What could a world without profit look like?
The object of the ark caravan are questions – their goal answers, which have been found afterwards by representatives of all humanity. The character of the questions is not how something can be improved within existing conditions, but what has to change in the circumstances – especially among people, between them – so that all people benefit from it. Could the food supply of all the world’s people be secured, even if no shareholders deserve it? Would hospitals be built, streets and schools, cars, airplanes and toys, if no stock market traders earned money from them? How did banks work when there were no more interest rates? etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Water is the most important means of survival. After three days without water everyone dies. The technical possibilities are there that everyone could have drinking water. Nevertheless, 70% of humanity has no access to drinking water, which is why tens of thousands of people die every day, especially children, from poisoned water. What is the reason for this? Would that be changeable? How? Why is this not the first priority of all politics and religion, which is about the well-being of the people?
There is nowadays enough water, food, space, knowledge, technology, in the world to supply all people, but a µ-breakage part of people has unimaginably much, the vast majority of people almost do not. What is the reason for this? The “nature of man”? The greed of the few? Worried about existence? Even if they might have been justified in the past, perhaps they are now obsolete?
By changing the consciousness of all, this unjust and unsustainable state could be changed from one day to the next. How could this other consciousness be expressed? How could it be brought about? Would the rich then have to “waive” allegedly justified advantages or would they have to become richer in human terms? What role do the religions play, which demand this justice, but have not been able to realize it for thousands of years? Is this because of their claim to sole representation? Is the idea of justice not yet clearly developed enough?
What could a global soviet republic look like? What criteria could it be structured from bottom to top?
What does “freedom is always freedom for others” mean in concrete terms? Examples, where are the limits?
According to what criteria would a chair, tomatoes, cars, houses and educational institutions be realized if no profit had to be made?
What are superfluous products?
What do products look like that were invented just to earn money?
What do products look like that are only useful?
How should the communication structure look like, so that not only no more power is needed, but not even administration steered from above is necessary.
What criteria would work be rewarded with if profit is lost? On the basis of real figures, e. g. from the automotive industry.
How is it calculated what one earns (strength, training, time, alienated or not alienated, i. e. fun or not, age, needs etc.) in a double sense: money and recognition.
Calculations of how drinking water could be distributed everywhere?
What are right or justified needs and what are wrong?
Since the invention of the worldwide web, it has been possible to calculate what needs all people have in which places of the world and how they could be satisfied in the simplest way: what would the programs look like? Value could and wanted to program it?
How can we convince the present profiteers that they would be better off using their power and resources to create a just world?
Is the car a basic human need? What are the consequences – not only of oil wars, but also of cobbled landscapes (over-flooding), etc.?
Is movement, travelling, getting to know other people, cultures and countries a basic human need? If so, how can it be satisfied without destroying the world?
What do advertising and packaging do with people? They determine everyday life to an enormous extent and are unnecessary except for information – what is the difference between information and advertising? What is the difference between necessary and unnecessary packaging?
How could packaging – and transport of things, especially food – be reduced to a minimum?
Would a world without advertising really look boring? Couldn’t the armies of graphic artists and designers really embellish the world and make it more colourful and varied if there is no interest in selling their art?
What is to be considered of the fact that narcotic drugs such as sugar and worse are mixed in mass-produced foods in order to make people dependent on this food, even though they become ill?
If consumption is a substitute satisfaction: what replacement for? Missing communication, sex, happy work etc? How can we achieve what consumption is a substitute for and thus make consumption superfluous?
What must competition and competition look like, with which the other one is not put down, but the competitors inspire each other?
How can we get the responsible authorities to rethink? You’re so dumb and primitive, they don’t get it?
Why are there “apple puree with mango” in tiny glasses of your own, created with an immense amount of work, and not easily attainable apple puree in large quantities and mangoes, for all those who want it; everyone has a mixer and the result is much better than the factory made one, which everyone knows. What is the pleasure expenditure ratio between glasses and homemade? How much time does one really save, extrapolated on all other comparable glasses etc.? Why do you still buy the glass? How much time and effort would be saved if there were no such glasses? What storage containers are there instead?
Generally speaking, how could the labelling and distribution of fresh foodstuffs (milk, yoghurt, desserts, spring rolls, sauces, soups, soups, small ready-made items, etc.) be designed and organised without the madness of 25 783 different cardboard, plastic, glass or ceramic containers with elaborate advertising? Mainly regional but also over long distances with the least effort? When is it “necessary” or justified and justifiable? Couldn’t the designations not look much more appealing, wittier and more varied if the respective manufacturers realized this with and in their environment, decentrally? What would this look like for all products?
Meat: research is being carried out on meat alternatives all over the world; vegetarian or vegandals are dogmatic too, and cannot be expected of everyone: how can we achieve a rethinking to less meat? If all people were to eat as much meat as the Germans, it would take three worlds that would not last long because the ozone layer had disappeared: this has been known for a long time, why is there no consequence?
Auto: Movement is a basic human need, an expression of human freedom. What would reasonable means of transport look like? How could their optimal utilization be organised with the least possible effort?
Armor: how to enforce the following procedure (or similar): Regarding the role of the UN: 1, all governments must set out a timetable for how long it will take them to stop their arms industries, abolish their armies and what they intend to do instead, in which alternative industries, projects they want to restructure. 2. The UN mandates interdisciplinary scientific teams working globally and for each country a) develop the same plans as proposals and alternatives to those of governments b) for the poor countries without functioning, let alone integrated economy in the global context and including the experiences of all NGOs emancipatory, which also means: glo-bal integrative proposals c) disseminate the results of these studies, from the bush drum to the satellite dish, in all countries of the world. 3. then popular vote on the various plans implemented by the UN in all countries (including the so-called democratic ones) will be held. In any case, the interdisciplinary teams of scientists are less dependent on national and capital interests than the politicians and they have more knowledge, even if they are not guarantors for the functioning of the matter. Just because they have this clear-cut task, the possibilities of bribing them, putting them under pressure or manipulating them in any other way are limited; at best they could not think of anything.
What could be done, fabricated instead of military and weapons production? Toys for adults? How many people are affected? What can they do, what specialties? What is there in these areas that the world needs? How can you make sure these people do that?
How could an app look like, which co-ordinates all movement requests locally or remotely, in such a way that it does not need timetables any more, but as soon as so many people want to go in the same direction.
How many tons of steel would be saved if only half of the cars would be produced as they are at the moment, while still producing a lot more?
How many ingenious computer scientists, whose valuable manpower is abused, produce unnecessary idiocy (where the term is narrowly defined, only the most idiotic) – what could they produce that which makes sense; the cracks of the automotive industry alone?
Here are some more questions!
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator