as pets, they would provide instructions to owners
on how to create a terrarium for their pet humans, and how to determine
when the environment of the terrarium is inappropriate. In those
instructions, it would say that if the humans are singing by themselves
in isolation, there is something wrong with the
environment of the terrarium. The instructions would explain that
humans are supposed to sing with other people.
The instructions would also point out that the male and female humans
should be able to form stable relationships, and if they do not,
is seriously wrong with the environment. The instructions would warn
the owners that they should not ignore this issue,
and they should not try to resolve the loneliness by providing the
humans with sex robots or dogs.
I think the reason so many men and women are having trouble with
relationships today, and the reason so many people are singing when
they are alone, and the reason so many people are forming such close
relationships with dogs, is because we have
created a miserable social environment for
ourselves. If we were to experiment with our culture, we would discover
that some environments increase these problems, and
For example, I think that the design of a city has
an effect on our
social activities and our enjoyment of life. Our
prehistoric ancestors lived in
extremely close proximity to one another, but today we are in isolated
houses, and we have to travel long distances in order to visit friends.
Also, prehistoric parents did not need
babysitters. Their children were always surrounded by other adults and
children. The parents didn't have to worry about kidnappers,
gangs, pedophiles, or rapists.
The city that I've suggested in other documents comes close to
providing us with the intimate environment of a prehistoric campsite.
For example, we would be able to freely move around the city, giving us
the opportunity to live close to our friends.
Furthermore, by eliminating the free enterprise system and providing
everybody with free access to recreational facilities, museums,
theaters, picnic areas,
social clubs, swimming areas, hobbyist equipment and supplies,
musical instruments, costumes, jewelry, karaoke
equipment, and whatever else we wanted, the city would
feel as if it was our home. We would not be under pressure by
businesses to spend money. We
would be able to have meals without any concern for carrying money or
pay the bill. We would be able to go swimming, bicycle riding,
or snorkeling without any fees or
Instead of encouraging us to purchase products, the city
officials would encourage us to participate
in activities and experiment with life.
For an example of how this would work, if a group of employees decided
to get together at the end of the workday for dinner, they could walk
or take a train ride to one of the sections of the city that is full of
restaurants. After they were
finished with dinner, if they decided to sing some songs, they could
walk over to one of the recreational rooms that provide musical
instruments, karaoke equipment, or robots that play music.
None of the people would need to carry money with them, or
purchase musical instruments, or carry equipment back and forth to
their homes. The people who wanted to sing or dance would do so, and
would watch and listen without insulting them. It
would create a social environment that is as friendly
and relaxed as that in the
The city government would ensure that
there are enough restaurants,
recreational rooms, swimming areas, bicycles, video rooms, arts and
crafts supplies, 3D printers, and other equipment and facilities so
that we don't have to wait in
line to use
them. The attitude in the city would be to put resources into community
buildings, activities, and supplies rather than personal
homes and possessions.
Our homes would be small, and we would not have many possessions. We
would instead have access to the facilities, supplies, and material
items that the city provided.
In addition to the business sections of the city providing social and
recreational areas, the apartment complexes would also provide
recreational facilities. If a group of friends at one of the
apartment complexes decided to get together in the evening to sing
songs, they would be able to go to one of the facilities within their
own building by taking a short walk or elevator ride. They would then
be able to use whatever equipment they wanted without worrying about
carrying it back and forth to their homes, or purchasing any of it.
If we were living in that type of city, I think we would be much more
interested in getting out of our home during the evenings and
joining other people in recreational
Our arrogance causes us to believe that we are super geniuses who know
what is best for ourselves, but I don't believe anybody truly
understands life so well that he knows what will provide him with the
most pleasant life. Most people have fantasies of giant
mansions and giant plots of land, but is that really what will provide
us with the most pleasant life? There may be some people who actually
prefer that type of life, but I don't think it is what the more
advanced humans would be happiest with.
I think most people have made a mess of their life
by trying to satisfy their emotional cravings for material wealth and
status. I think that as soon as we find the courage to experiment with
our culture, we will quickly realize that the life we have right now is
not very pleasant, and that it is easy
for us to improve upon it.
should reduce the emphasis on status
In our current social environment, there
is tremendous emphasis on winning competitions and
being important. For example, schools encourage
students to compete in intellectual and athletic activities, and to
insult the people who do not perform well. We also create lots of
contests, such as beauty contests, Nobel prizes, and food eating
contests. Only the winners of these contests get praise and prizes; the
losers are treated as worthless creatures.
The free enterprise system adds to the problem by encouraging us to
compete for material items and status, and to insult the people who do
not make lots of money. Businesses also provide "status products" for
wealthy people, such as goldplated cell phones, to show off
I think our societies are putting too much emphasis on winning
competitions and showing off our status, and the reason
this happened is because we are trying to satisfy our powerful
be at the top of the hierarchy. Our desire to be at the
top of the hierarchy is stronger than other emotions. We want to feel
important. We want to look down on other people as inferior. We want
status products so that we can show everybody how important we are.
The reason we have this powerful craving for status is that the
dominant males have been reproducing
more than the others for
of years. Furthermore, the males reach the top position
kicking, and intimidation. This has caused male animals to evolve a
powerful craving to
bite, kick, and fight one another for the top position. It is difficult
for men to relax around one
another. We want to compete for status.
When a male animal
reaches a high level position in the hierarchy, he wants the other
animals to know that he is important, and he wants them to show
submission. We inform people of our
importance by showing them our expensive material items, our college
diploma, and our trophies. We can also show them our wife,
expensive jewelry and clothing.
Our craving for status was kept under control during
but today it is causing us to distort our cultural activities into
increasingly senseless, wasteful, and sometimes dangerous competitions.
For example, millions of men are in senseless competitions to have
gigantic mansions and yachts, and millions of other men are
struggling to acquire hundreds of trophies, and millions of
other men are boasting about their college diploma,
job title. Every nation is wasting a lot of labor and
mansions, yachts, trophies, and other status products.
have such a strong craving to be important and win competitions that we
have created a lot of idiotic and dangerous competitions, such as
competitions to drink the most beer, eat the most food, drive a car the
fastest, or do the most dangerous stunt on a skateboard.
craving to compete for status is so extreme that people cannot even
graduate from college without turning it into a competition. For
example, the students who graduate from
Harvard like to imagine that they are in a competition with other
students, and that they are the winners who have graduated from the
best college. That is a
destructive attitude because it encourages arrogance, which in turn
interferes with a student's ability to form
friendships, learn from his mistakes, and enjoy other people.
to behave like stupid monkeys.
When we are successful in a competition, we titillate our cravings
for status, and that causes us to believe that we are enjoying life,
and that our life is worthwhile, but winning a competition provides
titillation. It does not provide us with the type of pleasant memories
that we will enjoy reminiscing about when we are older.
winning competitions was truly the way to enjoy life, then the solution
to enjoying life would be for a society to increase the number of
competitions, and to design them so that everybody wins once in a
while. We already have thousands of different athletic contests,
intellectual contests, beauty contests, and food eating contests, and
we could create even more contests so that everybody
can win a
contest on a regular basis.
For example, every
neighborhood could hold a competition every day to
see who could come closest to
guessing at a random number. With
contests like that, each of us
would be able to win hundreds of trophies during
our lifetime, no matter how little talent we have.
could also design schools so that they give us more diplomas. For
example, when a student completes his arithmetic class, he could get a
diploma for arithmetic, and when he completes his geometry class, he
could get a diploma for geometry. The history, language, and other
courses could also provide diplomas.
That type of
school system would allow each of us to collect so many diplomas that
proudly display dozens of them in our home and still have dozens more
for our office.
we are not going to increase our satisfaction with life simply by
gathering more diplomas or trophies. Our emotions are fooling us into
believing that we can enjoy life simply by titillating ourselves. In
reality, we get the most satisfaction from life when we work on
projects that have some value to our team. And our greatest
satisfaction comes from doing the work, not
achieving the goal. Our
most pleasant memories will come from working and "suffering", not from
the trophy or the diploma.
We enjoy the process of achieving our
goals. As soon as we achieve a goal, we want to work on another goal.
It is the work that we enjoy. Unfortunately, our
emotional cravings for
status, material wealth, food, sex, babies, and pampering by servants
causes us to believe that work is bad and that being pampered by
servants is good, and that inheritances, trust funds, and winning the
lottery will make us happy by allowing us to avoid work. In reality,
animals and humans were designed to be under pressure
by nature to work
every day. We don't like the concept of working, but that is what we
were designed to do, and that is what brings us the most satisfaction.
When we follow our emotional cravings for status without thinking about
what we are doing, we will inadvertently
cause our culture to evolve into increasingly idiotic competitive
battles. We will waste a lot of our time and resources in attempts to
be important, and we will waste our time and resources on status
products in an attempt to show off to other people.
we stop producing all types of status products. They are a waste of
resources, and they encourage stupid, monkey-like behavior.
Furthermore, I suggest we eliminate peasants, and
that requires that we eliminate as many unnecessary products as
possible, and I would say that trophies are one of the products that we
don't need to produce.
the type of people who rise to the top positions in a free enterprise
system and a democracy tend to be those who have intense
status, so they are not likely to want to reduce or eliminate status
products. They are not likely to want to eliminate peasants, either.
They want servants to pamper them.
people who currently dominate society are the people who
have put an enormous amount of time and effort into
getting into a leadership position, and the reason they have struggled
to become a leader is because they have strong cravings to be the top
monkey in the hierarchy. Many of them are also willing to
get involved with crime networks in order to become a leader. They
are not likely to want to give up their status products, or live in the
same type of house that the rest of us live in. They want to feel
comparison, the people who don't have such intense cravings to be the
top monkey would be more willing to eliminate status products,
but they are not likely to get into a leadership position
they don't have such intense cravings for status. Therefore, they will
not have the authority to stop the production of status products.
are currently allowing people to fight for leadership positions in
business, government, and other organizations. This is not
providing us with quality leadership. This is providing us with men who
are extremely aggressive and have intense cravings for status. It is
also providing us with leaders who are willing to join crime networks.
was acceptable for prehistoric people to fight for leadership, but in
this modern world, we should take control of our economic and
government system so that we can make wise decisions about who gets
into a leadership position.
We need to make people qualify for
leadership positions, and we need to give our leaders job performance
reviews, and we must regularly replace the leaders who are doing the
worst job. We should not allow people to become leaders simply because
they have cravings to be a leader, and we should be especially
about stopping people from becoming leaders through intimidation,
blackmail, crime, plagiarism, and einsteinism.
should be a social
activity, not a business
Although we will sometimes want to engage
in recreational activities by ourselves, our preference is for
recreational events to be social events. We prefer
to get together with
other people for recreation.
Unfortunately, a free enterprise system causes businesses to
manipulate our culture so that hobbies, sports, recreation, music, and
activities become profit-making ventures. For example, businesses
encourage us to watch professional
athletes rather than become active participants of
It should be noted that most of the people who watch professional
sports have more of an interest in getting together
with other people
than in watching the sports event. For example,
when they watch the
games on television, they
prefer to watch them with other people. Also, most of the people are
more interested in eating and socializing than in paying close
attention to the game.
Even more significant is that many of the people who go to stadiums to
sports events will arrive early so that they can get together with
other people in the parking lot in order to socialize (as
in the photo below). They refer to this activity as
site claims that 20 million Americans are regularly involved with this
activity, which would make tailgating one of the most popular leisure
activities in the nation.
give us the impression that the key to happiness is acquiring
a giant house, large piles of material items, and lot of fame, status,
sex, food, and children, but in reality, what we enjoy the most is
doing things with other people. The most exciting aspect of a
professional sports event is other people, not the
Compare the way people watch professional sports to the way they watch
the events in the Cirque du
Soleil or the Nutcracker ballet. When most people watch
soccer game, they pay more attention to their friends
and the snacks than they do to the game, or they
are concerned only with who wins the game. They
don't care if they miss large sections of the game.
Even more bizarre, some people are more interested in watching the advertisements
the halftime show of the Super Bowl than
By comparison, when people watch the Cirque du Soleil, they quietly
focus on the performers. They don't want to miss any part of the
performance. When they watch the Nutcracker ballet, they are
also silent because they want to listen to
the music as well as watch the dancers. This is an indication that the
circus performers and dancers are
providing real entertainment, whereas the professional sports events
Furthermore, people enjoy watching Cirque du Soleil and the
Nutcracker ballet on video even years or decades
after it has been performed. This is more evidence that we truly enjoy
the performances. I suspect that people even centuries
from now will enjoy watching the Mariinsky theater's production
of the Nutcracker. I like their performance better than the other
ballet companies, and unlike a lot of Internet videos, they
provided good video quality. However, will anybody years from
now want to watch the football games that are being played today?
Furthermore, people can watch the Nutcracker more than one time without
becoming bored by it. How many people want to watch the same football
game over and over?
Watching a bunch of strangers play a sports event is not
A sports event would be more interesting to us if we were participating
in it, or if we knew some of the people who were
Unfortunately, during the past few centuries, sports have evolved to
become so expensive, dangerous, and difficult that most people don't
have any interest in participating.
I think the reason so many people watch professional sports is for the
reason that lots of people sing in the shower; namely,
most people are lonely and bored.
I think we
would have a more pleasant life if we encouraged people to participate
in recreational events. This requires modifying sports to make them
more appropriate as social events, and to design a city that provides
us with easy and free access to recreational facilities.
I also think we will get more enjoyment from recreational activities
when we exert enough self-control over our craving to win competitive
events so that we can eliminate the emphasis on winning.
recreational events should get a meaningless award, if they get
anything. We should play for entertainment, exercise, and to socialize,
not to collect trophies or to feel superior.
Nobody should have to train for a recreational
event, and nobody should be embarrassed that they are not
good enough to participate in an event. I discussed some of these
concepts years ago here.
Businesses are manipulating us into
believing that we need to win
sports events and, in order to win, we must constantly purchase new and
equipment. The advertisement to the right is just one example.
enterprise system is encouraging us to develop detrimental and
idiotic attitudes towards recreation, and it causes society to waste a
lot of its resources and labor on unnecessary sports equipment.
We should experiment with recreational
events that are simplistic,
safe, and entertaining so that people can get some exercise and
socialize without breaking their bones, getting concussions, or
needing training. I also suspect that men and women have slightly
different interests and abilities in recreational activities, which
would require us
to acknowledge that men and women are different,
and to experiment with
different recreational events for men and women.
By designing cities as I've suggested in which clusters of tall
buildings are surrounded by parks and recreational areas, and in which
material items are provided for free, nobody has to purchase their own
recreational equipment, and nobody has to transport the equipment to
and from their home to the recreational areas, and nobody has to store
recreational equipment in their homes.
The lakes would have free access to snorkeling equipment, inner tubes,
scuba equipment, towels for drying off, and rowboats; the
grassy areas would provide various types of balls, badminton equipment,
or whatever people wanted; and scattered around the city would be
types and sizes of bicycles, including those that hold two or more
people. There could also be small electric vehicles for people who want
to go for rides around the city, or out into the recreational
areas outside of the city.
of watching some strangers compete
in American Ninja Warrior, the city could provide some equipment
similar to that so that people can play with their friends. The city
could also provide lots of small theaters for people to play
variations of Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, or whatever people enjoy,
rather than watch them on television.
That type of city would make recreation so convenient that many people
who have no interest in recreational activities right now are likely to
discover that they enjoy occasionally doing something.
In the world today, many large cities spend a lot of money on sports
stadiums, but I don't think people truly enjoy sitting in a stadium and
watching strangers play games. People seem to have more fun
the tailgating activities in the
parking lot before the game begins. The tailgating reminds me of the
parents who buy their child an
expensive toy, but the child has more fun playing with the
box that the toy was inside of.
The city of Los Angeles is planning
to spend a few billion
dollars building another gigantic sports stadium (the
drawing to the right), but I think more
people will have more fun in the parking lot than
they will in the stadium.
I don't think a city should waste resources on large sports stadiums. I
think we should design a city to encourage people to participate
in events. This requires changing the economic system so that the city
can be designed to provide people with activities. Instead of a small
number of gigantic stadiums and theaters, we should
have lots of
tiny stadiums and theaters for
us to use
with our friends and neighbors.
I also think we should stop putting resources into the video
recording of professional sports. Most of the people who
watch professional sports want to watch them live, not years after they
have occurred. The reason is simply because professional sports are boring
to watch. There are only some singers, actors, dancers, musicians, and
athletes who are so talented that we want to watch recordings
of their performances.
Rather than record professional sports, I think we would get more
satisfaction from life if the city made it easy for us to record ourselves
friends as we played recreational
activities, created music, had a
picnic, or celebrated an anniversary, birthday, or wedding.
To make the video more pleasant to watch, the city would provide free
access to high-quality video cameras so that we don't have to use low
quality consumer cameras. The city would not bother producing
To make recording ourselves easier, cameras could be permanently
installed in some recreational areas and theaters so we do not have to
set up the equipment. To further simplify the recording, computers
could use tracking software to keep the cameras focused on the people
so that nobody has to operate the cameras.
One of the problems with video is finding it when
we want to watch it in the future. Computers would make this job
easier, especially if people could get over their paranoia of being
tracked. If the city computers were constantly tracking everybody, then
the computers would know who was in a theater or recreational area,
and that would allow the computers to identify every video
segment according to date and according to the people in the video.
This would allow us to find video according to a
person or date.
The computers would also know which recreational area or event they
were recording, so we could also find video according to that criteria.
Computers will not operate a video camera as well as a human, but the
simplicity of the system would make it so easy to record ourselves, and
so easy to access the recorded video, we might discover that everybody
loses their interest in doing what they do today, which is to create a
disorganized jumble of photographs and video that nobody wants
to look through.
You probably have some photographs or video in your home right now, but
how often do you or other people look at them? Imagine if you had been
living in a city in which you were being tracked, and there was video
of you at the recreational areas and theaters. Imagine if all you had
to do to watch some of those videos was tell a computer to
show the video of a particular person,
date, or event. It would be similar to what people are doing right now
with Netflix, except that instead of requesting Hollywood movies,
they would request video of themselves, their friends, or their
The computer would search its database, locate the video, and then
display it for you. And imagine that the video is high quality rather
than from a consumer camera. You might find that the system is
so easy to use, and there are so many videos to choose from,
that you enjoy occasionally
watching yourself, friends, and family members playing
recreational events, singing, learning how to do snorkeling, or
participating in a city festival.
lot of what we enjoy is because we are bored
I will provide more detail about the
remark I made earlier that people who watch professional sports are
doing so because they are bored. This is a significant issue because it
affects our leisure activities and hobbies.
When a person foolishly believes that happiness comes from becoming so
wealthy that we can retire early, be pampered by servants, lounge
around the beach all day long, and do whatever we please, he is going
to get bored. We have some emotions that want us to avoid work and
spend the day lounging, but we evolved to work, and as a result, when
we have nothing to do, we get bored.
When a person is bored, his mind starts looking for something to do,
and if he is unaware of this issue and not putting any intelligent
thought into what he is doing, he may end up getting involved with a
stupid, wasteful, destructive, or expensive activity, which in
turn can cause trouble for him, even though he believes that he enjoys
A woman who is attracted to horses, for example, might get involved
with horseback riding, which can create financial problems for her, and
another woman might get involved with pets, which can
interfere with her human relationships.
Men like to compete for dominance, so many of them get involved with
hobbies and activities that allow them to show off, such as doing
athletic stunts, or something expensive, such as sailing.
Our prehistoric ancestors never had vacations, sick days, or
retirement. They did not have the concept of "weekends", either. They
worked every day of their lives.
Humans evolved to spend every day looking for food, finding a place to
sleep at night, and taking care of our children. Also, we were designed
to be our own boss, even though we often work with other people. Our
reason for working is to take care of ourselves and our family.
In this modern world, almost everybody has a job that is unnatural for
us. We did not evolve to work on an assembly line
and do the same repetitive motions hour after hour, day after day, year
after year. We also did not evolve to be insurance salesmen who spend
their lives trying to deceive and manipulate other people,
or submissive government officials who pander to other people.
Most important of all, we did not evolve to be somebody else's slave.
We did not evolve to work for other people and make them and their
children absurdly wealthy.
Ideally, we would study humans, get a better understanding of our
emotional, intellectual, and physical abilities and limitations, and
try to design jobs to be more practical and satisfying. However, almost
everybody ignores this issue. There is very little interest in
designing an economic system that provides us with an environment that
allows us to enjoy working.
During the 1800s, the situation was even worse. Businesses were
creating jobs with almost no concern for the safety or health of the
employees, and with almost no concern for whether the people could
afford to live on the wages that they were getting. Unions developed in
order to put pressure on businesses to provide better working
conditions, but the unions only reduced the misery; they did
not provide us with an economic system that we truly enjoy.
A lot of people have jobs that they don't enjoy, or which cause them
physical or emotional stress. Many employees
also resent that investors and executives are becoming
absurdly wealthy from their work.
Our miserable economic system causes a lot of people to want vacations,
and to retire early. However, our cities were not designed for
vacations. Our cities don't provide us with activities. Our cities are
dominated by businesses that are trying to make money from us. As a
result, when people have several weeks or a month of vacation, they
quickly become bored.
Businesses look for ways to exploit the bored people who are on
vacation. For example, some businesses offer us travel
opportunities; some businesses produce low cost products for tourist to
purchase as souvenirs; and some businesses arrange
for entertainment shows for the tourists.
Ideally, our government officials would analyze the issue of vacations
and provide us with some intelligent guidance on what to do. For
example, they might decide to support a variety of activities for
people on vacation. However, the voters continuously elect dishonest,
corrupt, and incompetent people to government offices. Our government
officials don't analyze anything, or provide us with any type of
Instead of providing us with guidance and suggestions, the city
government officials join the business executives in looking for
opportunities to exploit the people on vacation. The end result is that
the city government officials compete with other cities to lure
tourists to their city in the hope that they can increase their tax
The businesses regard the people on vacation as profit
opportunities, and the government officials regard those
people as tax opportunities. I would describe this
as a disgusting social environment, a disgusting economic system, and a
disgusting government. None of the people in leadership positions are
offering us any intelligent guidance or suggestions. None of our
leaders are interested in designing a city for human life.
|The travel magazines should be
described as a form of pornography because they are
intended to titillate our emotions rather than provide our intellect
with useful information. They often show unrealistic
scenes, such as the image above in which the people are underwater.
The fantasy images titillate us into desiring to go to those places so
that we can
experience the excitement.
The journalists are as detrimental as the
businesses because they are businesses.
They are competing with one another to grab our attention and, just
like other businesses, they will sell us whatever we want to purchase.
They provide us with television programs and magazines that
glorify traveling, which reinforces the attitude that
traveling will provide us with pleasure, and that lounging on
a beach in Tahiti will make our life worthwhile.
Although humans are better behaved than animals, our social
environment is still very similar to theirs. For example, we are
fighting with one another for food and land; we look for opportunities
to exploit one another; lots of people steal and plagiarize one
another; and the manner in which we fight for leadership positions is
not much better than the biting and kicking of animals.
The end result of people who go on vacation is that they get bored, and
businesses, government officials, and journalists exploit the situation
by encouraging them to become tourists.
Many tourists might respond that they enjoy spending their vacation
traveling around the world, but how would they know what they enjoy?
They have never experienced any other type of life.
In our world today, a person who is on vacation doesn't have many
options about how to spend his time. If he remains home, he will get
bored. Traveling is a better option, but that
doesn't make it the ideal
Tourism is based on the false assumption that other cities are more
exciting than the city that we live in. The people in Chicago will
travel to Paris on the assumption that Paris is more exciting than
Chicago, and the people in Paris will travel to Chicago under the
assumption that Chicago will be exciting.
In reality, the cities of the world are not that much different from
one another. They are all chaotic, ugly, overcrowded, crime-ridden,
noisy, and filthy. They are all full of graffiti, traffic congestion,
unwanted pet animals, and unwanted children. Furthermore, everywhere we
go in the world we find businesses trying to take our money,
governments taxing us, and people trying to steal from us and cheat us.
Nobody truly enjoys the city they live in, and they make the mistake of
assuming that the grass will be greener on the other side of the fence.
There are only a few areas of the world that are truly unpleasant to
live in, such as those near the poles, which are extremely dark and
cold during the winter, and those in the extremely hot deserts.
If everybody in the world was living in a city that was attractive,
clean, free of crime, and offering lots of recreational and social
activities, I think most people would discover that they prefer
remaining in their own city during their vacation because that avoids
the annoying aspects of traveling. However, we are not going to provide
ourselves with that type of city with a free enterprise system or a
democracy. We must be willing to exert enough self-control to
experiment with a new government system and a new economic system.
do tourists take so many photos?
often take cameras with us when we travel outside of our city, and many
people take a lot of photos. What happens to those photos? People are
so secretive that it is impossible to know, but from my casual
observations of people, most people look at those photos once after
getting back from their vacation, and then the photos go into storage,
and they are rarely seen again.
Why do so many tourists spend so
much time and money taking billions of photos that almost nobody
bothers to look at? We could describe what most tourists do as being
analogous to the "hoarders"
who collect excessive amounts of material items.
I think the reason most tourists take lots of photos is
because they are bored. Traveling is not
exciting. Our free enterprise system is fooling people into believing
that we will find happiness if we give some business a lot of our money
and then travel to Tahiti, Paris, the Galapagos islands, or the
Antarctica. In reality, traveling is annoying to
most of us.
to Stonehenge, for example, is time-consuming and boring, and when we
finally arrive, there is nothing there except some grass and
We can only spend a few moments looking at the grass and rocks before
we become bored. Stonehenge is more interesting to us when we look at
it on certain Internet sites, Museum presentations, or video
documentaries because then we get an explanation of what we are looking
The wealthy people increase this problem by boasting about
how they have traveled around the world. Their boasting creates the
situation described in Dr. Seuss's book The Sneetches. Specifically, by
boasting about traveling, they cause other people to believe that they
are suffering because they cannot afford to travel around the world.
This causes millions of people to fantasize about traveling.
people have an opportunity to travel, they will boast about it to their
friends. Some Caucasians deliberately let themselves get sunburned when
they travel so that they can show everybody that they have traveled.
Their boasting about traveling allows them to become the center of
attention for a while, and that will titillate their emotions. However,
they make the mistake of assuming that the emotional titillation is the
result of traveling.
Another reason people enjoy traveling is
because they frequently remind themselves over and over that they are
special people for being able to travel. By stimulating themselves like
that over and over, they titillate themselves over and over. This can
fool them into thinking that traveling is exciting.
traveling is usually irritating, boring, and time consuming, and when
we finally reach our destination, there is nothing for us to do except
look at things with our eyes. We quickly become bored.
If traveling was as exciting as people assume it is, then we would
enjoy doing it by ourselves.
However, not many of us want to travel alone. Furthermore, when we get
to our destination, most people don't pay much attention to the area
that they traveled to. Most people are not
exploring it, or learning about it. They are more interested in
spending time with their friends, visiting with other people in the
area, eating food, drinking beer, playing games, going swimming, and
taking photos of themselves and their friends. They enjoy the people
and the social activities much
more than the traveling.
think the reason tourists take so many photos is because they are
bored. By taking photos, the people have something to do. If they did
cameras, they would become even more bored.
enterprise system is fooling people into believing that happiness comes
from material items, traveling, being pampered by servants, lounging
around a beach, having a gigantic house, and retiring early. In
reality, what we enjoy the most is having activities and
friends. We want to do something with
our lives, and we want to do something that other people appreciate.
|This magazine implies that we will find
romance if we travel.
||This magazine implies that sailing is
||This magazine implies that lounging is
of promoting and encouraging traveling, I think we will provide
ourselves with a more pleasant life if our societies were sending the
people who truly enjoy exploring the world to create museum displays
and video documentaries.
There are a few people producing
documentaries right now, but they are small groups
of people with very limited budgets. I suggest that we experiment with
increasing the labor and resources that go into producing those
documentaries, and reduce the labor and resources
that is going into encouraging people to travel.
think that if we were living in a city that offered us lots of small
video rooms with high quality monitors, and if we had access to lots of
high quality and informative documentaries, more people would enjoy the
world by watching those documentaries compared to when they travel.
This is especially true of certain types of destinations, such as
Stonehenge, the moon, and Mars, which are very boring.
recent documentaries by Nature in which cameras were put into robotic
animals required a tremendous amount of time and effort by the
photographers, technicians, and other people. If we were to travel to
those same areas of the world, we would not have seen any of those
animals. Those type of documentaries allow us to see the world as we
would never have seen it as a tourist.
Attenborough also provides documentaries about the world that require a
lot of time and skills to produce. If we were living in a city that had
thousands of small video rooms with large, high-resolution
video monitors, as in the image below, we would learn more by watching
those videos than we would by traveling. Furthermore, we would be able
to watch those videos in comfort, and never worry
about mosquitoes, hotel rooms, or tropical diseases.
free enterprise system is putting a lot of resources and labor into
tourism, Hollywood movies, gambling operations, pets, and other
entertainment, but not because our leaders have put a lot of
effort into analyzing humans, and have come to the conclusion that
those activities provide us with the most pleasant life. Rather, a lot
of resources are going into those particular activities because the
free enterprise system gives us what we
want, and what is profitable to
As I have mentioned before, we should assume a zoo exhibit is
inappropriate when the animals behave
abnormally. It is not
abnormal for people to want to take photos, but I think people are
taking an abnormally large number of photos, and I think the reason is
because they are bored. I think that when a city starts experimenting
with its social environment, they will discover that as life improves
for the people, the people spend less time taking photos, and
they take photos, they put more effort into creating the photo.
I think that one of the reasons that people want to become tourists is
because their city is not providing them with enough recreational and
social activities, and our cities are ugly, chaotic, noisy,
frightening, and unpleasant. If we were living
clean, and quiet cities, and if we reduced crime to extremely low
levels, and if the city government was providing lots of recreational
and social activities, we would have less of an interest in leaving
our city and more of an interest in enjoying it.
not let computers
provide us with video of ourselves?
I suspect that we would see a
decrease in the interest in taking
photos if we were living in a city in which computers were keeping
track of us and recording video of us at recreational
social clubs, weddings, and other events. In that type of city, we
would have access to a tremendous about of video of ourselves
our friends, and without any effort. The computers would not
provide us with video that is as entertaining as if humans were
operating the cameras, but I think we would enjoy it, anyway.
Right now the software to control video
cameras and track people is crude, and voice recognition software could
use some improvements, but imagine living in a city in which the
software is more advanced. In that type of city, you could get together
with your friends in one of the thousands of small video rooms in the
city and give the computer some voice commands, such as: "Show us the video of when we were at the
city festival five years ago and playing volleyball at the beach."
computer would know who is in the room, and who was speaking, so it
would look in its database of video and find those people five years
ago at the city festival when they were playing volleyball. It would
then display it on the large, high resolution video monitor for them to
watch, as in the image below.
you use that system if you had access to it? Even though the video from
that system would be coming from cameras that were not controlled as
well as people would do, I think the system would be so simple to use,
and provide us with so much video about ourselves, that most people
would enjoy using the system once in a while to look back at their
life, and that of their friends and family members. It
is conceivable that we lose some of our interest in watching strangers
play sports and develop a greater interest in reminiscing about our
Technology offers us a tremendous number of
options. I can only imagine a few of the possibilities. Thousands of
years ago, nobody could have imagined that we would have computers,
airplanes, and food products from around the world. As soon as we start
exploring our cultural options, we are going to start discovering all
sorts of ways to improve city festivals, schools, leisure activities,
of years from now the people are likely to have holiday celebrations,
economic systems, recreational activities, and social clubs that we
cannot imagine, but which we would consider to be superior
what we have today. They are also likely to create cities that are more
beautiful, quiet, and orderly than anything we can imagine, and with
transportation systems, swimming areas, parks, and recreational
facilities that are superior to anything we can fantasize
However, we are not going to improve anything as long as
people are frightened to explore their options, and as long as we allow
our world to be dominated by criminals and monarchies.
Businesses are trying to convince us to pay a fee to watch strangers
play sports, music, Jeopardy,
and other games, but I think we will have more fun playing the games
ourselves, watching our friends and family members play them, and
recording the events on
video so that we can scan through them decades later and reminisce
about our life.
A lot of people today do not want to reminisce
about their life because
their life has been unpleasant. I think this is more evidence that
people today are not
truly enjoying life. When most people get old, they do not want to
start singing, "What
a Wonderful World". Rather,
I suspect that one of the ways that we can conclude that we have truly
improved our society is when we notice that a larger number of people enjoy
reminiscing about their past.
do you enjoy
the most about Christmas?
Because of our craving for material
items, and because we enjoy giving gifts, Christmas has evolved through
the centuries to become a holiday in which we give lots of gifts to one
material items truly provided us with happiness, then people would
enjoy reminiscing as they watched video of themselves opening presents
at Christmas. Although many people take photos or videos of
Christmas, there are two important aspects of this to notice:
|My parents took only a few
photos during Christmas holidays, and they show family members, such as
the one above of me and my two brothers. My parents did not
take photos of gifts, Christmas trees, or food. What do your
Christmas photos show?
1) Most people focus
the camera on the people,
not the gifts.
we truly received pleasure from material items, then the person with
the camera would focus attention on the gifts
than the people.
2) Years later, when we look at the photos or video, most of us
enjoy the memories of the people, not of
Furthermore, if material items were the most exciting
aspect of Christmas, we would be just as happy to spend
Christmas alone, and we would be just as
happy to purchase gifts for ourselves. However, to most of us, the
would be a Christmas that we spent alone, not a
Christmas in which we did not have any gifts.
To complicate this issue, everybody has slightly different emotional
characteristics, so each of us enjoys slightly different aspects of
example, to the people who have an above-average craving for material
items, the gifts of Christmas will have more
significance to them
compared to the people who have a below-average interest in material
To further complicate this issue, since we are not controlling
reproduction, every generation has more diversity
in emotional and intellectual qualities than the previous generation,
and more defects. This is
resulting in a wider variety of people, which in turn means that
different people are enjoying different aspects of Christmas.
Even worse, some of the defective people are enjoying "abnormal"
aspects of Christmas. For example, the
pedophiles may regard Christmas as an opportunity to dress up as Santa
Claus and fondle children. To the religious fanatics, Christmas may be
a celebration of Jesus. To people with extreme cravings for food, the
most exciting aspect of Christmas may be the food
To the "normal" people, the most exciting aspect of
Christmas are the people. However, since we are
titillated by receiving gifts, and we enjoy giving gifts, especially to
children, most people come to the false conclusion that gifts
are the most exciting aspect of Christmas.
As a result, most people waste their Christmas holidays on gift related
activities, such as shopping and packaging gifts, and returning some of
the gifts after Christmas is over. They focus their attention on
objects that have no meaning to them. This is one of the reasons they
don't want to reminisce about their life. Who wants to reminisce about
shopping for gifts, opening gifts, or returning gifts?
If we were to live in the kind of city that I've suggested, there would be no
gift giving of any type during any of our holidays. There would be no
businesses or organized religions to manipulate the holidays, either.
Christmas would be a social affair
for us to get together to enjoy the winter recreational activities,
enjoy the people, and enjoy life.
Christmas could extend for weeks if we wanted it to. It could be a time
of city festivals and recreational activities. Some people might enjoy
getting together to sing at the festivals, and others might like to get
the together to decorate the city, and others might enjoy taking
children on an exploration of the forest to show them how it changes
during the winter. By getting together with people and doing things
with them, we have something to record on video, and we have something
to reminisce about when we get older.
regard obese people as
having low self-control, but not
wants to be obese, and we all enjoy criticizing other
people, so we all enjoy criticizing obese people for having
self-control, or for being stupid and/or neurotic.
However, we have
such strong cravings for material wealth that we do not
regard people with enormous wealth as being analogous to obese people.
not regard the wealthy people as
having low self-control, or as being
neurotic. Rather, most people believe that the more material wealth we
have, the better our life will be. Not many people believe that there
is a point at which they have acquired so much material wealth that
they are interfering with their lives and happiness. Our emotions are
titillated so strongly by gigantic mansions, private jets, gigantic
yachts, and goldplated phones that most people cannot believe that it
is possible to have "too much" material wealth.
If people would put some effort into thinking about the issue of
material wealth, most people probably have the intelligence necessary
to understand that
after a person has acquired a certain amount of material wealth,
anything beyond that becomes a nuisance and a burden, but just as
most people have trouble controlling their consumption of food, most
people have trouble controlling their craving for
material wealth. Some people have so little self-control that they will
commit crimes to get more material items, and some people will form
friendships and marriages simply to get access to more wealth.
To make the situation worse, we have a strong desire to
compete with one another, and that causes us to compare our
pile of material items to the pile of other people. We want to
acquire more than they have,
even if it makes no sense to have more, and even if we hurt ourselves
in the process of acquiring more.
|The magazines that glorify
material wealth should also be described as a form of pornography.
Every society is currently promoting the
attitude that the people who
acquire extremely large quantities of material wealth are admirable,
talented people who are superior to the rest of us. Most women
seem to fantasize about marrying a wealthy man, and there
are enormous numbers of men
struggling to become wealthy, often through illegal or immoral
Imagine if a group of monkeys were to behave in this manner. Imagine if
a few of the monkeys acquired such enormous piles of bananas that most
of the bananas were rotting before they could eat them. Imagine the
other monkeys reacted by admiring those monkeys, and struggling to
create gigantic piles of bananas for themselves. You would not
admire those monkeys. You would regard them as neurotic.
people would be embarrassed to watch a pornography video or look at a
Playboy magazine in a public location, such as an airline terminal,
cafe, train, or the waiting room of a doctor's office. They would be
even more embarrassed to masturbate as they watched
However, every society considers it normal and acceptable for people to
look at magazines that glorify and stimulate our cravings for material
wealth. Many businesses, doctors, and dentists even put those type of
magazines in their lobby.
What is the difference between a
person who is sitting in a lobby of a hospital and masturbating while
he looks at a Playboy magazine, and a person who is stimulating himself
as he looks at magazines that glorify material wealth? It is exactly
the same behavior, but the people are stimulating different emotions.
a free enterprise system, we get whatever we want, even if it is
stupid, wasteful, or detrimental. For example, businesses are providing
us with a wide variety of magazines and videos for us to stimulate
various emotions. There are magazines to stimulate our sexual cravings,
our cravings for material wealth, a woman's craving for babies, a
woman's craving for weddings, a man's craving for status, and our
craving to lounge and be pampered.
The magazines titillate us,
which causes us to be attracted to them and to assume that they are
good for us, but pornographic material is harmful
it causes us to develop unrealistic goals, and to imagine that we are
suffering because we don't have whatever we see in the photos.
For example, a lot of people have developed the belief that an infinity
pool is more exciting than a regular swimming pool.
infinity pool is exciting only because they are so
people who have one can jerk themselves off by telling themselves that
they are special people for having one. If infinity pools were common,
then the businesses would compete with one another to find some other
type of unusual pool to titillate the wealthy people with.
think we would find that our lives improve if we take control of our
economic system and prohibit journalists and businesses from
stimulating us and exploiting us. Businesses should compete to improve
society, not to make profit. Journalists should be competing to provide
us with useful information, not to titillate us. Our economic system is
encouraging idiotic and wasteful behavior, and causing people to
develop idiotic goals in life.
culture is a reflection of our mental characteristics
we were to put all of the obese people in their own city, their
cravings for food would slowly cause their social affairs to evolve
around food. Birthday parties, Christmas celebrations, weddings, and
other activities would increase their emphasis on food, and they would
provide excessive amounts of food.
If we were to put all of the
religious fanatics in their own city, their attraction to religion
would slowly cause their social affairs to become more
religious. Their birthday parties, Christmas celebrations, weddings,
city decorations, and other culture would become increasingly involved
If a society consisted of people who enjoy becoming intoxicated, their
culture would evolve into
regarding drunken people as amusing, and they would provide
beverages at weddings, to the winners of sports events, and at other
If people like Tony Podesta and Biljana
Djurdjevic dominated society, then the artwork would evolve into what
they supposedly like, such as the image
to the right, which is
a portion of one of Djurdjevic's paintings. And, of course,
the social activities would evolve to fit whatever they enjoy.
At Voodoo Doughnut in Portland Oregon, which I mentioned in the
previous document as using a pedophile symbol in their logo, they have
in which the men compete to fit the most donuts on their penis.
They also produce a cream filled doughnut that is supposed to
look like a penis and testicles. They refer to it as the Cock-N-Balls
doughnut. If our nation had a greater percentage of those type of
then more of our food products would be shaped like sex organs, and
there would be more contests and activities that have a sexual
aspect to them.
Now imagine a city in
which everybody has a lot of self-control over their cravings for food,
material items, status, envy, sex, revenge, and anger. Their social
affairs would slowly change through time, also, but in a different way.
For example, they would have food at many of
their social affairs, but they would be more likely to arrange it in
artistic manners rather than
sexual manners. They might have contests, also, but they would prefer
contests that were safe and fun rather than dangerous, sexual, or
Our culture is changing haphazardly through time to fit the emotional
desires of the people in society. Also, many businesses,
and other organizations try to manipulate culture for their
selfish benefit, and some government officials try to manipulate our
culture to appease their supporters or themselves.
Obese people want more food; religious
fanatics want more religion; the gun fanatics want more guns;
people who have abnormally strong cravings for sex want more sex; and
almost everybody craves more material wealth and land. Our cravings are
causing us to inadvertently modify our culture in order to give us what
we want. Unfortunately, what we want is not always what we need. We are
allowing our culture to become inappropriate and irrational.
Everybody has cravings for something, and we believe that satisfying
our cravings will make us happier, but this is not true.
We cannot increase our happiness simply by satisfying an emotional
craving, and we do not ruin our life simply by
refusing to satisfy an emotional craving.
prehistoric ancestors had
the same strong cravings for food, material items,
children, weapons, and status, as you and I do, but
their cravings could
never get out of control. It was impossible for them to acquire
enormous amounts of material items or food. They could not
arrange for thousands of sports contests, beauty pageants, Nobel
prizes, and other contests, or provide the winners with giant
trophies or large amounts of money. They could not
provide themselves with pornography, either, and it was impossible for
them to create organized religions with giant churches and religious
In this modern world, our technology
allows us to go to extremes in
order to titillate our emotional cravings. For example, we can produce
food in such enormous quantities that we become obese, and we can
produce enormous amounts of religious materials, such as
gigantic statues of Jesus that overlook the city.
Men today have access to enormous amounts of
pornography that allows us to stimulate ourselves beyond the level that
is natural for us, and for longer periods of time, but we are not
improve our lives with more sexual titillation. Women
access to enormous quantities and varieties of dolls and pet dogs that
they can use to titillate their cravings for babies, but that is not
going to improve their lives, either.
People assume that they are enjoying life as a result of
large quantities of food, material items, sex,
religion, and guns, but we do not increase our
enjoyment of life
simply by eating more food, having more sex, acquiring more
material items, becoming more famous, or spending more time
to Jesus. Life is not that simple.
Unfortunately, people who don't want to think about what
they are doing, or who don't have the intellectual ability to
understand these concepts, will assume that
they are increasing their happiness as they titillate their emotional
We assume that we become happy when we satisfy our
cravings, but we were designed for an environment in which we never
what we want. Animals were designed to work
every day. We were designed for an environment in which we
never have as much
food, sleep, or material items as we want. We were designed to enjoy
the pursuit of our cravings. We get the most
enjoyment from the process
of trying to achieve our goals, not from the achievement
of the goals.
We create fantasies of having lots of material wealth and food, and of
being admired and pampered, and of spending our time relaxing and
sleeping, but we were not designed to achieve our fantasies.
We were designed to struggle to achieve our
fantasies, and to deal with problems in the
We fantasize about lounging around on yachts while servants pamper us,
but that would become incredibly boring after a few
weeks. We are
happiest in an environment in which we are under pressure to do
something, and something
that other people appreciate.
illusion of happiness
Most people believe that they are
when they can do what they want, and they believe they are miserable
when they have to do something they don't want to do. As a result,
businesses, journalists, schools, and governments
can fool people into believing that they are happy simply by pandering
to them. For some examples of how you can fool a
person into liking you and thinking that you are helping to
make him happy:
• If a person wants to eat excessive
amounts of food, don't
argue with him. Let him eat excessive amounts and he will believe that
he is happy, whereas if you try to control his food consumption, or if
you criticize him, he will assume that you are
making him suffer.
If he becomes sick, obese, or develops diabetes from his excessive food
consumption, don't reprimand him for making stupid decisions about
Let him react in whatever manner he pleases. For example, if he wants
to follow some idiotic diet, give him whatever diet he wants to try. If
he wants to inject himself with insulin rather than lose weight,
then provide him with insulin.
Let him do anything he pleases, no matter how worthless or
because every time he does something that he wants to do, he will
receive some pleasure. He will assume that he is enjoying life
result of that momentary pleasure, and that you are his friend, even if
he is actually making his
life more miserable.
• If a person wants to feel important, then create a contest for
him that he can win. Because people have different abilities,
requires we create lots of contests. For example, the Olympics offers
contests to run 60 meters, 100 meters, 200 meters, 400 meters, 800
meters, and so on, and some of those contests have hurdles to jump over.
people who are not athletic, set up some other contest, such
eating the most hard-boiled eggs in five minutes. The entertainers have
created dozens of awards for themselves, such as
Creative Spirit Award, Golden Globe awards, and the Oscars.
people with contests that they can win, even if the contests seem
idiotic to you. The people who win the contest will be titillated every
time they win a contest, and they will
assume that they are enjoying life as a result, and that you are
for creating the contest, even though you might regard
the contest as a waste of their life.
• If a person
wants a large trophy rather than a small
trophy, then give him a large
trophy. As long as he is getting what he wants, he will feel happy,
even if he is getting nothing of value, and even if he puts himself
through a lot of stress and frustration in the process
• If a person wants to collect excessive amounts of material
him, even if it clutters his home, puts a financial burden on him, or
causes him to waste a lot of his time maintaining his items.
• If a person wants some advice, then give him whatever advice
he wants some criticism, then give him whatever criticism that
However, don't give him real advice or real criticism. Give
him whatever he wants. For example, when
people ask, "Do you
hair?", they usually want you to say "Yes".
If you sense that they have doubts about their hairstyle, then you
could say "no". Tell people what they want to hear and you will make
them feel good, and they will like you.
• If a student wants good grades in
school, then give him good grades,
he wants a diploma, then give him a diploma. Don't make him earn what
he wants; just give it to him. The high grades and
diploma will be meaningless, but he will feel good because he will get
what he wants.
• If parents want to boast about their
child doing well at
school, don't criticize them. Instead, give them bumper
stickers to put on their car, such as the one to the right.
If you pander to a person, you will fool him into thinking
that you are his friend, and that he is
happy. This is the reason democracies and free enterprise systems are
so attractive to us. Democracies cause government officials to
pander to us, and free enterprise systems cause businesses to
to us. No matter what we want or complain about, some government
business will try to please us.
If a person wants Hollywood gossip, don't argue with him. Give him
whatever gossip he is interested
In a free enterprise system, businesses promote the attitude that "The Customer Is King". Some
businesses advertise their services with such phrases as, "You're number one with us!"
Animals have cravings to be at the top of the hierarchy, so we are
titillated when businesses pretend that we are special, and that they
are subservient to us.
We can even ask for something ridiculous, and some business or
government official will try to please us. For some examples:
Do you want to fantasize that you are a race car driver or a
bicycle racer? Businesses will sell you imitation racing cars, such as
Lamborghinis and Corvettes, so that you can imagine that you have a
race car, and they will sell you lightweight, imitation racing bicycles
that you can imagine that you are a bicycle racer. (I have
about imitation racing bikes.)
If you let a person do whatever he pleases, and if you tell him
whatever he likes to hear, he will assume he is happy.
He will also appreciate you, even if you are
hurting him and exploiting him. However, if you interfere with
his attempt to satisfy himself, or if you criticize him, he will assume
that you are making him suffer, "insulting" him, and "oppressing" him.
become angry with you, even if you are actually helping him.
• Do you want to live forever? The Cryonics Institute will freeze
you in liquid nitrogen, and store you until the technology becomes
available to give you eternal life, and the Ambrosia company will give
of blood from younger people.
• Are you worried about aliens from another planet abducting you?
Businesses will sell you insurance policies to protect you and your
family from that
• Do you want to go to
the moon or Mars? Businesses will provide you with that opportunity,
will provide you with movies in which you can pretend that you are an
• Do you want to believe that you have a free press, and that people in
other nations are victims of propaganda? Journalists and authors will
sell you news reports that let you read about how our journalists are
honest and providing us with the truth, and that other nations are
deceived with propaganda.
Who is our friend? Who is helping to improve our life, and who
is exploiting us? Most people routinely make terrible decisions about
this issue. For example, most voters are attracted to candidates who
provide them with praise, and who promise them whatever they want. As a
result, the voters are routinely electing liars.
Our natural tendency is to behave like Katie
assumed that a man who gave her a lot of praise and attention was her
Democracies and free enterprise systems provide us with government and
business leaders who pander to us, and that allows us to satisfy our
cravings, which creates the illusion that we are
happy. Whenever we satisfy one of our cravings, we experience some
momentary titillation, and that causes us to assume that we
are enjoying life, even if we are actually hurting ourself. By
comparison, whenever somebody
interferes with our attempt to satisfy one of our cravings, we assume
that we are suffering, even if he is doing something beneficial for us.
Democracies and free enterprise create a
society in which people are
constantly trying to titillate themselves over and over, like a rat
with an electrode in its brain. They are not
enjoying life; rather, they are
simply titillating themselves.
Democracies and free enterprise systems are fooling people into
believing that they are happy when in reality most people are so
miserable that they don't want to reminisce about their life. They want
to forget about their past. When they get old, they
don't have a collection of wonderful memories to look back on and
talk about. They have miserable memories of fighting, frustration,
loneliness, and awkwardness.
In our current economic and government system, the people are treated
as Kings and Queens, but in the government system I propose, the people
will be treated as team members. They will be
treated like soldiers in a military, or employees of a business. The
government officials and businesses would create policies to create a
stable society, not to please the people.
In order for that type of government and economic system to be
successful, the people must be able to exert enough self-control to
think about what is best for society. People cannot assume that they
are suffering simply because they cannot do something that they want to
do. As with employees of a business, they will have to think of what is
best for the organization.
who cannot exert enough self-control, or who cannot understand these
concepts, are not going to be able to become
members of a more rational
society. They will want to behave like animals that chase after
emotional titillation. They will become upset when they cannot get what
free enterprise system has become inappropriate
The free enterprise system was practical
many centuries ago because most of the people were self-employed
farmers or business owners, and there was not much business
activity. Today the situation has reversed
itself. All of us are purchasing almost everything we use and eat.
Furthermore, most people are employees, and they
working to help make some business executives and investors extremely
wealthy. They are not working for themselves, or
Animals evolved to satisfy themselves. They were
not designed to be slaves or servants of some other animal. Humans are
even more advanced than the animals. We want to work in teams for the
benefit of the team. We do not get much satisfaction from working to
make somebody else wealthy.
Free enterprise works very well for primitive people, and it is the
only system that they are capable of understanding, but it is becoming
increasingly undesirable as our technology increases and our societies
become more complex. In this modern world, our jobs would
be more satisfying if we could work with other
people, and for the benefit of society, as opposed
to working for a few business executives, and for
the purpose of making them extremely wealthy, especially if
we are also doing a job that is worthless or detrimental to society.
easy to manipulate people's desires
We enjoy getting what we want,
but many people don't realize that a lot of what they want is
actually something that other people want. As I
pointed out in other documents, we pick up bits of information from
other people as we grow up, and I use the word "information"
to include "goals" and "desires". As a result, many of the goals
that we have set for ourselves are not actually "our" goals.
Rather, we are picking up ideas from other people on how to spend our
life. Our goals are influenced by the information that we were exposed
It is very easy to deceive people into believing that they
are getting what they want when in reality they are being manipulated.
simple example is that businesses arrange for contests and awards, such
as food eating contests, athletic contests, beauty pageants, and awards
for setting world records. At the Guinness World Records website, this
page is encouraging people to apply for the fastest time to cut
If a person were to practice cutting pumpkins underwater, and if he
win the world record for doing it, he would be proud of himself. He
would assume that he has achieved what he wanted to achieve. However,
it would make more sense to describe the situation as a person who has
been manipulated into desiring such an award, and then foolishly
wasting his time trying to achieve a goal that he had no interest in,
and does not benefit from.
schools, governments, and other organizations offer us thousands
of contests and awards, and this stimulates our competitive
nature. This causes some people to put a lot of time and effort into
practicing for the contests, and other people to become spectators of
All of the participants and spectators of the contest
believe that they are doing what they want to do, and they believe they
are happy doing it, but in reality, they have been manipulated into
desiring something that they did not have any
There are thousands of people practicing to win beauty contests, food
eating contests, and athletic contests. The people who are practicing
to win contests believe that they are doing what they want, but if they
had been raised in a society in which they had the basic necessities
for free, and there were no financial prizes for
winning contests, would those people continue to be interested
in putting phenomenal amounts of time and effort into practicing for
those contests? I don't think so.
In a different environment, our desires and goals would
change. For example, if we remove the financial rewards for
winning contests, we will still enjoy competing with one another, but
we will be interested only in competitions that are more casual and
safe, and which provide us with entertainment, exercise,
magazines and television shows that glorify material wealth and
traveling are also causing people to develop goals and desires that
they would otherwise never have. The people who take a trip to Tahiti
to lounge on the beach assume that they are doing what they want to do,
but the businesses gave them that idea. They would have saved a lot of
time, money, and trouble if they had lounged inside their own home.
The religions also manipulate their members into doing things, such
putting displays of a baby Jesus on their front lawn at Christmas, or
traveling through neighborhoods to recruit new
their religion. The
people who get involved with those activities believe that they are
doing what they want to do, but the religions manipulated them into
having those desires.
If the government were to prohibit food eating contests, and
competitions to cut pumpkins underwater, many people would become angry
that the government is interfering with their life and their pursuit of
happiness. However, if we could provide ourselves with higher quality
government officials, then we would benefit if they
promoted beneficial activities and prohibited the idiotic,
wasteful, destructive, and dangerous activities.
Parents do not set up idiotic activities or contests for their
children to participate in. Parents don't arrange contests for their
children to eat the most hotdogs, or to set a world
record for sitting in a tub of ice water. Parents try to
activities that are more beneficial.
parents do not stimulate their children into desiring material items or
vacations by showing them photos of infinity pools, or children
lounging on a beach in Tahiti, or showing them photos of toys and candy
Actually, if parents were to stimulate their children with
photos of candy bars and toys, most people would describe them as
"tormenting" the children. What is the difference between parents who
are doing that to their children, and businesses that are stimulating
adults with magazines and television programs of material wealth?
If the voters would provide us
with leaders who behave like parents, then our government would design
a city to
provide recreational and social activities that have more value to us
than those that the businesses and religions are currently providing.
the government would not permit businesses or other organizations to
stimulate people with any type of pornographic material. The government
would insist that all businesses and organizations encourage beneficial
attitudes and behavior.
We will not improve our lives simply by having government officials or
businesses pander to us, or by having schools
give us good grades or diplomas, or by having journalists tell us that
we have a free press. We are animals, and we get the most satisfaction
from life by being a
member of a
society, and working with our friends to do something useful for the
does not always provide us with jobs that we can get satisfaction from,
does not encourage people to work together for the benefit of society.
It encourages fighting between businesses, and it encourages people to
focus excessively on material items and money. It encourages people to
regard one another as profit-making opportunities or as enemies rather
than as people and friends. It also encourages a lot of idiotic
A democracy does not give us what we need, either. In order to
improve our lives, we have to stop being fooled by our
emotions into thinking that happiness comes from pleasing ourselves.
Parents don't pander to their children, and governments
should not pander to the people, either.
blood transfusions prevent old age or death?
Incidentally, I mentioned that the
Ambrosia company will give transfusions of young people's blood to
extend a person's life. Blood
transfusions can indeed help a person whose body cannot maintain proper
chemistry, just as a
kidney dialysis machine can help people with defective
but the beneficial effect is only for a few days. People who have blood
problems would need the transfusions or dialysis machines on a regular
Furthermore, those type of treatments will not stop
from growing old and dying because those treatments cannot extend
our life. Rather, all they can do is delay the death of a sickly person
so that he might be able to live as long as the people
in better health.
people who have problems with their blood chemistry might benefit from
transfusions, but they might also benefit by taking
whatever they are missing, such as vitamins or thyroid hormones, or by
machines clean their blood. They don't need to have transfusions
The fact that so many people want transfusions of blood that businesses
are developing to satisfy them makes me wonder if some
people are involved with the kidnapping and killing of children for
their blood. I saw an
accusation on the Internet that
George Soros wanted Madeline McCann because he believes
that she has the type of blood that he needs. Is that just an idiotic
rumor? Or are some wealthy people actually buying children from
and kidnapping other children, and then killing those children for
If you feed a wild animal of certain
species, it will eventually become accustomed to getting
food from you, and it will come back for more food. You will train it
to become a parasite. The situation is even worse if you do this to the
children of the wild animal. Those children might become dependent
upon you for food because they might not bother to learn how to survive
Animals have a craving to spend every day relaxing, and
every night sleeping. They do not want to work, be responsible, think,
learn, or have discussions. If animals
could have inheritances, trust funds, welfare, Social Security, tax
alimony, they would take it. Animals would not be too proud to take
handouts. They don't have any desire to earn what they want. If they
could make a living by investing in the stock market, or by winning
lotteries, or by marrying somebody wealthy, they would do so.
Animals also grab at whatever attracts their attention. They don't
care how they get what they want. They have no desire to earn what they
want. If some animals are living in an area where humans were regularly
putting food in an area where the animals could grab at it, they would
take it from us. If they were successful in grabbing the food, they
would come back to do it the next day, and they would do this
throughout their entire lives, and without any guilt or shame.
Actually, there are animals doing this right now. For example, there
are seagulls regularly grabbing food from people along piers, and there
are monkeys in some nations regularly grabbing food from tourists.
a result of these characteristics, animals are easily
domesticated. A domesticated animal is a parasite
that becomes accustomed to handouts and pampering. If we want
a domesticated animal to do something for us, we have to offer
it food and attention as a reward. However, the animal is not actually
doing something for us. Rather, it is doing
something for the reward.
can also become domesticated. If there were some aliens from another
solar system offering to give us free robots to be our maids, cooks,
and gardeners, and if they were offering to provide us with free and
wonderful food and material items, we would take the offer. Most people
would quit their job and survive on the free food, free material items,
and free robots. We would become like domesticated pets. Who among us
would refuse the free robots or free material items?
Some people might claim that they would not take
handouts from aliens from another solar system, but we cannot
believe what people say about themselves. People are arrogant, and we
are always looking for opportunities to boast about ourselves.
The history of the human race shows that people enjoy being
parasitic. Take a look at the primitive
nations. All of them are parasitic. The people in the
primitive nations constantly beg for handouts, especially food and
services. They also want our handouts when they suffer from earthquakes
or floods. Has there ever been a nation that suffered an earthquake or
drought and then told the other nations, "No,
don't help us! We need to learn how to deal with these problems and
take care of ourselves."
Our emotions have cravings for food, sex, status, and other things, but
we don't have any craving to earn what we want. We
want things, but we don't care how we get them. As
a result, our emotions are attracted to the concept of getting
something for nothing.
Businesses take advantage of this
characteristic by offering us things
for free. Our emotions have a difficult time resisting an offer that is
"free". In reality, businesses are not providing
us with anything that
is free. We are paying indirectly for all of the free items.
The offers of free items are deceptive. We could describe it as abusive
and disgusting because the businesses are
treating us like dogs on a race track who are chasing after a
All humans have these crude characteristics, so don't let your
yourself into believing that you are better than the rest of us and are
not attracted to offers of free
items, or that you are not easily domesticated.
All of us need to exert some self-control and think about what we are
doing so that we can avoid being manipulated by offers of
free items, and resist becoming parasitic, domesticated
In this modern world, we need to learn about our crude characteristics
rather than pretend they don't exist. We must face the evidence that
we are animals, and that some
of our qualities are undesirable today.
In addition to being attracted to free
items, our emotions want us to grab at whatever we are
attracted to, just like pets that
meat on the kitchen counter.
People often giggle at this behavior when animals do it, but it is not
amusing when humans do it. This characteristic causes a lot
and in addition, it causes a lot of fights between
People all around the world are regularly
grabbing at one another's material items, land, children, and resources.
This behavior is also occurring among our leaders. For example,
business executives and investors try to grab all the material
for themselves. They boast that they are earning
their billions of
dollars, but it makes no
sense to say that
some people are earning that much money. Those people are simply
grabbing at what they want.
If some aliens from another solar system were to visit
us, we would find that billions of
people would beg the
aliens for handouts, especially medical services, and that
many people would try to steal items from them.
men would try to rape their females or, in the case of our government
officials, rape their children.
the aliens were willing to give us robots and material wealth, we would
take it. This would create a world in which the human children were
growing up in an environment in which the adults were getting
everything they wanted from the aliens and the robots, and that would
cause the children to lose their incentive to learn a skill and get a
The children would
become so dependent upon the aliens and robots that they would be
survive without them. They would become just like domesticated animals.
If aliens refused to give us
technology, and if they also refused to help us when earthquakes
destroyed our cities, many people would become angry
but would they be hurting us by doing nothing? Or would they be helping
When zoologists observe wild animals, they do not
feel sorry for the
animals. They do not give the animals food when they are hungry, and
they do not help the dying animals to survive. They merely observe
animals, and they allow them to eat one another, die from accidents,
and die from diseases.
We need to follow the same philosophy with humans. We are not helping
the primitive nations when we give them handouts. When they experience
earthquakes or hurricanes, we should ignore their suffering and deaths.
We can provide them with advice and information, but they need
learn how to deal with the problem themselves. Handouts simply
encourage people to become parasitic crybabies who
whine for more handouts.
The only sensible way to help other people and other societies is to
provide them with information. If the people of a
foreign nation cannot or will not use that information to take care of
themselves, that is their problem, not ours.
handouts to primitive nations can also inadvertently help to
support corrupt or incompetent governments
For example, if the North Korean people were to experience such a
shortage of food that some of them began dying of hunger, what should
happen is that the North Korean people become so disgusted
their nation that they make changes to their economic system and/or
government, thereby improving their nation. However, if we feel sorry
for them and give them food, we will pacify the people, thereby
dampening their desire to improve their nation.
In the previous
document of this series, I pointed out that humans and animals have a
high tolerance for abuse. Our natural tendency is to ignore
problems until they become severe. We have to suffer to an
before we are willing to make changes to our attitudes or
society. This is especially true of the people who call themselves
"conservatives". Therefore, when primitive nations suffer
from problems, we should let them suffer,
and we should tell them to do something to fix their
must face the evidence that we are monkeys
We are not going to improve our world by
lying to ourselves about what we are. We
are monkeys, and there are genetic
between us that make some of us inferior to others.
We need to understand ourselves, exert some self-control,
and design a world that makes intellectual sense, even if it is
are constantly fantasizing about getting lots of money through
investments, gambling, winning lotteries, marrying somebody wealthy, or
by creating a popular YouTube video, book, or business. Not many people
fantasize about earning what they want, or getting together with other
maintain their city. We fantasize
about lounging, being pampered by servants, having other people grow
food for us, and having servants to clean up our messes.
fantasies are unrealistic and absurd, and we should encourage
one another to stop these fantasies and be more
Television programs, books, and magazines should stop glorifying
material wealth, Hollywood celebrities, and retirement. They should
stop making it seem as if people who are lounging are having more fun
than people who are working. We should
stop promoting the belief that children who have trust funds and
inheritances are having a better life than children who have to work
for everything they want.
Humans have a greater interest in taking care of themselves than
animals, but this desire is not equal in all of us. At one extreme are
the people who have the least concern about earning what they want.
They will beg for donations and handouts without any shame,
embarrassment, or guilt. Many
of them will commit crimes to get what they want. They
are frequently looking for ways to make money without doing anything in
return. Those people should not be allowed in influential
societies are currently dominated by people who want to be pampered
Kings and Queens. They are promoting a crude, animal-like
philosophy. We should restrict leadership positions to people who will
team members, and who work with us and live
are a lot of possible government systems, but the democracy is the most
appealing to us because it satisfies our craving to be
important and have other
people pander to us. In order for us to create a
better world, we need to exert some self-control and give ourselves the
type of government we need rather than the government we want. We need
leadership, not pampering.
A democracy causes humans to behave like
domesticated animals. It causes people to become accustomed to
getting whatever they want. It encourages us to make demands of other
people. It does not encourage us to control
ourselves, think, learn about ourselves, deal with criticism, or work
with people for the
benefit of the team.
A democracy encourages everybody to believe
that they are so educated and intelligent that they will make
decisions about which political candidate to vote for, and what the
best policies are for abortion, terrorism, and unemployment. It
encourages people to become arrogant.
line shows that the government has been hiring people continuously
since 1939. The
blue line shows the people in manufacturing.
Another problem with democracies is that
because we do not
like to work, and since a democracy gives voters control over the
government, many voters pressure the government to provide
them with jobs in the government, and they pressure
government into making it difficult to fire somebody. This causes the
every year, and to accumulate a lot of useless employees.
Most of the growth in the United States government has been among local
governments, and some people justify the growth by pointing out that
the population is increasing, but
that does not justify hiring more government
employees or increasing taxes. We have to judge a government according
to what it does for us. We should provide job
performance reviews to government employees.
What are the local government employees doing for
their city? What are
the state employees doing for their state?
What are the federal
government employees doing for the nation?
growth in government would be acceptable if the government employees
were providing us with useful services, but in a democracy, there is no
quality control department to ensure that government
employees are doing
something useful. Instead, the voters
are supposed to watch over the government and tell the government
officials what to do.
Also, government employees are allowed to vote, which creates a conflict
of interest. Specifically, the government employees are not
likely to vote
for candidates who will make
government employees do useful work, or who will reduce the size of
end result of a democracy is that the government
becomes large and
inefficient. Instead of providing leadership to the
nation, the government becomes a burden.
Actually, our governments are worse than a burden; they are criminal
operations that are ruining life for everybody. The voters are so
incompetent, and so many people are so apathetic, that crime networks
have been able to dominate our governments, police departments, media,
schools, military, and other organizations.
We will never improve our nations as long as we continue to promote the
philosophy that the majority of people can make wise decisions about
voting, abortion, economic issues, and schools. We need to face the
evidence that the majority of people are unable to cope with life
today, and that we need to provide ourselves with leaders who can
provide us with intelligent guidance.
promote freedom, but we practice oppression
Everybody promotes the concept that each
of us should have freedom, and Americans are constantly boasting that
we have more freedom than the people of other nations, but in reality,
all people and all societies practice the same behavior that we see
with monkeys. Specifically, we have strong cravings to be at the top of
the hierarchy, and to force other people to do as we say. Our emotions
want to control other people, not give them freedom.
For example, the people who regard themselves as "conservatives" boast
about how they support freedom, but they do not want to provide people
with the freedom to choose assisted suicide or abortion, or to have the
freedom to use marijuana, heroin, thyroid hormones, insulin, and other
drugs. The conservatives are willing to provide us with only the
freedoms that they want, such as the freedom to own
guns, drink alcohol, and
join organized religions. They want to suppress all of the freedoms
that they don't approve of.
The conservatives are hypocrites when they
claim to support freedom. They do not support freedom. They behave just
like monkeys who want to force other people to follow their orders.
They want to be dictators, and they want us to be their slaves who obey
The liberals are also hypocrites. They claim to support
freedom, but they want us to have only the freedoms that they
approve of, and they want to suppress all other freedoms. They
also claim to promote love, peace, and nonviolence, but many of them
practice violence, hatred, tantrums, and bullying. For example, after
lost the presidential election, many of them had tantrums, some of
which were violent.
As I have mentioned many times, we cannot believe what people say about
themselves. People are arrogant, and we don't have a good understanding
of ourselves. We are constantly looking for opportunities to boast
about ourselves and criticize other people. We boast about how we
support freedom, and how we are peaceful and loving, but in reality, we
behave just like monkeys. We are dictatorial and selfish,
and we want other people to obey us, not do as they please.
are descendants of a long line of top ranking monkeys, and that has
caused us to evolve cravings to control other people,
provide them with freedom. We are hypocrites when we claim to support
We should try to understand our characteristics, and then
design a society to deal with what we really are rather than what we
like to think we are. We should design our culture so that
we dampen our crude qualities and encourage our good qualities.
For example, by changing our economic system so that we compete to
bring improvements to society rather than compete for money, our
economic system will encourage us to regard other people as friends and
look for ways to improve society, rather than encourage us to
fight with one another for money, and with no concern for how we
acquire the money.
Our culture should also encourage us to understand ourselves, such as
why we are so dictatorial. There is a sensible reason for all of our
physical and mental qualities, and it is important to understand them.
Evolution did not give us any qualities simply to annoy us, or to cause
trouble. Our qualities evolved because they served a valuable purpose.
There is a sensible reason for why high-ranking monkeys are so
dictatorial, and why they try to restrict freedom. The reason is
because this is how a group of animals create a
society. An organization
cannot exist when the members are doing whatever they please. Freedom
must be restricted in order for a group of
individuals to form an
organization. The members of an organization must be united and
coordinated, and that requires they follow an authority rather than do
whatever they please. The members can have freedom, but there has to be
limits on it.
The social animals, especially the males,
have a powerful craving to be at the top of the hierarchy, and to force
other members to follow them. Animals did not evolve a desire to
tolerate freedom. Our brains evolved a craving to force other people to
One of the reasons there are so many fights in human societies over
freedom is because there are a lot of people who don't
understand these concepts. When they are denied a particular freedom,
they react by becoming angry. They assume that they are suffering from
oppression. If people could understand that we need to put limits on
freedom, they would be less likely to whine about having more freedom.
We need leadership, and we need restrictions on freedom. Instead of
whining that we need more freedom, we should put
our effort into discussing which freedoms are beneficial,
and which freedoms should be suppressed. For
example, should people have the freedom to become obese, purchase
machine guns, drink alcohol, or have as many babies as they want? Or
should we have restrictions on some of those activities? Should we have
the freedom to experiment with medical drugs, or should we have to get
a doctor's prescription for every drug?
When we discuss these issues, we should not think about what we
personally like or dislike. We should think about what is best for society.
We should consider how providing a particular freedom, or suppressing
it, will affect society. It makes no sense to argue over right or wrong
because there is no right or wrong to the issue of freedom. Instead,
there are advantages and disadvantages to providing a freedom, and
for suppressing it. We simply have to decide what we want society to be.
of speech is a beneficial freedom
Prehistoric tribes did not need to
tolerate a difference of opinion because they did not have any
significant differences of opinion. Most of the issues that people
argue about today didn't exist in prehistoric time, such as religion,
abortion, unemployment, crime networks, and assisted suicide. In this
modern world, however, we have a lot of complex
problems to deal with,
and we will make better decisions on how to deal with our
problems when we have the freedom to discuss the issues,
and the freedom to disagree with our leaders.
Freedom of speech is valuable because it allows people to learn from
one another. However, providing people with freedom of speech does not
guarantee that they will use it. In order to benefit from this
particular freedom, a person needs the emotional ability to listen to
and think about other people's opinions. Unfortunately, because we are
arrogant creatures, and because we want to be at the top of the
hierarchy and give orders to other people, our emotions interfere with
this freedom. Our emotions want to react to critical remarks with
anger, pouting, or hiding. Also, our emotions resist listening to other
people. Our emotions want to stand on a tall pedestal and tell other
people what to think. We want to give orders to
people and criticize them, not listen to them.
Why are some people more productive as scientists? Why are some
organizations and nations achieving more technical progress? Most
people would probably answer that question by saying that some people
are more intelligent than others, but a person
needs more than intelligence in order to be productive in thinking. A
person needs the ability to listen to differences of opinion and look
critically at his own opinions. He also needs the desire to
spend a lot of time thinking, and the desire to do research.
The differences between people and nations are due to more than our
differences in intelligence and education. Our emotional
have a significant effect on our lives. The emotional
between us determine how well we learn from one another and work
together. It also affects how we spend our time, such as whether we
waste a lot of our time on hatred, envy, whining, and pouting, or
whether we spend more time thinking, researching, cleaning up after
ourselves, and being responsible.
emotional differences between zoologists, for example, can make the
difference between a zoologist who notices some similarities between
humans and monkeys, and a zoologist who cannot see any similarities
because he resists the possibility that he is a member of a species of monkey.
The people with the better emotional qualities will be noticeably more
productive. For example, if a farmer has a difficult time listening to
other people's opinions about farming, his ability to farm will be
limited to what he is capable of figuring out by himself. He will not
be able to learn from other people. Or, if he doesn't want to think, he
will resist thinking, which will result in lots of idiotic decisions.
Farmers with those emotional qualities will be less productive, even if
they have a lot of intelligence.
Our emotional characteristics have a significant effect on our lives,
activities, goals, and opinions. The people whose emotional
characteristics are more similar to animals than
modern humans, or who have genetically defective
emotional qualities, will waste more of their life hating, fighting,
pouting, whining, and being envious. They will have a more difficult
time learning from their mistakes and learning from other people,
and their resistance to thinking and research will result in
quick and simplistic decisions.
Some news reports about Donald Trump imply that he does not
want to spend much time doing research, and that he prefers to depend
on other people for information about the world. If these reports are
accurate, it would be easy for a group of people to manipulate him
because all they would have to do is censor the information that they
provide him. People who don't want to do their own research have to be
very careful about who their friends are.
The voters should look for political candidates who have demonstrated
an ability to do research and think, and who can listen to differences
of opinion, including critical opinions. Voters should look for
candidates who have shown that their opinions improve over
time because those people are showing that they have the
ability to learn from their mistakes and learn from
conservatives have boasted that a particular person is an admirable
leader because he doesn't change his opinions, but a person whose
opinions never change is actually more like a monkey than a human. How
can anybody in this modern world not change his opinions over time when
we are exposed to so much information about life? People whose
opinions don't change are obviously not learning or thinking. They are
going through life like an animal; namely, completely oblivious to all
knowledge around them.
The people who resist thinking and research, or who react to critical
remarks with anger or pouting, or who prefer to insult other people
rather than look seriously at their opinions, will promote the same
opinions over and over. Those type of people might be useful as
supervisors for teams that are doing the same tasks over and over, such
as supervising an assembly line, but they would not be very effective
in jobs where they must be able to explore the unknown, such as
supervising a team of scientists, or in a top leadership position of
Those of you who have tried to discuss the 9/11 attack, the Holocaust,
feminism, religion, euthanasia, or abortion must have noticed that a
tremendous number of people - I suspect it is the majority - cannot
discuss issues in a productive manner because they don't like to think
or do research; they react to critical remarks with anger or pouting;
and they have such a strong craving to follow the crowd that they
resist looking seriously at opinions that are non-standard.
When most people have a discussion about social or political issues,
they don't learn anything from the other people, and they don't
actually discuss anything. Rather, each of them simply promotes his
particular opinions. They have a fight, not a discussion.
like monkeys who are competing for dominance, but instead of
biting and kicking one another, they insult one another, interrupt one
another, yell at one another, make angry facial expressions, make
sarcastic remarks, and make noises to express their disapproval of one
A democracy will not work well because it requires the majority of
people to make decisions on what to do, but most people cannot have
discussions, do research, or compromise on policies. The end result is
people argue incessantly with one another. Their submissive
representatives in the government cannot do anything about a problem
when the people cannot agree on what to do, and the end result is that
most of the nation's problems are ignored. A
democratic nation is a nation without leadership, which makes it
helpless. Crime networks, other nations, and immigrants can easily take
advantage of the situation.
The organizations that have been the most successful are those in which
the leaders are more educated, intelligent, and talented than the
members, and the leaders provide guidance to the
It is possible that a democracy would work for an organization
that consists of people who are genetic clones of one another, and if
the person that the others were cloned from was in good mental
health, was capable of doing research, and was capable of compromising
on policies. In the real world, however, there is a
tremendous difference in our intellectual abilities, emotional
characteristics, and genetic defects. A democracy cannot
function when an organization consists of people with a wide range of
mental characteristics and disorders.
Democracies are becoming increasingly impractical. We must be willing
to experiment with a new government system and a new economic system in
order to improve our world.
Can you see the hypocrisy with
freedom of speech?
Freedom of speech is a valuable freedom,
but not everybody is willing to practice it all the time. This is most
noticeable when somebody tries to discuss a crime, such as "pizzagate",
the 9/11 attack, or the Holocaust. The people discussing those issues
are attacked for spreading hate speech, fake news, anti-Semitism, or
One of the techniques people use to suppress freedom of speech
is to complain that it is inappropriate to discuss certain
issues at certain events. For example, if you were trying to bring up
the Jewish involvement in the 9/11 attack at a recreational
event, music concert, or birthday party, many people would
respond that it is inappropriate to discuss political issues
at nonpolitical events. However, those people will
"inappropriate" issues if they want to discuss them.
An example of this hypocrisy occurred with the
2017 Academy Awards. Although I did not watch the ceremony, I
saw news reports in which the Jews had announced that they were going
to allow people to use the event to criticize Donald Trump. While that
might appear as if the Jews were promoting freedom of speech, they were
actually allowing criticism only of Trump, and not to provide
freedom of speech. Rather, they are becoming very frightened that they
are losing control
of the American government, and that the Trump administration might
arrest a lot of them.
news article we find that in 1978, the actress Vanessa Redgrave
criticized "Zionist hoodlums" at the Academy Awards, and she was
attacked for expressing her opinions. One Jew, Sidney Chayefsky,
responded with “I’m sick and tired
of people exploiting the Academy Awards for the propagation of their
own personal propaganda.”
If somebody criticizes a Jew at the Academy Awards, he
is "exploiting" the Academy Awards and spreading "personal propaganda",
but when Jews want to criticize somebody, they claim to be
practicing freedom of speech, or protecting the world from tyranny.
The criticism of Vanessa Redgrave and Donald Trump are examples of how
the Jews are intimidating and manipulating
the majority of people into remaining silent about certain issues, such
as the Holocaust, the 9/11 attack, and pizzagate.
The Jews also do the opposite of suppressing opinions; specifically,
they manipulate people into discussing certain issues by
giving it a lot of publicity, and by telling us that it is "going
viral", or that "everybody is talking about it".
Another example of how the Jews are hypocrites is that if we try to
discuss the evidence that Jews demolished the World Trade Center towers
with explosives, they will criticize us for discussing "conspiracy
theories". However, those same Jews will promote other
conspiracy theories on a regular basis, such as Bigfoot, the Loch Ness
monster, and UFOs.
For example, here
an article from a British newspaper about conspiracy theorists who
believe that a photo of Mars shows a squirrel. The article says that "Conspiracy theorists have made an
incredible discovery on Mars", but when we talk about
9/11, those same Jews will not produce news
articles that say "Conspiracy
theorists have made an incredible discovery about the collapse of the
World Trade Center buildings."
The Jews are not practicing freedom of speech. They
are practicing manipulation, deception, and intimidation.
Unfortunately, a lot of people, possibly the majority, do not have the
intellectual or emotional ability to understand or resist this type of
abuse. A lot of people cannot even see the evidence that Jews
dominate our media, courts, and government, and that the Jews are
discriminating against us when we apply for jobs in those organizations.
Ben Stein published a document in which he claims that Jews control
Hollywood, and years later Joel Stein (no relation to Ben
amusing article in which he complains about how dumb the Americans are
for not noticing that Jews control America. Some Jews dismiss
Joel Stein's article as satire, but is it really
Is a Jew being sarcastic when he says to
you, "Yes, we
lied about the Holocaust. The conspiracy theories are true!"
Or is he trying to manipulate you with sarcasm
into believing that the conspiracy theories are absurd? Are you smart
enough to figure this out? The television show, "Are you smarter than a
5th grader?", should be modified to, "Are you smarter than a sheeple?",
and it should ask questions such as those.
As I mentioned in a previous
document, most people need protection
from abusive people. They need protection from the weirdos who
push us into idiotic initiation ceremonies; they need protection from
the destructive people who encourage us to ignore laws and warning
signs; and they need protection from the Jews who manipulate us with
accusations of anti-Semitism, Holocaust Denial, and Fake News.
Our military and police should be protecting our freedom of speech, and
dealing with the hypocritical, dishonest, selfish, and mentally
defective people who are abusing us, manipulating us, lying to us, and
of speech requires that we exert self-control
A mother's natural tendency is to praise
her children, and to repeatedly tell them that they are talented,
good-looking, and have a wonderful personality. It is not natural for
parents to be honest about their children.
During prehistoric times, the constant praise that parents gave their
children would have been useful in helping them to develop the
confidence they needed to face the problems of their world, but in this
modern era, we need less arrogance, not more of it.
People today need
the ability to look critically at themselves and notice the good
qualities in other people. We are no longer battling one another for
survival. We need to work together. People today
need encouragement to suppress
their arrogance, not become more
It is no longer appropriate for parents to encourage their children to
be arrogant. Parents, schools, and society should teach children that
all humans are imperfect creatures with limitations and flaws. Children
should be given practice in looking critically at themselves, looking
favorably at other people, and dealing with differences of opinion,
unpleasant situations, and critical remarks. Children today
need practice in exerting self-control.
By changing our culture from encouraging arrogance to encouraging
self-control, freedom of speech, and criticism, we will reduce the
number of people who whine about being bullied, unappreciated,
oppressed, and insulted. It will also improve the ability of adults to
handle criticism and have discussions.
Of course, putting children through programs to help them practice
self-control will not ensure that they all develop appropriate levels
of self-control. No matter how well we design the school courses, we
will discover that half the population is average in regards to
self-control, and a certain percentage of the population has
unacceptably low levels of self-control. We should regard that minority
of the population as inferior to the rest of us. If we were to restrict
their reproduction, then every generation will have less of a problem
with arrogance, criticism, and self-control.
should stop tolerating people who bite
monkeys encounter problems, they react either
by running away and hiding, or by becoming angry. If a monkey becomes
angry, he reacts by yelling, throwing objects, kicking, and
hitting. Humans also react to problems by either hiding from
them, or by becoming angry with them.
In this modern world, our culture should encourage us
to exert self-control and discuss problems in a
calm manner, but culture tends to evolve to give us what we
want, and what is natural to us, rather
than give us what is best for us.
For example, the First Amendment gives us the right to "peaceably
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The men who wrote that sentence were certainly expecting people to
behave in a peaceful
and sensible manner.
However, people have been interpreting the
First Amendment in the manner that they want to
interpret it. They don't care what its purpose
was. Millions of people interpret the First Amendment to give them the
right to go into public streets and sidewalks to yell, chant
slogans, block traffic, and throw rocks.
It seems that every day
there is a group of Americans protesting about something on a public street or
sidewalk. We refer to these protests as
"freedom of speech", but we should regard this behavior as unacceptable
and destructive. It is monkey behavior. The people
involved in these protests are not
providing us with a different view of life, or with constructive
criticism. Rather, they are having a temper tantrum, and they are
trying to manipulate and intimidate us.
a business executive allowing his employees to have the freedom to yell
at other employees in the manner that Rebecca Goyette is yelling at the
police in this
video. (She claimed to be a professor of New York
University, but she lied about that. She is an artist.)
is natural for us to become angry when something bothers us, so we
consider tantrums to be "normal", but it
would be more beneficial for us to regard protests as being as
worthless and as disgusting as a child's temper tantrum, or analogous
to monkeys who are biting and
scratching one another. We should regard protests as illegal
and unacceptable. We benefit from freedom of
speech, but not from a freedom to have tantrums. We need to
make a distinction between "speech" and "tantrums".
that we have the Internet, anybody who disagrees with a government
policy or social custom should be told to post his opinions on the
will let the entire world and the future generations see and think
about his opinions. People should no longer be allowed to justify
protests in public streets and sidewalks by claiming to be expressing
If we were to restrict the reproduction of the people who are the worst
in regards to having tantrums, then each generation would have fewer
tantrums. Eventually the human race would become capable of having calm
discussions about their problems.
Another reason to prohibit protests is that
protests make the job of a policeman less
desirable. The police are expected to tolerate protesters who throw
rocks and bottles at them, spit at them, and yell at them. The more
unpleasant the job of a policeman is, the more difficult it will be to
find people willing to be policemen.
should stop tolerating lies and suppression
makes sense to suppress a person who says something that causes
trouble. A popular example is that we are justified in suppressing a
person who yells "Fire!" in a crowded building in order
to cause the people to panic.
However, some people and
opinions are being suppressed simply because the people in influential
positions disagree with our opinions. The laws against Holocaust
denial, for example, are not intended to protect
society from troublesome people; rather, they are to
protect the criminal Jews who are lying about the world wars.
Our school books, the Wikipedia, and journalists are suppressing
information about pedophile networks, global warming, the Apollo moon
landing, the 9/11 attack, the Holocaust, and people such as myself.
They are also lying to us about many events.
promote laws against "hate crimes" and "Holocaust denial" so that they
can arrest whoever tries to expose their lies, but it would make more
sense to arrest people who suppress freedom of speech. Any journalist,
teacher, government official, or business executive who we determine to
be deliberately hiding information from us in order to deceive
and manipulate us should be considered as a "criminal".
believe that they will protect society by putting people in jail for
using or selling marijuana or heroin, but they are not
of us by
arresting drug users or drug dealers. By comparison, if the police
would start arresting the people who lie to us or suppress
important information, there would be a
noticeable and dramatic improvement to our news reports, Wikipedia, and
The people who are suppressing information, and the people who
are lying to us,
are causing more damage to us than the
who are using
drugs. For some examples:
They fooled millions of people into believing that 19 Arabs
attacked us on 9/11, which tricked people into supporting a war that is
still going on.
Your life and my life have been severely and adversely
affected by the dishonest journalists and government officials. By
comparison, how has your
been harmed by people who are using drugs?
• They are deceiving millions of women into
believing that they have been oppressed for 6000 years.
By ignoring and criticizing information about pedophile networks, they
are deceiving people into thinking that the problem is not very serious.
We are currently designing laws according to how a crime affects our emotional
feelings. We must change our attitude and design laws according to how
they affect society.
enterprise systems discourage participation in life
The free enterprise system has a lot of
detrimental effects on human
life. I've mentioned some of these problems, such as
how it forces everybody to find a way to make a living, but with no
concern for what they do, and the end result is that many people make a
living through idiotic, irritating, or destructive activities.
Another problem with the free enterprise system is that businesses
encourage us to be passive,
lazy, voyeurs who pay other people to do things for us. Businesses
cannot make much profit from us when we are doing things for ourselves.
example, if we were to get together with our friends and create our own
recreational activities, music, and other entertainment, businesses
would not make nearly as much money from us compared to when we are
passive spectators of professional athletes, musicians, and
entertainers. Likewise, if we were to make our own bread, clothing,
furniture, and other items, businesses would not make nearly
much money as when they can create those products for us.
impractical to expect people to make their own computers and
telephones, but in a free enterprise system, the decisions about what
businesses provide for us and what we do for ourselves are being made
according to what will bring in the most profit, not according to what
is best for human life.
offering us thousands of different television shows, contests, music
concerts, and sports events, so almost everybody can find something he
enjoys. They are also offering thousands of food products and drinks,
so most people can find food products that they enjoy. They offer
children thousands of different types of toys.
The free enterprise offers such an enormous smorgasbord of food,
entertainment, contests, and other products and services that everybody
can find lots of items that they like. By choosing the items that we are
attracted to, we titillate our emotions, which causes us to assume that
we are enjoying life and getting what we want from it.
However, I don't think the businesses are providing us with what we
need to enjoy life. Instead, I think the free enterprise system is
encouraging us to become
like domesticated pet animals that spend most of their life in a
passive state and lounging around the house, and that this is actually
causing us to get bored, lonely,
restless, and frustrated.
Although we will not know for sure what type of life we enjoy the most
until we find the courage to start experimenting
with our culture, I suspect that most of us will have a much more
satisfying life when we get rid of the free enterprise system and
create a city in
which we are encouraged to do something rather
than watch other
people do something.
suggest experimenting with a city in which we are provided with a wide
variety of recreational facilities and equipment, theaters, musical
instruments, arts and crafts projects, museums, and other social
activities. All of the activities and equipment should be free, as if
the city is a part of our home. I think that type of environment would
encourage people to get out of their house and do something, rather
than sit in front of a television and watch other people do something.
There are some people
who are so talented with music, singing, and other activities that they
are entertaining to watch, and so the city could provide events in
which we can watch those unusually talented people, either in person or
on television, but
the watching of other people would be just one activity in our
rather than our primary leisure
Free enterprise encourages battles for money
Since the only other economic system the
world has experienced is communism, which is a failure, we assume that
free enterprise is the best possible system, but I think that free
enterprise works so well and appeals to us only because we are animals,
not because it is a wonderful system. Our natural behavior is to fight
with one another over land, food, mates, and material items, not to
share the resources.
The free enterprise system puts us into competition for food, material
items, and land, just as animals compete with one another for
land. Since women want a husband who can support a family, the free
enterprise system inadvertently also puts men into competition for
women because the men must acquire a certain amount of money in order
to attract a woman.
We need a certain amount of food and material items for our survival,
and the survival of our children, and men need to attract a woman in
order to reproduce. Therefore, the free enterprise system is putting us
into competition for items that are vital for our
reproduction, as opposed to competing over unnecessary luxuries. As a
result, the competition is very significant to us.
Nobody wants to be a loser in this type of battle. This
type of competition encourages a lot of fear, worry, fighting,
hatred, and sabotage.
The free enterprise system creates an
is similar to what we see with the animals, such as with the four
gorillas in the photo
to the right that got into a fight over a tomato.
is the difference between a group of apes fighting over a tomato, and a
group of humans fighting over material items?
Animals are in constant fear of hunger, so they do not
want to share food. Actually, animals are so fearful of hunger that
when they find food, their tendency is to eat it as fast as
possible. They do not
relax, take their time, and enjoy the meal. Furthermore, animals do not
want to eat with other animals. They prefer to eat by themselves.
They do not regard meals as a social event.
Humans are much
better than animals. We have the ability to share items to a certain
extent, and we can also relax when we eat. We
can enjoy our meals, and we can enjoy the people that
we are eating
with. However, as with animals, we have a resistance to sharing wealth
and land. The free enterprise system appeals to us because
it satisfies our animal cravings to fight over food and land,
it allows us to keep whatever we can grab for ourselves. However,
fighting over money is not an
efficient or sensible way of providing ourselves with material wealth,
food, housing, or social activities.
Free enterprise is also inefficient for providing health care.
Free enterprise causes businesses to look for ways to profit from
health problems, not help us to maintain our health, and with no regard
to the value of what they do. This results in a lot of worthless or
wasteful health related products and services.
For example, many businesses have discovered that they can make a lot
of money by selling health insurance. Those
companies do nothing to improve our health. They
have simply found a way to profit from our fear of health problems.
They are parasites of the healthcare business.
Health insurance is an expensive way of providing healthcare because it
requires that we pay for all of the people involved with the health
insurance companies, and all of their investors. We also have to pay
for their advertisements as they fight with one another for customers.
Most people don't realize it, but every advertisement is an expense
that the customers of health insurance are paying for, but which does
nothing to improve their health.
no longer need to fight over food and homes
Our modern technology allows us to so
easily produce food and material wealth that we have the option of
creating a city in which all of the basic necessities are provided for
free. This will eliminate the competition for food, homes, and
material wealth. In that type of environment, nobody would be in
beds, phones, or computers, and nobody would be fearful of
losing the competition.
government would own all of the land and businesses, so nobody would
have to invest his money in a business. If a person wanted to be a
farmer or business manager, he would apply for the job, and if
failed at it, he would not go bankrupt. He would just get a
different job, and the government would help him find a job if he
With that type of economic system, businesses would not sell
products to consumers. None of the employees would waste their time
creating advertisements, or trying to figure out how to manipulate
consumers into desiring particular products or services. Instead, the
factories would produce whichever products the government
authorized for production. The businesses that were involved
development of new products would compete with one another to impress
government officials, not titillate consumers.
Furthermore, since the government officials would be living in the same
homes, eating in the same restaurants, and riding on the same trains as
everybody else, the businesses would not be producing products
specifically for the "elite, wealthy class" because there would be no
elite or wealthy class.
In that type of economic system nobody would be able to do anything to
make themselves wealthy. If a business executive or government official
wanted to improve his home, recreational facilities, trains, or
restaurants, he would have to improve society for everybody.
That type of economic system would
encourage people to think about what is best for society, rather than
encourage people to fight with one another over food and material
items. It would
encourage us to regard other people as our friends rather than
profit opportunities or enemies.
free enterprise system, businesses want their competitors to be
failures, but when we are sharing our
wealth, we want everybody in society to
in a free enterprise system, businesses can profit
people, mentally ill people, criminals, and idiots. For example, they
can sell the unemployed people low cost, low-quality products that
nobody with a job would be interested in, and they can sell worthless
products to stupid people, such as worthless insurance policies and
To make the situation even worse,
businesses in a free enterprise system can exploit natural
disasters, divorce, loneliness, and other problems, and they
incentive to prolong the misery and suffering.
In a free enterprise
system, there is no concern for how people make
money, and the end
result is that many people make money through producing idiotic
products, copying the products of other businesses, creating idiotic
contests and events, and investing in the stock market.
In a free enterprise system, schools can profit by providing worthless
courses. The free enterprise system also allows people to retire
whenever they please, and the end result is that many people who make a
lot of money choose to retire at a young age.
problem with the free enterprise system is that businesses try
avoid hiring old people because old
people are not as productive as young people, and the end result is
that many old people cannot find a job, even though many of them are
capable of contributing something of value to society, and want to
In a free enterprise system, a business can exist simply because it
is capable of making profit, but by switching to an economic system
that the government controls, businesses will exist only if they can
justify their existence to the government.
Of course, this
requires that we be able to provide ourselves with better quality
government officials, but if we can do so, we will have
a government that ensures that all businesses are doing
something useful for society. Those type of government officials will
behave like the managers of a business who eliminate the departments
that don't serve a useful purpose.
When we share the wealth, we will encourage the type of attitude that
see among people in other organizations. Specifically, we will want
everybody to be a productive member of
society. The people in a business do not want parasites working with
them, and the musicians in an orchestra do not want to hire people who
are parasitic, and the military does not want parasites in their
organization, either. When we are sharing the wealth, we want everybody
to contribute something of value.
Our attitude towards schools will change, also. Instead of allowing
schools to become expensive, profit-making ventures that provide
children with diplomas, schools will be
under pressure to provide a useful education to children so that they
become productive members of society rather than unemployable,
Another advantage to sharing the wealth is that nobody will be able
to make a living through
inheritances, investments, alimony, marrying wealthy people, or
gambling. The government will help find people
jobs, and ensure that every job is useful.
There would be no unemployment because even the most unskilled person
could be put to work. A modern city has an enormous amount of chores,
so there is no excuse for unemployment. Even the most unskilled people
can be put to work on chores, such as cleaning, maintenance, farming,
The government officials would also provide older people with jobs.
Even though older people are less productive than young
is better to give them something to do than to tell them to do nothing.
For example, the government might give older people first preference at
the simplistic jobs at elementary schools, such as helping with the
meals, or arranging for recreational activities for the children. It
might require twice as many old people to do the work, but that is
better for society than to have the old people sit at home and do
nothing while some younger people do the work.
In this type of
economy, nobody would be wealthy, so nobody would feel as if they are a
slave who is serving a wealthy King or Queen. Everybody would be
working for society. I think this will provide everybody with much more
will benefit from medical problems
Another advantage to putting the
government in control of the economy, and to sharing the chores that
need to be done, is that nobody will have an incentive to profit from
somebody's medical problems, or to prolong their medical problems. We
will instead have an incentive to keep everybody in the best possible
health so that they can do their chores and contribute to society. When
somebody gets sick, we will want them to get over their sickness as
quickly as possible.
Our attitude towards healthcare will be similar to our attitude towards
the "healthcare" of airplanes. Specifically, we want airline companies
to keep their airplanes in good working condition rather than wait for
the airplanes to have trouble. We will want society to have the
same attitude towards human health. Specifically, we will want
dentists to keep everybody in good health rather than wait for us to
have medical problems.
Some people might respond that the doctors and dentists already have
that attitude, but in our current societies, there is nothing they can
do about it. An airline technician has the ability to prevent problems
because he has dictatorial control of the airplane, and the airplane
does not fight back or demand its freedom to do as it pleases. By
comparison, doctors and dentists cannot control
what people do.
If doctors had dictatorial control over our food and drinks, they could
people from becoming overweight, anorexic, and malnourished, and they
could prevent people from using abusing drugs and alcohol. Or if
doctors had dictatorial control over our sexual activities, they could
prevent unwanted pregnancies and venereal diseases.
Another difference between maintaining an airplane and maintaining
human health is that the airline technicians know exactly
maintain airplanes, but we don't know enough about human health to be
certain about a lot of medical issues. For example, doctors do not know
much about the role of dietary cholesterol. There
are also disputes over whether "red" meat is harmful, and if so, in
An airline technician knows for certain how to fix a
particular problem with an airplane, but doctors cannot be certain
about what we should eat, or how we should mix foods in our meals, or
how many meals we should have each day. They also don't know much about
the difference between men and women, or different races.
When the "health experts" talk about
health issues, they
often create the impression that there are only two possibilities with
health issues; specifically, the experts either understand an issue, or
they don't understand an issue. In reality, it would be more helpful if
they treated every medical issue as if there was a sliding pointer that
would show our level of ignorance.
With some issues we have a lot of
knowledge, so the pointer would be near the "high" level. For
know that eating large amounts of sugar is harmful. However,
for red meat and cholesterol should be near the low level of
In the society I propose, the government has total control over
everything in the city. This gives us a lot of options. One of them is
to allow doctors and scientists to design the meals for the
restaurants, which allows the government to exert some control over
what we eat and how we eat it. The government would not force us to
follow a particular diet, but they could require that every
restaurant provide meals that they regard as healthy. For example, they
could prohibit or restrict products that are primarily sugar, such as
cotton candy and lollipops, and they could require all bread products
be made from whole-grain flour that is less than an hour old.
For the issues that they don't know a lot about, such as red meat, they
would provide people with the truth that
they don't yet know if red meat
is harmful, and they would tell people to watch the scientific
research and make their own decisions.
Another option is to let people eat whatever they please at the
restaurants, but have computers keep track of what everybody eats, when
they eat, how much they eat, and what type of medical problems they
have. This would provide scientists with a lot of information that
could help them figure out how food is affecting our health.
also have the option of passing judgment on who among us cannot handle
the freedom to choose their own meals, and the government could
restrict those particular people to certain diets, restaurants, or
quantities of food. This would allow us to deal with the anorexic,
overweight, alcoholic, and sickly people rather than allow them become
a burden on society.
in life, don't dream of pampering
As I mentioned earlier, in
a free enterprise system, businesses look for opportunities to do
something for us. For example,
they remove walnuts from their shells and they arrange for sports
events for us
to watch. Because animals and humans have a tendency to avoid
work, we enjoy
being pampered. We assume that being pampered is making our life
better, but I think we would actually enjoy life more if we changed
our attitude from expecting other people to pamper us to participating
in life's activities.
In the previous document of this series I pointed
out that when you order a beer in some of the small German towns, it
takes about 1/2 an hour to get the beer, which forces everybody to sit
at the table and socialize. Now I would like to point out how these
concepts could be applied to meals.
In a free enterprise system,
the restaurants pamper us, as if we are babies. They put us at a table
that they have provided with plates, utensils, and glasses,
they provide us with whatever foods we ask for, and then they clean up
whatever mess we make. We don't have to do anything. A free
promotes the attitude that the more pampering we get, the better our
When people are in a rush to eat, such as when a
group of electricians are trying to restore electricity during a storm,
it makes sense to provide them with meals quickly, and to
have somebody else clean up their mess. However, when people
in a rush to eat, I suggest we experiment with restaurants that expect
people to participate in certain aspects of their meals. One
purpose for this would be to reduce the amount of unskilled labor that
restaurants need, and the other is to encourage people to do
something rather than be passive babies who expect other
people to do things for them.
example, people could set the table themselves, and
they could clean
the table when they are finished. Eating at these restaurants would
feel like you are eating at your own home, except that somebody else
would provide the meals and clean the dishes. The advantage to
that type of restaurant is that it:
1) Reduces the number of peasants that
the city needs.
2) Gives people something to do before and after their meal, thereby
forcing them to spend more time together.
thought of having to set the table yourself, and especially the thought
of cleaning the table, might frighten you, but remember to react to
problems by thinking of
solutions. By designing restaurants specifically for this activity, we
can make those chores easier compared to what we do
in our own home.
a free enterprise system, restaurants are cramped in order to increase
profit, but in a city in which people are getting meals for free, there
is no sense in making the restaurants cramped. It makes more sense to
provide restaurants with so much space that people feel comfortable,
and this in turn allows us to have enough space to push carts of
dishes and utensils to the tables.
Instead of carrying items to and from
the table, as we do in our own home, we could set the table by pushing
a cart with dishes and utensils over to the table, take what
want, and then push the cart back. (I mentioned this years
To clean the table after
the meal is finished, we could push a cleaning cart over to the table,
put the dirty dishes in the cart, and use the sponges and cleaning rags
in the cart to clean the table. Then we push the cleaning cart to the
kitchen where the employees of the restaurant, or some robots, put
the dirty dishes through a dishwasher, and put the dirty rags and
sponges through a cleaning process.
carts would make setting the table and cleaning the table even easier
than it is in our own home. That type of restaurant would require you
spend a minute or two setting the table for yourself, and a few minutes
cleaning up after yourself when you are finished with your meal, but is
spending a few minutes on those chores really going to ruin your life?
Hopefully after reading the beginning section of this document you will
agree with me that you are not going to suffer if
you have to do some of these chores. Furthermore, consider the advantage
that this type of restaurant provides us; specifically, it reduces the
number of peasants
that the city needs.
emotions fool us into believing that we will improve our life by
work and having servants pamper us, but our emotions are wrong.
You will not suffer if you have to participate in
the chores required to feed you.
by forcing people to participate in these type of chores, it forces
people to interact and socialize. Instead of just sitting down at a
table with a group of people, you would first have to spend a few
minutes pushing a cart over to the table, and then setting the table
with them. This would not make you suffer. Rather,
it would give you something to do with the people.
By specifically designing the restaurants to make it easy for people to
set the table and clean the table, we can make it easy for
to participate in those chores. Nobody is going to suffer, unless they want
are already some smorgasbords, salad bars, cafeterias, and other
restaurants that expect people to pick up a plate and utensils, get
their own food, and clear their table, but nobody is complaining about
We could go even further and tell people to process some of
In the previous document of this series, I pointed out that walnuts
should be removed from their shells only when we are ready to
them. The problem with processing food is that it can create a mess.
Therefore, it should be restricted to restaurants that are
specifically designed for such activities.
the city I suggest, restaurants would be in clusters so that we can
easily walk from one to another. Some of those restaurants could be
designed to let people process food items. For example, if you
wanted some nuts as an appetizer, you would walk to a "nut bar". Inside
you would be provided access to nuts, and high quality nut cracking
equipment, not low-quality consumer nutcrackers. In this type of
economy, the government does not create low-quality products.
In case you never noticed, the standard,
low cost, nutcrackers that are produced for home use are not
useful. A better type of nutcracker is similar to the plumber's tool
called a channellock (with curved jaws, not straight jaws). The reason
is because when the nut cracks in a channellock, you
do not crush the nut and send the pieces flying through the air.
We certainly have the intelligence to develop nutcrackers that
allow us to extract the nuts without destroying them, and without
pinching our fingers. By also providing the tables
small, hot air devices, we could warm the nuts up, or roast them. The
tables could also provide toppings, such as spices, powdered salt, and
molten chocolate. Those type of restaurants would make it easy and
pleasant for us to have some nuts as an appetizer.
Those "nut bars" would not offer a complete meal. They would only
offer nuts as an appetizer. After you are finished with the nuts, you
would have to walk over to some other restaurant for your primary meal.
Or you could go to a salad bar and have a salad.
By having specialty restaurants, such as restaurants that serve only
nuts or only salads, we would have to travel
restaurant to another in order to have a complete meal, which would be
a nuisance in a free enterprise system and our chaotic cities, but when
all of the restaurants
are free and clustered together, it would be easy for us to walk from
one restaurant to another. Besides, taking a short walk once in a while
would be better for us than sitting still for hours.
There are a few areas in our cities right now where a lot of
restaurants are clustered together, such as in the photo below
of Paris, but these areas are not as pleasant as they could be
because they have been designed for businesses, not humans. For
example, the streets tend to be straight so that businesses and people
can drive vehicles on them, and the dining areas are cramped
because of the high rents.
By designing a city for humans
than businesses and vehicles,
sections of the city with the restaurants would be primarily gardens,
restaurants scattered among the trees, flowers, and ponds. They would
be quiet, pleasant areas to relax and have a meal. Walking from one
restaurant to another to have a complete meal would be a pleasure
rather than a chore. With the meals free, nobody has to worry about
carrying wallets, credit cards, or dealing with bills or tips.
The ground level of most cities today is dominated by asphalt
roads, parking lots, and businesses trying to sell products. It
is unpleasant and inconvenient to walk around our cities.
in the city I suggest, the situation will be dramatically different for
1) The primary transportation will be
underground, leaving the surface available for people.
In a free enterprise system, the cities are designed primarily for
shopping, but the city I suggest would be designed for people
to do something,
such as meet people, do some arts and crafts, get some exercise, or
listen to music. The restaurants would be clustered together to make it
us to walk around to get food. Clustering the restaurants together
would also make it easier for us to
deliver fresh food to the restaurants, and get rid of the food waste
before it becomes stinky.
2) The city would consist of clusters of
rather than an enormous number of short buildings spread out over an
enormous area. This allows the area around the buildings to be parks,
gardens, ponds, creeks, and canals.
3) In a free enterprise
system, the ground level of a city is dominated by retail
material items in windows. There are an enormous number of those
businesses, and they are producing an enormous variety of
items. However, when the material wealth is
free, the government will produce significantly fewer
and there will be no attempt to sell or advertise
the items. Therefore, the city will not be
dominated by retail stores that are competing to sell products.
of the material items will be available only at social clubs and
hobbyist centers, such as arts and craft supplies, cameras,
microscopes, telescopes, CNC equipment, musical equipment, and 3D
printers. There will be stores that offer clothing and shoes, but they
will simply offer them rather than try to grab our
displays of manikins in windows. Some of the items would be available
where they are used. For example, snorkeling and scuba equipment would
be available at the lakes and ponds, and volleyballs, and other
equipment would be available at the recreational fields.
switching to the economy I suggest, the ground level of the city would
be dominated by restaurants, social clubs, small theaters, and other
types of activities, rather than displays of material items. This would
make it very easy for people to wander around to get meals, and to find
entertainment and recreational activities.
In a free enterprise system, businesses are in a rush to give us some
food, take our money, and get us out of the restaurant. However, in the
city I propose, the clusters of restaurants will be in such pleasant
areas that we will sometimes want to prolong our meal so that
we can enjoy the area and relax. One of the ways of prolonging the meal
is to participate in some of the food preparation.
For example, if we
wanted a tangerine as an appetizer, we would walk over to
a "fruit bar". Peeling citrus fruit is messy because the skin
has oil in it. As you peel the skin, oil sprays onto your hands and the
table. Also, the seeds are a nuisance. It's best to restrict citrus
fruits to restaurants that have been designed for such a mess.
I think the tangerines that have seeds are tastier than the
that are seedless, but it is unpleasant to eat with people who
spitting out seeds. One solution to this problem is to simply change
our attitude towards life. Instead of being in a rush to
eat, and instead of assuming that work is bad and
that servants are good, take some time to first remove
It is actually easy to remove seeds from citrus fruits by
cutting the wedges along their length,
which exposes the seeds, making it easy to knock them out.
people cut shrimp like this, they refer to it as "butterfly shrimp", so
we could refer to this as "butterfly tangerines" or "butterfly fruit".
The tangerines from my tree have a lot of seeds, and the photo below
shows how I cut the wedges, knock the seeds out, and
create butterfly tangerines. This is what I do when I eat the
tangerines, although I usually eat them as I make them rather than make
displays of them.
Imagine walking into a fruit bar
one of your friends,
and then making a display of butterfly tangerines. You then
down and eat them. You might spend a couple of minutes making those
butterfly tangerines, but how many of us are in such
that we cannot do it? Creating the butterfly tangerines will give you
something to do with your friends, and it will eliminate
the problem of people spitting
out seeds. It also allows us to create a more visually attractive
The point I want to make in this particular section of the document is
that a free enterprise system encourages us
to believe that happiness comes from being pampered,
but I think we will enjoy life more if we participate in
activities. Work is not bad, and
pampering by servants is not the
key to happiness.
When you participate in the preparation of your food, even if it is
something as simple as removing seeds from tangerines, or removing the
husk from an ear of corn, the food will taste better
than if a peasant processed your food. When you participate in life,
you will get more satisfaction from it.
If you participate in
maintaining a garden in your city, that garden will have more
significance to you. If you participate in the design of a building in
your city, or the construction of it, or the maintenance of it, that
building will have more significance to you. If you participate in the
design or maintenance of a museum display, that display will mean more
to you. By comparison, when you are a pampered King, nothing has much
meaning to you.
course, as always, life is more complex than I make it appear.
Specifically, because each of us is genetically unique, we received
different amounts of satisfaction from participating in activities. For
example, imagine if everybody in a city spent a few afternoons each
year helping to maintain their city park. When people went into that
park, they would receive some satisfaction for the work they did, but
if we could measure that satisfaction, we would find that most people
have an average amount of satisfaction, while a small minority does not
get much satisfaction from it. To the people who don't get much
enjoyment from work, they will want to live in a city in which servants
are pampering them. They will not want to work.
Different people want to spend their leisure time in different ways. We
all have different hobbies, and we all have different ideas on what is
"fun". Some women enjoy spending some of their leisure time cleaning
and organizing their house, whereas others prefer to play with dolls,
children, or dogs. Some men like to spend some of their leisure time
building things, or exploring the creeks and forests near their home.
Some people like spending their leisure time skiing, skateboarding, or
Our hobbies and our idea of what is "fun" changes according to our
environment. If we had been born thousands of years earlier, we would
had a very limited selection of hobbies, and if we had been born 10,000
years in the future, we would have a much greater variety of hobbies.
We don't need any particular hobby in order to enjoy life. There are
thousands of possible ways for us to enjoy our leisure time. If we were
living in a city in which we had to share chores, some of us would
certainly discover that we enjoy spending an
working with our neighbors on some chore for the
city. In such a case, those chores would become fun,
not miserable "nigger work".
The men who enjoy building and repairing things, for example, might
enjoy getting together once in a while to maintain the rowboats and
scuba equipment, and the people who enjoy arts and crafts might enjoy
getting together once in a while to create and maintain artwork for the
restaurants, city parks, and office buildings. The women who enjoy
cleaning and organizing their home might enjoy getting together with
other women to clean and organize some of the social clubs or museums.
The women who enjoy children might enjoy the chores that
involve taking care of and cleaning up after children.
However, because of the genetic diversity of our minds, there will be
some people who do not get any
enjoyment from doing
chores, just as there are children who don't enjoy doing chores
around the house.
that I propose is not going
to appeal to everybody. It
will appeal only
to people who are similar in emotional characteristics to me.
If somebody with a different personality were to design a city, he
would design it differently, and it would appeal to a different group
of people than a city that I designed. For some examples of our
• There are some people who point out
that modern technology allows us
to reduce our work week to only a few hours a day, and only a few days
a week, and that would allow us to spend a lot more time on leisure
When the human race decides to start experimenting with new
cities and new culture, the design of their city, and the type of
culture they want to experiment with, will depend upon
the genetic characteristics of the people who dominate the city.
• There are some people who receive so much enjoyment from pet dogs,
pigs, goats, and other animals that they want the city to allow and
support a variety of pets. And there are a few people who want to get
married to their pets.
• There are some people who do not like the idea of equality, and would
rather live in a society in which there are servants who are pampering
a wealthy class.
The future of the
human race will be set by the people who become active in setting our
future. It will not
be determined by the apathetic sheeple. At the
moment we are dominated by people who want mansions, yachts,
servants, and pampering. If those people remain in control forever,
this is all we will ever have. If people with my
interests are a tiny minority, then my proposals for
will be ignored.
Incidentally, I will once again remind you that my proposals
would be practical only if the people in the city were willing
immigration and deal
with misfits. For example, in a city in which people are expected to
clean the table after they are finished eating, we would discover that
some people do a terrible job of cleaning, and at the other extreme are
the OCD people who waste a lot of resources cleaning the table to
excess. Some of the OCD people would want to use so much bleach that
they create air pollution in the restaurant.
Also, when material items are free, we would find that some people are abusive
with the free items. For example, when provided with free access to
arts and craft supplies, 3D printers, drones, CNC laser machines, and
musical instruments, some people will be abusive with the
equipment, and some people will leave a tremendous mess for
other people to clean up, and some people will waste a lot of materials.
The type of city I propose
requires that the government and
citizens be willing to restrict the slobs and
to their own
neighborhoods, evict those who are regarded as
unacceptable, and keep the OCD people under control.
about yourself, don't boast about yourself
What type of city do you want to
What type of
culture do you want? Do you know the answer to
those questions? The
suggestions I have for cities are just suggestions
to experiment with. I don't know what I would enjoy the best, and you
should not assume that you know what you want, either.
Our arrogance causes us to assume that we
understand ourselves extremely well, but humans are complex creatures.
A better attitude is to regard life as an exploration,
and to spend some of our time trying to understand
our mental and physical characteristics.
As you gain a better understanding of your body's
will be able to reduce the chances that you get sick, and you will
reduce your chances of being injured from physical tasks, and you will
have a better idea of what type of physical tasks you will be able to
As you gain a better understanding of your mental
will be more successful in life because you will be able to choose the
activities that bring real satisfaction to your
life rather than doing something that only fools you into thinking you
are happy. You will also be able to choose goals, jobs, and tasks that
you can do well, and avoid those that you are not so
good at. You will also be able to avoid the situations and activities
that are likely to cause you frustration, envy, pouting, or anger.
many people can adequately handle failure?
No animal or human enjoys failing. We
want to be successful
in what we do, even if it is an idiotic or dangerous activity. All of
us become upset when we fail, but each of us deals with the
disappointment in a different manner. For example, after failing in a
sports event, some people throw or break their golf clubs, tennis
rackets, or other objects; some people cry; some people make sarcastic
or insulting remarks about the winners, judges, or other contestants;
and some people become angry at their competitors and try to hurt,
murder, or sabotage them.
During prehistoric times, people experienced problems all the time,
but they tended to become angry at animals or nature
rather than other
people. For example, the men would frequently fail in their attempt to
catch pigs or squirrels, but they would become upset at themselves, the
world, or the animals.
They remained friendly with one another.
It was actually
beneficial when a prehistoric man, who failed to catch a pig, became
angry at the pig. The reason is because when we become
angry, we acquire more physical energy, and we also forget about our
other problems and can more easily focus on achieving our goal.
Furthermore, when we become angry, we will not notice that we have a
wound on our arm, or that we are hungry, or that we are cold. Becoming
angry is analogous to turning on the afterburner of a jet
engine. When a prehistoric man became angry at a pig, he put a
lot more effort into catching the pig.
If you agree that evolution gives us only
the qualities that are necessary, then you should realize that anger is
not a frivolous, unnecessary quality. Rather, it was vital during
prehistoric humans. The men who reacted to failure with anger were more
successful than those who reacted with apathy. Also, anger was useful
in dealing with the defective members of society. For example, if a man
became so angry at a badly behaved child that he killed the child, he
was cleansing his tribe of a genetically inferior member.
However, our emotions are inappropriate
for many of the jobs and activities that we do today. We are no longer
chasing after pigs with sharp sticks. We are working in teams to grow
food, assemble computers, and design robots. When we become upset
during our modern activities, we cause trouble for ourselves and other
people because we tend to become upset at other people.
During prehistoric times, it was
acceptable for a man to become angry at a pig when he failed to catch
the pig. His craving to hurt the pig
would not have disrupted society, or caused him to
be irritating to
other people. Rather, his craving for revenge would have motivated him
to put more effort into hunting the pigs.
when prehistoric humans became angry at pigs or wolves, the animals did
not respond by becoming angry at the humans. The animals did not
try to get revenge on the humans. The anger was going in only one
direction; namely, from the humans towards the animals.
Today, however, we spend most of our time interacting with other people,
not with pigs or wolves. Therefore, when we become angry today, we
are likely to become angry at other people, such as our boss,
neighbors, spouse, or government officials. We will want to
hurt the people we become angry with, but those
the same emotions, and so they will react by becoming angry at us and
wanting to hurt us. This can cause senseless fights to persist for
years, and sometimes for generations.
was acceptable for prehistoric people to become angry when they failed
at something, or to pout, but modern humans need to exert some
self-control and think about the problem.
and women should study one another rather
than hate one another
An example of how people hurt themselves
and society with
their inappropriate reaction to failure are the men and women
fail to find a
compatible spouse, and who react with hatred, anger, crying, or
pouting. Some develop a "sour grapes" attitude and insist
don't want a spouse.
Many of the complaints of the feminists are
actually accurate, such as when they complain that
men are violent,
arrogant, self-centered, dictatorial, selfish, and promiscuous.
Likewise, the men who are the male equivalent of feminists, such as the
men who describe themselves as MRA or MGTOW, are making valid
complaints about women. For example, a MGTOW man created this
video to complain about the characteristics of women that irritate him.
men and women who are complaining about the opposite sex are often
making valid complaints, but they are wasting their life
complaining doesn't improve anything. The only way to improve something
is to be willing to experiment with changes.
men and women who are complaining about the opposite sex are not
to understand the problems that they are suffering from, and
not advocating that people find the
courage to start experimenting with
our courtship procedures, marriages, divorces, social
system, or economic system. Rather, they are having a temper
encourages other people to whine, make sarcastic remarks, and hate.
men and women who are whining about the opposite sex are interpreting
the situation incorrectly. For example, a man posted a comment
on the Internet that the men in the office where he works
have photographs of their wife on their desk, and they often carry
photos of their wife in their wallet, but most of the women in the
office are more
likely to have photos of their children rather than their husband. This
man interpreted that situation as evidence that most women do
have much of an interest in their husbands, and that their marriages
His complaints are valid; it is true
that a man has a strong attraction to his wife, but his wife has a
stronger attraction to her children. To a female animal, a male is
nothing more than a slave to provide her with food and protection. She
interest in him as a friend.
However, it is inaccurate to claim
that women are inferior or awful because of this characteristic. This
is simply the way animals evolved. It is these characteristics that
have allowed all of us to be alive. If it were not for our female
ancestors devoting their life to raising children, and if it were not
for their husbands devoting their lives to providing their wives with
food and protection, none of us would be here today.
when women complain about men, their complaints are often valid, but
they are complaining about characteristics that evolved in us for an
Do you appreciate your mother?
all of us were raised primarily by our mothers, not our fathers, and if
you can look seriously at women, you should be able to see that your
mother put a lot of time and effort taking care of
you. Actually, most mothers devote their lives to
animals were not designed to appreciate their mothers, or their
fathers, other animals, food, flowers, birds, or the universe.
Animals were designed only
to fight for survival and to reproduce.
are more appreciative of life than animals, but that is nothing to be
proud of when you realize how crude an animal is. If you can look
seriously at yourself, you will notice that you spend most of your time
trying to figure out how to titillate yourself with material items,
food, status, sex, and babies, just like an animal. We rarely
spend time appreciating what we have, or appreciating other
appreciating the universe.
It is not natural for a child to
appreciate his mother, or for a woman to appreciate her husband, or
for a husband to appreciate his wife. Furthermore, it is not natural
for us to appreciate the farmers who are providing us with food, or the
electricians, plumbers, carpenters, and other people who are providing
us with homes, cities, running water, and electricity.
arrogance causes us to look down on one another rather than appreciate
one another. This is especially true of the people who think of
themselves as being high in the hierarchy, such as people who have lots
money, or people with college diplomas. For example, the people who get
college diplomas have a
tendency to think of themselves as superior to the farmers, carpenters,
and factory workers. They don't appreciate what the farmers are doing
until a natural disaster, such as a hurricane, causes them to run out
of food. When people become hungry, they are more
likely to realize that the farmers are "people" rather than some type
of subhuman creature.
Most people don't appreciate
anything until it is taken away from them. Children would appreciate
their parents if they were abandoned for a few weeks. People
appreciate their eyesight if they went blind. People
would appreciate the ability to breathe if they got polio and had to
live in an iron lung, such as the children in the photo below.
If we could measure our
ability to appreciate things, we would find that we create a bell
curve. At one extreme are the people who have the least
As with animals, they spend their lives trying to titillate
themselves and rarely appreciate other people or life. They are not
likely to appreciate their eyes, hands, or legs until they have an
accident that damages those parts of their body.
The people who are the least likely to appreciate other people are
the most likely to spend time whining about how they are abused,
unappreciated, oppressed, mistreated, insulted, and bullied
by their parents, spouse, teachers, other
students, boss, coworkers, and neighbors. I don't think many of the
people who whine about being abused are truly being abused.
Children are especially likely to whine about being abused when they
are actually being pampered.
certainly are a lot of violent and neurotic people who truly do abuse
their family members, friends, spouse, and coworkers, but they are a
minority. Most people are not
abused. They only think
they are abused, and the reason they come to that conclusion is because
they expect special treatment,
and they are upset that they are not getting what they believe they
a friendship, marriage, or business relationship requires certain
mental qualities. Forming a team also
requires the people
have certain mental qualities. People with the inferior mental
qualities will form inferior relationships.
For example, if a person does not have much appreciation for what other
people do, he may not appreciate what his spouse is doing, and that
might cause him to believe that he is doing a tremendous amount for his
spouse while getting almost nothing in return. He may feel that he is
being abused or neglected. This could lead to arguments and a divorce.
During prehistoric times, nobody had
to understand anything about this issue. Nature took care of this
problem automatically. The people who were inferior at forming
relationships were less successful in reproduction, and the tribes that
had the best ability to form teams dominated the tribes that were more
Today, however, we are helping the people with problems
to successfully reproduce. This is going to create a greater variety
of mental characteristics in the next generation, causing more problems
with relationships. There will be more people in every generation who
believe that they are being abused and neglected, and there will be
more people who have so much trouble forming friendships that they
spend their life alone, or with a dog or cell phone.
police records already show that there are some women who have married
a man, convinced him to take a large life insurance policy, began to
slowly poison him to death, and after he died, she married another man
and started the cycle over. Those women cannot form a stable marriage
because they regard men as profit opportunities. Likewise, there are
some men who regard women and children as sex toys.
complex today, and we must form complex
today need higher-quality intellectual and emotional characteristics
than our prehistoric ancestors. If we don't do something to control
reproduction, we are going to increase the abuse, loneliness, fighting,
divorces, and misery.
No matter what type of society we create, we need certain
intellectual and emotional characteristics in order to
function in it, and
we need certain characteristics to enjoy the social
activities, people, foods, and jobs.
for example, people need to be able to go to school, learn a skill,
work at a modern job, clean up after themselves, follow laws,
appreciate other people, form friendships, and consider how his actions
will affect other people. The people who have substandard mental
qualities are going to be misfits, and we have to deal with
them in some manner rather than ignore them. We must ensure that the
disrupt society. We should also limit their reproduction options so
that each generation has fewer misfits.
are people so focused on money?
The free enterprise system does not force
us to do anything in particular. It does not require that we complain
that prices are too high, and it does not require that we compare how
much money we have to how much money other people have. It does not
force us to cheat in the stock market, or use illegal immigrants as
There is no rule in the free enterprise system that requires a business
to lay off employees when sales drop. It is entirely possible that
businesses react to a drop in sales by lowering the wages of the
executives. There is also no rule in the free enterprise system that
business executives make more money than the employees.
The free enterprise system puts us into competition for money, but how
we react to that competition depends on our intellectual and emotional
Because we are animals, we are very selfish, and we have a fear of
being hungry and homeless. We also have very little concern for the
well-being of other people. Just like a herd of sheep, we will ignore
another sheep who is being eaten by a wolf. We care about ourselves and
our children, not strangers.
Business executives several decades ago were making about 20 times as
much money as the average worker, but today they are making hundreds of
times as much. During the past few decades, technology has made it
easier for us to produce food and material items. Business executives
could have reacted to this technology by increasing wages of the
employees, but they reacted in the opposite manner. They have been
trying to reduce wages, such as by bringing in more immigrants and
refugees, and by hiring illegal immigrants. They have also been
increasing their own salaries, and the profits of the investors. The free
enterprise system does not require business executives to behave like
that. They are doing this because of their intellectual and emotional
The free enterprise system is causing people to fight over money, but
it's not because the free enterprise system makes us do this. We do
this because we are selfish animals.
We need to understand our animal qualities and design an economic and
government system to suppress our undesirable qualities and encourage
our desirable qualities. Free enterprise encourages us to fight with
one another like animals over food, housing, and material items. We
need to design an economic system that encourages beneficial behavior.
do married couples fight over money?
The same issue applies to the fights that
married couples have over money. There is no rule in the universe that
married couples must fight over money. They get into these fights
simply because we are animals. We are so selfish and arrogant
that we have trouble compromising on policies, and we are frequently
imagining that we are unappreciated, abused, oppressed, and bullied.
Married couples might assume that they argue over money because they
don't have enough of it, but their arguments
have nothing to do with the amount of money they have.
the people in the advanced nations today are incredibly
wealthy. Even the "poor" people have houses, electricity,
refrigerators, and thousands of material
items. Almost all of the people in the advanced nations are
incredibly wealthy, but they argue over money because they and their
children want more than they have, and they want more
than they can
If you were to encounter an obese couple who were
arguing over how to divide up the food between themselves, you would
undoubtedly be disgusted with them, but what is the difference between
that couple and a wealthy couple who are arguing over money?
The couples who argue over money are not suffering from a shortage of
money. They are arguing with each other over money because of their
emotional and intellectual characteristics, and their attitudes towards
life. For example, some of their fights are because:
• They have trouble controlling their
cravings for material items.
Our technology provides us with a tremendous amount
of food and material wealth. We could be enjoying
this technology, and we could be sharing the food
and wealth, but
instead a significant percentage of the population spend a lot of
their time whining about prices, and trying to grab everything for
Millions of people are even worse than that; they get
involved with crimes.
• They cannot control their cravings to give
gifts to their children or friends.
• They cannot control their cravings to feel sorry for their
unemployed, drug addicted relative who is begging for handouts.
Some criminals are very wealthy, so we
cannot say that they are involved with crimes because of poverty. They
are involved with crimes because of their particular emotional
Of course, as always, life is more complex than I
make it seem. Married couples are not fighting only because they have
trouble controlling their cravings. There are lots of reasons as to why
men and women get into fights. One of them is ignorance
and another is inaccurate information.
people are raised on television programs and religion, they pick up
some unrealistic views of life, marriage, and humans. They
have a more difficult time coping with the modern world compared to a
person who realizes that humans are monkeys, and who has a better
understanding of our emotional and intellectual characteristics and
and women need to understand
and accept each other
The people who react to problems in their
becoming angry at the opposite sex, or by developing the sour grapes
attitude, or by ignoring the problem, are behaving in an inappropriate
manner. People today need to remain calm and look for
solutions to problems.
The people who react to problems like animals should
be described as inferior to those of us who react by looking for
Men and women are frequently making valid
complaints about the opposite sex, but it is senseless
to complain about the genetic
characteristics of the opposite sex. It might help you to understand
this concept if you imagine a child who has convinced his parents to
give him a pet dog, but who complains incessantly that he does not want
to clean up after the dog, feed the dog, or provide the dog with
Imagine the child complaining,
want to enjoy the dog, not clean up
its messes and feed it. I spend more time taking care of the
dog than I
do having fun with it! Furthermore, this dog is so
stupid that I cannot
talk to it."
Most parents have the sense to tell a child that if
he wants a pet dog, then he must be able to accept the responsibilities
and unpleasant aspects of a dog. Parents will ruin their family's
social environment if they allow a child to have a pet dog
even when he
whines about the responsibilities of a dog, because his
whining will make him miserable, and it will be unpleasant for the
family members. It will also be unpleasant for everybody who visits
The same concept applies to humans who want a
spouse. Ideally, men and women would have an understanding of what they
are getting into before they get married. We are hurting our society
when we allow men and women to get married when they have
unrealistic fantasies and expectations of marriage, themselves, or
the opposite sex. The confused, ignorant people will get into
arguments with one another and whine about one another, and that will
hurt their relationship, irritate other people, and make life miserable
for their children.
Imagine if animals were intelligent enough to speak to
us. Imagine a male peacock complaining to you that the female peacocks
are so stupid that the only way he can attract a female is by waving
his feathers at them. He complains that he cannot talk to the females
in an intelligent manner. He complains that the process of finding a
female is degrading and frustrating.
And then imagine a female peacock
complaining to you that she wants a beautiful male peacock, but she has
to frequently tolerate unwanted male peacocks who chase after her, try
to titillate her with their feathers, and want her only for sex.
Certainly your response to those peacocks would be, "You are peacocks.
That is how you behave. Learn to deal with it. I don't want to listen
to your whining about the characteristics that you evolved with."
The same concept applies to humans. Imagine a
man complaining: "I spend more time
taking care of my wife than I do
having fun with her! And her primary interest is our children,
not me! I want a wife to enjoy, and who cares for me, but there is
almost nothing I can talk to her about or do with her because all she
cares about are our children, astrology, and Hollywood gossip."
A man who
whines that women want men primarily for financial support, or that
women don't have much in common with men, should be told that if he
wants a wife, he must accept the fact that he is getting into a
relationship with a female monkey, and if he doesn't like the
characteristics of that species of monkey, then he should not get
married. It is idiotic to get into a relationship with an animal
and then whine about the characteristics of that animal.
Men and women evolved with certain mental and physical
characteristics. Furthermore, we evolved
to take different roles in life. We are not a
unisex creature. The male of our species was designed
to spend his life taking care of a female, and the female of our
species was designed to spend her life taking care of children. The
people who cannot understand and accept our animal nature should not
Instead of men and women complaining about one another, we should
be trying to understand ourselves and the opposite sex, and we
should experiment with our culture in order to provide
with stable, pleasant
For example, our concept of "home" has changed
dramatically since prehistoric times. To our prehistoric ancestors,
"home" was a campsite. The women wanted their husbands to be home with
them every evening, and when the men were in the campsite, the
men were home. The men could spend the evening
making tools by
themselves, or chatting with other men, but the women would have
regarded them as "being home" since they were in the campsite.
the men wanted their wives to be home every evening, and when the
women were in the campsite, the men were satisfied. A
man's wife might spend the evening with other women,
making clothing, singing with other
people, or playing with her children, but he would have been satisfied
that she was "home".
Today, however, when men and women expect
their spouse to "be home" every evening, they are expecting their
to spend every evening isolated from other people in a house. This is
not natural for either of us. This
creates a lonely, boring life.
lot of people are spending many hours every evening watching
television, or interacting with people on the Internet, but I think
they do this because they are lonely and bored, not because it is truly
spend thousands of evenings in that manner.
The reason I suggest we design a city so that people are living in
clusters of tall apartment buildings, and that the city have an excess
of apartments and allow people to freely move to whatever apartment
they please, is to allow us to come close to re-creating the
intimate, friendly environment of a prehistoric tribe. We will be able
to live among our friends.
And the reason I suggest the cities
provide a wide
variety of free social and recreational activities is to encourage
people get out of the house in the evening and do something
with other people, even if it is something passive,
such as sitting in a cafe and listening to people play music.
Furthermore, this modern world requires a wife to be willing to let her
husband spend time with other men rather than be like a devoted
dog who follows her around, and a man must have the confidence to let
his wife do things with other women without becoming
paranoid that she will run off with another man.
This in turn
that we develop better courtship procedures so that
people have a better chance of developing a stable marriage, which in
turn would cause married couples to be less
paranoid that their partner will abandon them.
will provide music and singing?
As you look at the drawing above, you
might wonder who is going to play music at cafes or
concerts in the type of city I suggest when there is no free
enterprise system, and no money. In a free enterprise system, people
provide music, singing, and a variety of other types of entertainment
simply to make a living. Some people provide music and other
entertainment for donations. What will happen when we are living in a
city in which we have the basic necessities for free, and there is no
money for donations, and everybody is required to have a job and
contribute to society?
The city I suggest is not going to appeal to everybody. People like
Vincent van Gogh would love the idea of a city in which the basic
necessities are free, but their antisocial behavior and their inability
to function properly at a job would result in them being evicted.
In a free enterprise system, people and businesses are
constantly looking for opportunities to make money, and the end result
is that they offer a wide variety of entertainment, such as singing,
music, beauty contests, dancing, skateboards stunts, and magic acts.
There is also some pathetic entertainment, such as the people who are
so desperate for food and housing that they play music or perform other
entertainment on the sidewalks for donations. Those people are not
enjoying themselves or their life, and they create an uncomfortable
situation for the people walking along the sidewalk.
In the city that I suggest, the government is in control of all of the
jobs, so we will have total control over our entertainment
options. We can discuss and make decisions about what type of
entertainment to provide, when to provide it, how much of it to
provide, who is going to provide it, and whether people who provide it
are doing so as a full-time job. We have a lot of options, two of which
1) We can design the city to
make it easy for people to
produce music on their own. Since the city will provide everybody with
free access to material items, nobody has to purchase musical
instruments. The city could provide lots of tiny theaters that have
musical instruments, karaoke equipment, and whatever else
people wanted. If a group of friends wanted to create music
for themselves, or for other people, they would go to one of the tiny
theaters and use whatever equipment they were interested in. The city
would feel as if it is a giant mansion full of rooms that they can use
whenever they want.
2) The city will have a lot of chores to do, such as mowing lawns,
trimming trees, pulling weeds, cleaning the social clubs, and
maintaining the swimming pools. However, is up to us to decide what we
designate as a "chore" that we must share, and what we refer to as a
"job". We could say that one of the optional chores that people can
choose from is providing entertainment at city festivals, restaurants,
and parties. This would allow the people who excel at music, singing,
or other entertainment, to choose one of the entertainment chores
rather than help with the maintenance of swimming pools.
Furthermore, robots will
eventually be useful for creating music, and those robots will make it
easy for people with excellent singing abilities to put on shows for
the public. I find it difficult to imagine that
people would enjoying robots that sing, but I think that musical robots
become very popular for two reasons:
1) The people programming the robots
would be able to design music that humans don't have the coordination
to play, and they could create instruments that only robots have the
ability to play. The competition between the people who are
programming the robots would inspire new and different types of music.
Although we will never be sure what provides us with the most pleasant
life until we find the courage to start experimenting
with life, I suspect that we will have a much more satisfying life when
we can do something in the evening, and be with
other people, rather than just sit at home with a television,
a computer, or a dog
2) There are many more people who are excellent
singers than there are
excellent musicians. When a city provides us
with free access to musical robots, then any of the thousands of people
well would be able to put on shows for the public at cafes, festivals,
Without musical robots, putting on a show requires contacting a lot of
human musicians to find out who is interested in performing at the
show, who has the talents that they need, and who will be available at
the time that they want to do the show. It is a lot of work.
With musical robots, however, one woman who likes to sing can arrange a
very quickly by herself simply by taking some musical robots
telling them what to play. The robots would provide better quality
music than an MP3 player, and be more visually entertaining.
creates the impression that only Lady Gaga and a few other people are
excellent singers, but Hollywood is fooling people. Hollywood gives
publicity only to the people who are part of their crime network.
In my opinion, an enormous
percentage of women are very good or excellent singers. Actually, the
people who control Hollywood seem to use this information to intimidate
Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, and other people that they have chosen to be
celebrities. Specifically, they occasionally remind the celebrities
that they can easily be replaced because there are lots of people with
just as much or more talent than they have. The celebrities respond
to this intimidation with angry remarks in their songs about
how they are
insulted and bullied, but the truth is that they can
be replaced because there are lots of people with just as much or more
The music created by robots will have a better sound quality than the
music produced by speakers. Therefore, robots will allow small groups
of people to have higher quality music. There will be no distortion,
buzzing, hiss, or other problems associated with speakers.
more self-control, dancing will become more popular
use for musical robots is to
make it easy for small groups of people to create high quality music
for dancing, and to produce shows for the public, such as the
Nutcracker ballet. It is difficult to set up those type of ballets
because so many people are necessary. Musical robots will eliminate a
lot of the people, thereby simplifying the situation to the point at
which more people would be able to put on those type of shows.
However, we should also make a change in our attitude towards
dancing. Just as
sports have been evolving through the centuries to become increasingly
difficult and dangerous, dancing has also become incredibly difficult,
especially for the ballet dancers who dance on their toes.
centuries ago ballet was just another form of dancing, but it has
evolved through the years into an increasingly difficult and painful
form of dance. In the 1800s, for example, one woman decided to try
dancing on her toes, and that caused other people to compete with her,
and the end result is that today no women can qualify as a ballet
dancer unless she can dance on her toes. This restricts who can be a
dancer, and it requires the people who want to be dancers to spend
enormous amounts of time training and practicing. It also requires
special shoes, referred to as "pointe shoes".
Have you seen the Nutcracker ballet? (I
think the Mariinsky theater
has the most entertaining variation,
and it also has good video
There is a section in which the dancers are doing dances of different
cultures. Notice that none of the women are dancing
on their toes, and
they are not wearing pointe shoes, either, but I
and millions of other
people regard that section of the ballet to be very entertaining. Also,
men are not capable of dancing on their toes, but that doesn't
Women do not
have to dance on their toes.
It is our competitive nature that causes us to push ourselves to
extremes, and to develop the attitude that we must
dance in a particular manner. In reality, there are lots of different
ways to enjoy dancing. The women are tormenting themselves by dancing
on their toes, and they
are making ballet so difficult and painful that most people cannot
become ballet dancers.
This concept applies to all of our activities, not
just dancing. There is no correct way to design sports or recreational
activities, or to have a wedding, birthday party, city festival, or
Christmas party. For example, as I mentioned in my document about bicycles, we
do not have to crouch over our bicycle and pretend
that we are racers in order to enjoy a bicycle ride. It is our
competitive nature and our desire to impress and intimidate other
people that causes us to believe that we must ride bicycles in a
Football players do not have to give themselves
concussions or destroy their knees, and there is no correct or
incorrect way to go swimming or snorkeling. Sports equipment does not
have to be expensive, either, and sports do not need to be so difficult
that we need years of training to play them. As I mentioned in my document about
sports, we have tremendous options with sports, and we should design
them to be simple, safe, and entertaining. We do not
improve sports by making them expensive, dangerous, complex, or painful.
Likewise, we could design weddings, anniversaries, birthday parties,
and other celebrations to be more casual, more entertaining, and more
sociable. A lot of people are tormenting themselves with their complex
and expensive weddings and parties.
In a free enterprise system, city festivals are designed to allow
businesses to sell products, but we could design city festivals to
provide ourselves with recreation, exercise, entertainment, and
We have a lot of options in life, but we must exert some self-control
and use our intellect in order to see those options and experiment with
them. If we follow our emotions, we won't notice that we have options
because we will focus on competing for status, fighting, and trying to
impress other people.
We should push
ourselves into making intelligent decisions. If a society did not
require the ballet dancers to do incredibly difficult stunts,
the dancers would not have to spend so much of their time practicing,
would allow them to do other things with their life, and it would
allow more people to become ballet dancers, thereby allowing more
people to put on shows.
by dancing on their toes, the women are causing themselves a lot of
pain and medical problems, and they are wasting an enormous amount of
resources and labor on pointe shoes. One of the reasons ballet is so
expensive is because the ballet companies have gotten out of control
with the shoes and clothing. The Pittsburgh ballet theater claims
to be spending about $100,000 every year just on pointe
In addition, they are spending unnecessarily large amounts of money on
other clothing items for the dancers.
Furthermore, the male ballet dancers
usually wear tights rather than pants, kilts, short
pants, or other clothing items, but they have the option of wearing a
variety of different clothing styles, colors, and patterns. In some
dances, the tights create an interesting visual image, but in most
scenes, especially when the men are wearing a jacket or shirt, the
tights seem out of place, and a bit homosexual. In the Nutcracker,
there are a few scenes in which a few men are wearing pants (the
image to the right), and it does not
ruin the performance. Also, note that the women are wearing boots
in that dance, not pointe shoes.
In a free enterprise
system, we don't know the details of how our money is spent on pointe
shoes or treating concussions of football players, or how much money is
needed to arrange for food eating contests or basketball tournaments,
but if we switch to the economy I
suggest, the government will be in control of everything,
and we will
be able to see exactly where our labor and resources are going. This
will give us the ability to pass judgment on which activities we want
to eliminate, and which we want to simplify in order to reduce labor,
resources, or medical problems.
In a free enterprise system,
businesses are in competition to attract our attention, but we don't
need to go to extremes in order to provide ourselves with entertainment
and recreation. Dances can be entertaining without difficult
dangerous stunts. I think that dancing should be regarded as a form of
visual artwork. We should design dances to be entertaining rather than
have dancers impress us with their painful and difficult stunts.
The Nutcracker ballet would be just as entertaining without
the difficult stunts and pointe shoes. By altering the dances so that
they are easier to
do, the dancers won't have to practice so much, and they won't be in
pain at the end of a performance. This will allow more people to become
dancers, and that makes it possible for us to have a
lot of shows in small theaters rather than just a few shows in large
theaters. The small theaters don't need audio amplifiers or speakers,
thereby giving us better sound quality, and we will be able to see the
I think we will find that to be much more pleasurable.
Furthermore, when more
people are involved with dancing, there is a greater chance that you
will know some of the dancers in the performances, which can make
the performance even more entertaining compared to
watching a group of strangers.
should admire the people who contribute
In all societies today, both men and
women admire whoever becomes
wealthy and famous, and we show no concern for how
those people achieved their position. We should encourage
to change their attitudes about who among us deserves our respect. We
should judge people by what they contribute to
society, and how they
people who are providing us with food, electricity, and homes are doing
more for us than the people who have merely gathered a large pile of
money, or who were born into a wealthy or famous family. Unfortunately,
people are most attracted to whoever brings them the most pleasure.
Lady Gaga, for example, entertains a lot of people, so she is admired
much more than the people who are doing something that is truly useful
for us. Furthermore, we are especially unlikely to admire a person who provides
us with useful, constructive criticism.
currently consider a man to be a successful father
and husband if he
can make a lot of money, but we should judge a man by whether he can
provide his family with sensible guidance, behave in a responsible
something of value to society, and be a good role model for
We regard a man as brave and courageous
if he can get
into fistfights, which was a useful trait for prehistoric men, but in
this modern world, it would be more useful for us to consider a man be
brave and courageous when he can listen to and discuss information he
does not want to hear, such as constructive criticism,
that Jews are lying about the Holocaust. The men who are capable of
conducting experiments with culture should also be considered
courageous, not the men who insist on following their ancestors.
If every society would change its attitudes like that, then we
would want leaders who contribute to
society, provide us with intelligent guidance, set a good example for
us, and have the courage to experiment with our options in life. This
would give us leaders who slowly bring improvements to society, rather
than letting the problems persist for years.
Those type of leaders would encourage the men to exert some
self-control, provide guidance to their wife and children, and look for
ways to improve society. That would be a significant improvement over
the situation today in which men are wasting their life on a senseless
competition to acquire the largest pile of material items and awards,
and who frequently get into
arguments over who has the correct opinions about abortion, drugs, and
today need to be educated about relationships
Our prehistoric ancestors did not need to
teach their children about marriage, sex, clothing styles, or much of
anything else because the children picked up everything they needed to
simply by observing and mimicking the adults. The children learned
which items were safe to eat, how to make clothing and tools, and how
to make a shelter for the night. Furthermore, they regularly saw naked
sex acts, childbirth, and breast-feeding. The children observed how men
and women treated one another, how often they had
sex and how they had
sex, and what to expect from a marriage.
Today, by comparison, children are picking up a lot of unrealistic and
psychotic information about life from Hollywood, the Internet, and
books. Scientists have discovered a tremendous amount of information
about humans during the past few thousand years, but children today
actually have less of an understanding of some issues, such as
childbirth, sex, breast-feeding, and what human bodies look like, other
than their own body.
Prehistoric children grew up in a small, friendly, homogenous society,
they did not pick up lots of conflicting beliefs about religion,
abortion, politics, material wealth, marriage, or tattoos. By
comparison, children today are picking up so many conflicting and
idiotic opinions about life that they are confused about what to do
with their life and how to treat other people.
For an example of how men and women can ruin their relationships when
they have unrealistic information about life, consider a man who
assumes that after he gets married, his wife will continue to have the
same flirtatious personality as when they were dating, as we can see
sometimes in the Hollywood movies. After he gets married, his wife will
lose interest in flirting with him, and as soon as she has a baby, she
will show a much greater interest in her child. She will want her
be a slave who provides her with financial support and gifts, tells her
how much he loves her, and spends the evening at home like a faithful
servant who is waiting for orders.
female animal selects a male in a similar manner as a farmer would
select an ox to pull a plow, or the manner in which a business would
hire a factory worker. The females are not looking for
companionship, compatibility, or friendship. They are looking for a
slave to feed them, give them attention, and protect them from danger.
The unmarried women put a lot of effort into looking pretty and
being flirtatious and adorable. Once they pick a husband, however,
they lose their interest in flirting with men and become what
they were designed to be, namely, mothers. Of course, since every woman
is unique, some of them change more than others after getting married.
Some women are so crude that after they get married they lose their
interest in their physical appearance and allow themselves to become
overweight and sloppy.
If a man does not realize that this is normal behavior
for females, he
might become angry or disappointed when his wife loses her interest in
him after the wedding is over. He might
feel that he was deceived by her; that she pretended to be in love with
him simply to trick him into marrying her. He might decide to look for
that flirtatious behavior by having extramarital affairs, or he might
decide to get divorced and search for a woman who behaves in the manner
that he expects.
If, instead, he had been raised on realistic information about men and
women, then he would have realized that the natural relationship
between a man and woman is for the man to spend his life
supporting his wife, and for her to spend her life taking care of
children. He would have expected his wife to lose interest in him and
focus on the children. As a result, when she did that, he
would not be
surprised or upset. He would accept his role in life rather than
complain about his wife.
The prehistoric children observed men and women every day, and that
filled their memories with realistic information
about what men and
women do each day, and how men and women treat one another. The
prehistoric boys saw the men spend each day looking for food and making
tools, and bringing food home to their families. Those observations
caused the boys to realize that when they grew up, they would spend
each day doing those same activities, and they would treat their wives
just like the other men were treating their wives.
Likewise, the prehistoric girls realized that when they grew up, they
would spend their lives raising children with the other women, and they
would treat their husbands in the same manner that the adult women
treated their husbands.
Today, by comparison, children are exposed to all sorts of
idiotic and unrealistic information about marriages, jobs, sports, and
other issues, and it is causing a lot of them to be confused about what
to do with their life, what to expect from a marriage, and how to treat
There are marriage counseling services to help couples handle their
marital disputes, but those services are for couples who are already
married and fighting with each other. They are not intended to prepare
single people for marriage.
Furthermore, those counseling services are based on a religious view of
life, not a scientific view, so the counseling services are worthless.
The only counseling services that would be of use to couples would be
those that provide them with realistic information about human
behavior; give them practice in exerting self-control; and push them
into getting accustomed to thinking about problems rather than reacting
Imagine a society in which people are allowed to fly airplanes without
any type of training or education, and after they crash an airplane,
some businesses offer counseling services to the pilots to help them
cope with the trauma and provide them with some guidance on how to fly
an airplane. And imagine that those pilot counseling services are
designed by religious fanatics rather than pilots, resulting in a
service that focuses on making the pilots feel better about themselves
rather than provide sensible flight lessons.
In this modern world, we need to prepare children
for life. We need to provide them with information about human bodies,
sex, marriage, and human nature. We cannot expect them to learn what
they need simply by mimicking the adults, especially when the adults
are so sexually inhibited that they will not allow their children to
learn about sex, human bodies, masturbation, childbirth, or
It is also ridiculous to expect children to learn about life when there
are thousands of businesses, religions, and other organizations that
are struggling to manipulate children and adults
into desiring certain products, following a particular religion,
becoming feminists, or following a particular political belief.
must alter our culture to fit our genetic characteristics
We must do more than merely learn about
and accept our animal-like qualities. We should also alter our culture
to fit our qualities. For example, we need to stop allowing businesses,
religions, and other groups from manipulating children. If you can
understand that children are picking up bits of information as they
grow up, you should realize that it is important for us to ensure that
children are picking up useful and realistic
information, rather than
idiotic beliefs from organizations that are trying to manipulate them.
Organizations are trying to convince children to desire certain types
of clothing, toys, candies, religious beliefs, political beliefs, and
beliefs about men and women. We should not allow businesses, religions,
or other organizations to manipulate children.
I think the primary reason that men and women are having so much
trouble forming stable relationships today is because boys and girls
are picking up unrealistic information about marriage, relationships,
and sex, and most of this false and deceptive information is coming
from businesses and religions. In order for men and women to form
satisfying relationships, the boys and girls need to pick up realistic
information about human nature.
We should also design our leisure activities to fit our
characteristics. For example, women have a strong desire to chat with
one another, especially when they are upset. If they don't have female
friends, they are likely to expect their husband to listen to them.
Unfortunately, men and women cannot spend a lot of time talking to one
another because we have significant differences in our intellectual and
From the point of view of a woman, chatting is a social activity. When
women run out of topics to discuss, they will usually just repeat a
topic, which irritates most men. The men have to suppress their craving
to yell, "You just talked about
this issue five times today! Shut up
Women usually talk about something because they have a craving to talk,
not because they are interested in discussing an issue or listening to
somebody else's opinion. Chatting is a social activity for women.
Women also talk when they are upset, but they don't want a
conversation. They just want to talk, and they want somebody
least pretend to be listening. Talking is their method of relieving
their frustration. By comparison, when men are frustrated, they tend to
yell, throw objects, or remain silent.
During prehistoric times, women were never alone.
They were always
surrounded by women and children. Even when the people were in their
teepee structures, they were within auditory range of one another, and
the women were capable of chatting with one another.
designed to spend the day and evening among women and children, and so
they expect to be surrounded by human voices. Today, however,
most people are living in
homes that are separated from
one another. When women are alone in a
house, some of them will turn on a television simply to provide them
with some human voices. During the evenings, when a husband
and wife are
alone in their house, some women deal with the loneliness
by spending a lot of time on the telephone or on the Internet, and
some women expect their husband to talk
to her, or at least listen to her.
Men don't have much of an interest in the type of chatting
that women do. This usually results in husbands who do not pay much
attention to what their wife is saying. Instead, the husbands tend to
occasionally make remarks such as: "Yes
dear." Women have such a
craving to talk that even though they sometimes sense that their
husbands are not paying attention, they continue talking anyway.
We are currently designing society to satisfy our cravings for big
houses and large plots of land, but this is creating an unfriendly,
social environment. It is causing husbands and wives to spend a lot of
their time in their house by themselves. Humans evolved to spend our
evenings in a campsite with other people. When we put a man and woman
together in a house by themselves, they are going to get bored, lonely,
and annoy one another.
Millions of people spend many hours during the evening watching
television programs or on the Internet, or on the telephone. There is
nothing wrong with any of this, but if we take a look at what
they are doing, and why,
I think we will come to the conclusion that most of them are bored and
lonely. For example, they are selecting the television shows that allow
them to feel as if they are among other people, and they choose the
Internet activities that allow them to chat with other people. When
they are on the telephone, it is not to discuss anything of value;
it is simply to chat because they are so lonely.
By watching a television show in which
people are playing
sports or singing, or by watching a television program such as "Seinfeld",
we can imagine that we are among other people. Those type of television
programs make it feel as if we are sitting around a campfire
and watching other people do things.
However, if a person's only contact with other people is through
electronic devices, then he may as well cut out his brain, put it into
a jar, and connect himself to a television
their brain in a jar, they don't have to worry about getting
sore from sitting in a chair for hours, or having to get up every few
hours to eat or go to the bathroom.
During prehistoric times, the people were always in close proximity to
another during the evenings. Some people would make tools, while others
might play music, sing songs, or dance. The children would play with
each other, and some of the adults would play recreational games, tell
stories of what they did during the day, or teach one of the children
how to sharpen a stick into a spear. Sometimes one of them
would reenact what he did during the day, similar to an actor in a play.
Most of our television programs are simulating that prehistoric
campsite. By sitting in front of a television, we can watch other
people, including children, interact with one another, play music,
dance, and play recreational games.
Most people select television programs according to their emotional
feelings; specifically, to provide themselves with pleasure, not to
educate themselves or help them practice self-control. The type of
programs that people are attracted to gives us an indication of the
emotional feelings of the people. The programs that are the most
popular are those that make it feel as if we are among other people. I
think this is evidence that most people are using television as a
substitute for friends and activities.
When the television programs provide us with sports, music, and other
types of entertainment, they don't keep their cameras focused on the
athletes or musicians. Instead, the cameras frequently show us the
audience, and there are frequently narrators who talk to us. I think
this is an indication that people who watch these programs want to feel
as if they are in the audience. They don't want to watch
event. They want to fantasize that they are among
Because men and women have different intellectual and emotional
qualities, we are attracted to slightly different types of television
programs. Women have a greater attraction to the "soap operas" because
those programs simulate the ancient campsite in which women would chat
with one another about other people and their children.
I think the strong attraction to telephones, television, and social
media is evidence that our social environment has degraded
significantly, and that we are not getting what we truly need; namely,
companionship, and activities with other people. I would describe most
television programs as being analogous to sex robots, pet dogs,
and dolls. In other
words, people are not watching television because it improves
lives. Rather, they are watching it because they are lonely or bored.
Most television programs are being used as a substitute
for a life.
a zoo installed lots of televisions in a cage of monkeys, and if
the zoo also produced television programs for the monkeys. Imagine
if the monkeys were spending almost all of their leisure time alone in
front of a television. Imagine the monkeys also getting fat and sickly, and
having trouble forming relationships and reproducing. You would likely
complain about that zoo exhibit, but what is the difference between
monkeys behaving like that, and humans?
Imagine that the zoo also provided the male monkeys with "monkey pornography",
and they provided the female monkeys with dolls that look like baby monkeys
and dogs that have been specially bred to become pets for monkeys.
Imagine the male monkeys spending a lot of their time masturbating, and
the female spending a lot of time with the dolls and dogs.
You would likely regard that zoo exhibit as disgusting, but what is the
difference between that type of zoo exhibit and what we see in human cities today?
I think that if we were living in cities that are more homogenous and
friendly, and if we were within walking distance of our friends, and if
we had easy access to a wide variety of free recreational activities,
music concerts, social clubs, and other activities, our interest in
television would decrease, and we would also want to watch different
types of programs on television.
When people are extremely hungry, they think a lot about food; when
women become frustrated about not having a baby, they might spend a lot
of time thinking about babies; when a man has strong cravings for sex,
he might spend a lot of time fantasizing about sex. Likewise, when
people are lonely and bored, they are likely to spend a lot of time
trying to satisfy their cravings for people and activities.
Therefore, if we were living in a city in which people had satisfying
friendships and activities, they would not be bored and lonely, which
in turn means that they would not have intense cravings for television
programs that make them feel as if they are among other people. Their
interest in television programs would change.
I suspect that in a more appropriate social environment, people would
lose their interest in the type of television
programs that make us feel less lonely, such as General Hospital,
Seinfeld, and Friends. I also suspect that people would lose their
interest in programs that frequently show us the audience, and the
programs that have fake laughter. I also
suspect that if people were having a
more satisfying life, they would have less of an interest in
dogs, dolls, and sex robots.
If we were living in a more satisfying social environment, we
would still enjoy television, but I think we would want different types
of television programs, such as:
• Programs that are purely
such as music concerts, plays like the Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker, and
acts like those of Cirque du Soleil.
Our cities are not providing us with an appropriate environment. Our
cities are unfriendly, ugly, and frightening, and the cities are so
chaotic, and the transportation so difficult, dangerous, and
time-consuming, that it is inconvenient for us to get together with our
friends in the evening and join them in activities.
• Programs that are truly educational, similar to those
produced by David
Attenborough and Nature.
• Videos of ourselves and
our friends from the past.
The fear of crime is also causing parents with young children to be
afraid of leaving their children alone. Actually, we have made it illegal
for parents to leave their children alone. Compare that to prehistoric
tribes in which the children could freely wander around the campsite.
Children today are isolated from other children, and many of them are
afraid of being kidnapped or raped. Parents need babysitters in order
to spend time with other adults.
Furthermore, our cities do not truly provide us with social or
recreational activities. There are businesses offering us sports
events, food, music concerts, and other services, but they are
businesses that are trying to make
profit from us. Businesses are not
going to provide us with what we need. They are going to
provide us with what is profitable to them. We
design a city for human life, not for businesses.
must acknowledge that some of us are unusual
Most people are ordinary, but there will
always be a minority of people who are at the extreme edges of the bell
curve. Two reasons that this issue is significant to us are:
1) The people who are unusual must
realize that they are unusual, and that society has been designed
for people with slightly different characteristics. They should not
society to change to give them what they want.
There will always be people who are unusual in some particular quality,
and they must realize that they are unusual because if they assume they
are ordinary people,
they will assume that what they want and think about is what everybody
wants and thinks about, and that false assumption will lead them to
conclusions about life.
2) Every society must restrict the reproduction of the unusual people
in order to ensure that society is friendly and homogenous. We cannot
allow unlimited diversity in physical and mental qualities.
For example, there are some women who do not have strong
who would rather have the type of jobs and leisure activities that men
have. If they assume that they are typical women, they will assume that
other women also prefer to behave like men, and that in turn will bring
the false conclusion that most women are raising children
society is pressuring them to become mothers. They
will assume that most women are suffering, and that
they need to be liberated from the sexism.
If the masculine women could understand that they are unusual women,
then they would realize that they should quietly do what they want to
do, and they should allow the majority of women be mothers.
Likewise, the feminine men who do not realize that they are unusual men
will come to idiotic conclusions about life, such as claiming that the
reason most men never cry is because we are suppressing our
emotions, and that the reason we don't spend hours a day with babies is
because we have been brainwashed by sexist propaganda. The feminine men
should accept the evidence that they are unusual
men, and that most men
truly do not want to cry or play with babies.
Men were not designed to react to problems by crying. A male monkey's
natural reaction to problems is anger or fear, not crying. The females,
and especially the baby monkeys, tend to react to problems by crying
A male monkey evolved to react to a problem with anger or fear because
both of those reactions provide leadership to the females and the
children. For example, when a male monkey becomes angry at some
problem, such as a predator or competitor, his anger gives him the
courage and physical energy to face the problem. If a problem is so
dangerous that he becomes frightened, then he will run away from the
problem, and he will take the females and children with him, thereby
protecting them from danger.
Men are supposed to be leaders. A man's tear glands are triggered by
certain emotional situations, both pleasant and sad situations, such as
a wedding and the death of a friend, but our tear glands were not
designed to be triggered when we encounter a problem
in life. We have been
designed to react to problems with anger or fear, not with tears. Of
course, in this
modern world, it is absurd for us to react to a problem with
anger or fear. Today we need to exert some self-control so that we can
push ourselves into remaining calm, analyzing the problem, and looking
for an intelligent solution.
The men who have a tendency to react to problems by crying are
"abnormal". They struggle
to suppress their tears, and they assume that other men are also
suppressing tears, but most of us do not suppress
tears. We truly do
not want to cry when we are confronted with a problem.
The men who accuse us of suppressing our tears have an unrealistic view
of humans. Their accusations are as idiotic as if Jerry
Sandusky were to claim that every man wants to have sex with young
boys, and that we are suppressing our cravings. Most men truly
do not have a sexual attraction to other men, and
especially not to little boys.
If homosexuals or pedophiles believe that they are "normal" men, then all
of the opinions they create based on that unrealistic assumption will
Schools should teach children that even though all humans have the same
mental and physical characteristics, each of us is unique, and we all
have a unique set of flaws and defects. Students should be put through
lots of activities and tests so that they can determine their
particular qualities. This will allow the students to discover whether
they are "typical" people, or whether there are some unusual
characteristics about their body and/or mind.
There will be some people who are so ordinary in every quality that
they could truly boast that what they think is "typical",
but until we have been put through tests to determine our
qualities, we should not assume that our desires, qualities, or
fantasies are typical. This is especially true of people who read my
documents. You obviously do not have a typical mind because if you did,
you would be sitting in front of a television or playing with a cell
phone instead of reading this type of material. Because you are not
typical, you might have a difficult time understanding the typical
people, and the typical people might have trouble
must restrict the reproduction of the misfits
Religious fanatics and social scientists
promote the philosophy that we should love one another and tolerate one
another's differences. That philosophy would be practical if the human
mind was truly like a piece of clay that molded itself to the
environment. However, if you believe that our intellectual and
emotional characteristics are due to our genetic design, then you
should realize that there are an infinite number of possible
intellectual and emotional characteristics, and that the only way a
society will be homogenous, friendly, and pleasant is if we restrict
reproduction to ensure that the people have compatible mental
An example is this
former policeman who wanted to have a child simply to rape the child.
His desires are so bizarre that it's difficult to believe that the news
report is telling the truth. The accusations by orphans at the
Boystown orphanage, and the accusations of the children at
the McMartin preschool, the pizzagate information, and all of
the other hundreds of accusations about pedophilia, is showing us that
there are possibly millions of people who enjoy using children for sex,
and drinking their blood, eating their flesh, and torturing them.
The pedophiles are just one example of how people
significantly different and incompatible emotional and intellectual
characteristics. If we do not control reproduction, each generation
will have a wider variety of personalities and intellectual
you agree with me that our bodies, personalities, and intellectual
abilities are genetic, then you should realize that every generation is
going to create a diversity of physical and mental characteristics.
prehistoric times, nature took care of this problem in a very cruel
manner. For example, the undesirable children were bullied, which
reduced their chances of survival and reproduction, and sometimes the
adults would kill the undesirable children. The bizarre adults had
trouble surviving, attracting friends, attracting a spouse, and raising
children. Today, however, we struggle to stop the suffering and help
everybody to survive and reproduce.
There are already some people who have such unusual
personalities that they cannot find a friend or spouse, and there are
who are excessively violent, and there are other people who don't want
to go to school, work in a modern job, follow schedules, or obey our
laws. There are also people who believe that they are witches or
warlocks, and there are some people who are so involved with religion
that we should classify them as mentally ill.
Every generation has a wider variety of
personalities and intellectual abilities, which is causing each
generation to be more incompatible than the
Furthermore, every generation is also experiencing a wider variety of physical
qualities. Each generation has a wider variety of sizes and shapes, and
each generation has a wider variety of skin blemishes, speech
disorders, odors, allergies, and other problems.
If we don't restrict the variations, people will
eventually have such a wide variety of shapes and sizes of bodies
that everybody will need different sizes and shapes of chairs,
tables, beds, clothing, bathrooms, and doorways.
Eventually the human race will become millions of different species
with different medical and nutritional requirements.
In other documents I have proposed allowing cities to develop their own
culture, but I have also suggested a world government
that supervises all of the cities and prevents them becoming so
genetically different that they start causing trouble for one another.
We can allow different societies to be genetically and culturally
different from one another, but we must ensure that everybody is
compatible enough to form a peaceful, stable world. We have to put
limits on how different the people can
become. Those limits are
arbitrary, and so the only way to set them is to have a world
government make the arbitrary decisions and force them on the cities.
We are not
being nice when we allow such incredible diversity. Rather, we are
causing the unusual people to suffer a miserable, lonely life.
pointed out in other documents that many of the people who choose
bizarre clothing styles, tattoos, body piercings, and lifestyles are not
doing this because they are enjoying their freedom, or because they
enjoy their clothing styles or body piercings. Rather, they are
deliberately choosing to do something different from the "normal"
people because they don't feel as if they fit in to society. They are misfits,
and they are miserable, angry, envious, rebellious, and lonely. They
are not enjoying life. They are suffering. We are tormenting
misfits, not being nice to them.
is autism increasing?
Several studies of autism have shown that
it has been increasing
tremendously between 1996
and 2007, such as the graph to the right.
Trump is one of many people who is promoting the theory that
vaccines are causing autism. I don't
whether it is possible for a child to become autistic from a vaccine,
but it should be obvious that vaccines cannot
explain the rise
in autism because there is no corresponding rise in the use of
vaccines. I suspect that the rise in autism is due to these five
1) More parents and doctors are aware
issue of autism, thereby resulting in more people looking
for signs of autism, whereas decades ago a lot of the autistic children
were regarded as simply being different, stupid, or weird.
is a vague word that is being used to describe a variety of undesirable
behavior. I don't know how to explain autism, but I can say with
certainty that even if we eliminate vaccines and pollutants, there will
be more autism in each generation, and there will
be a wider variety of
autism in each generation. The reason I can state this as a fact is
because biologists and farmers have already proven that when
reproduction is not controlled, every plant and animal population will degrade
Pollutants are increasing in our environment. Some chemicals have
already shown to have the ability to interfere with the development of
animals and humans. The chemicals that are obviously dangerous have
been prohibited, but we should consider the possibility that we have
not yet noticed that some of the "safe" chemicals are causing
developmental disorders that are more difficult to notice. For
example, it would be very difficult to determine if a child of ordinary
intelligence would have had an above-average
intelligence if it were not for the pollutants in the environment.
3) Different races of humans are
interbreeding. Mules are an example of how a mother and father from
different gene pools will produce children with mental and physical
disorders. The different races of humans are more genetically
compatible than horses and donkeys, but there is no evidence to suggest
that we are so compatible that we can interbreed without producing
children with mental and physical disorders.
4) Genetic disorders
are accumulating in every race because we are not restricting
reproduction to the healthier people.
5) More parents are having children later in life, which results in
children who are the result of elderly eggs and sperm.
The people who cannot understand this concept, or
who refuse to acknowledge it, are analogous to people who refuse to
acknowledge that 2+2 = 4. These people should be classified
as "intellectually and/or emotionally inferior", and they should not be
allowed in influential
positions. They are causing the human race to degrade into freaks.
we do not control reproduction, every generation
will have a wider
variety of emotional characteristics, intellectual abilities, mental
illnesses, crooked teeth, diabetes, headaches, and autoimmune diseases.
Every generation will have a wider variety of physical sizes and
shapes, and a wider variety of digestive problems, nutritional
requirements, and sexual cravings. People will become increasingly
antisocial, making it increasingly difficult for them to form stable
friendships, marriages, and organizations.
Eventually so many people will have so many serious genetic disorders
that it will cause
society to degrade because there will be too few people available to
maintain modern technology. There will be such a shortage of skilled
machinists, technicians, engineers, and other people that the situation
will resemble the movie Idiocracy, in which the people have trouble
maintaining their buildings, electric power network, factories, and
Every generation has more people who have trouble with
school, jobs, and laws. Every generation has more people who want to be
taken care of by somebody else while they spend their time behaving in
an obnoxious manner, watching television, getting drunk, or playing
games. Every generation has more people who want to waste their time at
work looking at pornography, playing video games, or sending text
messages on their phones. Every generation has more people who have
such bizarre personalities that it is difficult for them to form stable
friendships, marriages, and business relationships, and which results
in them becoming best friends with animals, sex robots,
fictional characters, and dolls.
In an earlier
document I speculated that homosexuals frequently flaunt their
homosexuality, such as in parades, because most of them
are actually unhappy that they are homosexual, but
they are trying to
make themselves feel better by repeatedly telling themselves over and
over that they enjoy being homosexual.
When we find somebody
routinely saying something over and over, especially if he says it to
himself, it is very likely that he is lying, and
that he is trying to
fool us and/or himself.
We can see this same situation
occurring with people who have autistic children, or who are autistic
themselves. The parents of autistic children are suffering,
people who are autistic are suffering, also, but many of these
are struggling to make themselves feel better by repeatedly telling
themselves that autism is wonderful. For example, some of them proudly
display such graphics as the three below.
of those people have created clever ways of misspelling words, such as
"autism is ausome" and "We're autastic". They will provide
some momentary titillation every time they praise themselves for
being creative, but they are doing nothing
to reduce their misery, or reduce the number of autistic children in
the next generation.
The only way we are going to reduce this problem is to restrict
reproduction, and to eliminate secrecy
so that we can study the human race and get a better
of what is causing our problems. How many of our mental and physical
problems are due to chemicals in the environment? How many are due
to the interbreeding of races or genetic defects? We need to answer
these questions, not
ignore them. The people who are resisting the issue of genetics and
pollutants should be regarded as inferior
creatures who are destroying the human race.
Multiculturalism and tolerance is impractical
Zoos do not promote
multicultural exhibits. In other words, they do not
put different species of animals together in the same cage and expect
coexist peacefully. Zoos do not practice "tolerance", either.
Rather, they promote compatibility.
In other words, they do not mix psychotic monkeys, midget
tall monkeys, violent monkeys, retarded monkeys, shy monkeys, and
sloppy monkeys. They do not expect a variety of monkeys to tolerate and
love one another. Instead, they put animals together that are
compatible with one another.
We should design cities with the same attitude that
we design zoo exhibits. Mixing people with different physical and
mental characteristics results in frustration, fighting, unemployment,
bullying, loneliness, and misery.
Take a look at this
comment that was posted on rumormillnews.com, which is one of the many
sites that Jews and their cohorts use to spread propaganda. The person
who posted it makes angry, sarcastic remarks
about Donald Trump and Germans. His document is vague and
confusing, but that is to be expected since crime networks don't
attract people with high quality minds.
His remarks show a lot of anger towards Germans and Trump, and it
seems to be because he does not fit into our society. He
describes the Germans as being like "bugs". Some of his remarks are:
are after the governments constantly, to create more “jobs”.
Trump's promise to create jobs bothers him. He does not want
He wants the government to
provide "fertile grounds" for us to "flourish" and "thrive". What does
that mean? He does not provide any detail, perhaps because he is
ashamed to admit that what he wants is to be taken care of by
who provide him with food, housing, electricity, and computers, while
he spends his time promoting propaganda, eating, and playing video
A typical bug behaviour. Keep everybody busy, for the “collective”,
“public”, “society”, with zero respect to individuality.
government's duty is not the creation of jobs, but to provide “fertile
grounds” for EVERYBODY to flourish, to thrive, without interfering on
others, without being parasitic.
also posted a brief response to his document in which somebody who
agreed with him made some vague, insulting remarks about "long necks".
I suppose that is an indication that these people are Neanderthals with
It is possible that those two people would have been
happy living with a tribe of Mongols a few centuries earlier because
back then they could have made a living by stealing from people who
traveled through their land. When we let them live with us, however,
they become angry, miserable misfits because they don't like our
schools, work habits, jobs, and other culture.
The two people are just two of millions
of people who are living in America
and Europe, but who don't like our schools or jobs. They like our
material wealth, and they like how we treat them, but it is
idiotic to let them live with us because they don't fit in.
They become angry, bitter, frustrated, and envious. Some of them become
criminals, and others get jobs in the government where they conspire
against us, or waste their time watching pornography or playing video
games. We are not being nice when we accept
immigrants who cannot fit into our society
because of their mental or physical differences, or who don't
want to adapt to our
If the Jews and other immigrants would remain on their own land, they
would not cause anybody any trouble, but they don't want to live with
their own people. They don't like their own people. For example, the
Jew that married Trump's daughter did not want to marry a Jew; he
wanted Trump's daughter, and Mark Zuckerberg did not want a Jew,
either. They would rather live with us and marry our women. They want
our food, not the food they produce. They want the homes that we
build, not the homes that they build. We have to stop feeling sorry
for the immigrants who don't like their nation and want to
are a nation of immigrants, but we are not
A lot of people point out that America is
a nation of immigrants, and they claim that because of this, we should
continue to accept immigrants and refugees from every nation. However,
the issue is more complex than they make it seem.
must regard our children as immigrants,
It is true that everybody in the United States can be described as an
immigrant, including the Native Americans. However, the early
immigrants were considerably different from the immigrants that started
appearing in the 20th century. The Native Americans, the pilgrims, and
all of the early immigrants traveled to North America to start a new
life for themselves. They were not going to an
established nation. They were pioneers and explorers. They were taking
a big risk, and a lot of them died in the process.
Some of the early immigrants to America were mentally disturbed, and
some were criminals, but the point I want to bring to your attention is
that they were explorers. Furthermore, and more
important, they were willing to adapt to the culture of the new nation.
Those from England did not have to adapt, but those from Germany,
France, and other nations had to learn a new language and a new culture.
However, the immigrants began to change significantly by the end of the
19th century. As America became more wealthy, and as it developed a
more pleasant social environment, we began attracting a different type
of immigrant. Specifically, an immigrant that is analogous to the rats
and mice that want to live in our home. They were
America because they were attracted to the food, material wealth, and
better living conditions. They were not pioneers,
and they were not interested in adapting to
American culture. They were like animals who wanted
to enjoy the benefits without becoming a member of American society.
Many of the refugees and immigrants who are coming to America today are
analogous to rats who come into our house simply to grab
food and enjoy our better social environment. They are not interested
in learning our language,
becoming our friends, and adapting to our culture. They just want our
food, houses, and better living conditions. We don't owe those type of
immigrants anything. They are not "citizens". They are just "pests".
Imagine if IBM were to give jobs to people who had no interest
in becoming a member of the IBM team, or who have no ability to
contribute to it. Imagine that the only reason they want to become IBM
employees is so that they can have access to
the paychecks, healthcare, retirement programs, cafeteria, bathrooms, parking lot, computers,
air-conditioning, and Internet.
IBM management is not so stupid as to hire people
who lack the skills to contribute to their organization,
or who do not want to adapt to it.
However, there are millions of people pushing America into accepting
immigrants and refugees who are only interested in getting access to
our food, houses, and better living conditions. This will not
create a pleasant nation. This will cause America to become
just a gathering of animals who are trying to use
and exploit one another, and who will eventually get
into fights over who this country belongs to.
The concept that America is a nation of
immigrants is more complex than I have made it appear.
The reason is because every nation can be described
as a nation of
immigrants. If the human race developed from some small group
in Africa, then every nation can be described as a nation of immigrants.
The argument that a nation should accept immigrants simply because it
is a nation of immigrants does not make sense. It makes more sense to
say that every nation needs to control immigration.
Every nation should require people to apply to become a member of the
nation, and every nation should analyze that person and pass judgment
on whether they want him as a member of their society. They should pass
judgment on whether he will fit in, and whether he will be able to
contribute to the society.
Furthermore, to make this issue more complex, we need to realize that
our children should be put into the same category
as immigrants. Our
attitude today is that when citizens of a nation give birth to
children, their children automatically become members of society, but
children are just a haphazard jumble of genetic traits, and the end
result is that some children are not going to fit into our society at
all, and some will fit to a certain extent, but not very well. Our
children need to go through the same type of scrutiny that we put
This policy might seem bizarre, but this is the policy that businesses,
militaries, and other organizations have been practicing for thousands
of years. For example, when an employee of IBM has children, his
children do not automatically become IBM employees. The children of the
IBM employees who want to become an IBM employee have to apply for a
just like everybody else.
When we give birth to children, we cannot assume that the children are
going to fit into our society. We need to observe them and pass
judgment on whether they have the qualities necessary to fit in. If
not, they need to be put on restrictions, such as restricting them to
certain jobs or neighborhoods, or they need to be evicted, and some may
need to be euthanized.
What is the difference between a nation that accepts a bunch of stupid
refugees, and a nation that gives birth to a bunch of stupid children?
The effect is the same in both cases. It does not matter whether we
accept idiots from a foreign nation, or idiots from parents within our
own nation. It does not matter whether we accept criminals from Cuba or
whether we accept criminals from the parents of our own nation. We must
control the people in our nation regardless of whether they are
immigrating into this country, or whether people are giving birth to
If we continue to ignore the fact that some of our children do not fit
into society, we allow the misfit children to suffer, and that
in turn causes trouble for society. For example, the misfit
hurting schools because parents and teachers are pandering to them
rather than suppressing them. One example of their detrimental effect
on school is that they are putting pressure on teachers to give
grades to students. This problem is often described as grade
Another example of how the defective children are altering school and
culture is that schools have recently begun eliminating
showers in the gym classes. When
I was in school, from seventh grade onward, we had to take physical
education classes to get some exercise, and we were required to change
from our school clothing into gym clothing. At the end of the class we
would go into a community shower to rinse off. During the years since I
was in school, many American schools have stopped telling children to
take a shower. Why has this change occurred?
schools have been seriously discussing this issue, and that they have
come to the conclusion that showers are detrimental or unnecessary. I
think they are eliminating showers because the newest
of American children are so mentally and physically defective
cannot tolerate community showers.
percentage of the American people are ashamed
of their bodies. A lot of them are overweight, underweight, deformed,
or ugly. America is also a mixture of races with different physical
appearances and sizes, and this adds to the awkwardness of the
children. A lot of the Americans are also suffering from such serious
emotional disorders that they cannot handle nudity.
In one of my earlier documents, I suggested that we
develop a shower similar to a car wash so that people could quickly
rinse off during their lunch time, but the only people who would be
willing to use that type of device are people who are not
their body, and who can handle nudity. How many
people is that? It may
only be few percent of the population.
Our prehistoric ancestors did not
have private bathrooms. When they wanted to wash off in the rain or in
a pond, they had to do so in front of other people. They were not
ashamed, however. They did not care if somebody saw their naked body.
Today, however, people become hysterical if somebody sees their naked
The situation is going to
get worse, not better. Every generation is more
than the generation before it, and every generation has more emotional
and intellectual disorders.
There are already a lot
of people who have trouble pronouncing words, and some people stutter,
and some people have an unpleasant voice. These problems are
getting worse with every generation, and it will eventually have a
detrimental effect on schools. There will be a point in the future at
there are so many children who are ashamed of their voice or their
inability to pronounce words that they put pressure on the schools to
stop asking children to speak in class.
their voices and speaking ability will be so defective that the people
will be so ashamed of themselves that speaking in public will be
prohibited, just as nudity
is. People will communicate by
messages. When they want food at a restaurant, or clothing from a
retail store, they will point to what they want rather than speak.
We are not cruel to abort or euthanize the
defective babies. We are simply protecting the defective babies from
suffering decades of loneliness and misery, and protecting society from
their bad influence, and protecting their parents from becoming
burdened by them.
If we allow every city to control their citizens and immigration, then
can create peaceful, pleasant, safe,
and homogenous cities, and every generation would become more sociable,
less violent, and
better looking. Every generation would develop more stable friendships
and marriages, and be more willing to learn, work, cooperate, and
contribute to society. People would eventually be able to use some type
of carwash-type shower that I've suggested. In fact, they
running through them and rinsing off before they go back to work.