AN IMMEDIATE CRISIS – Evaluating Projected TimeLines

AN IMMEDIATE CRISIS –  Evaluating Projected TimeLines

Nuet   11/28/2012

nuet feels it wise to briefly examine what we and others are doing in context of  the META-STATE of Humankind/Gaia in 2012 projecting forward a few decades.  Imagine we had immediate access to all digital semiotic structures (sems) on Earth; through which we could search and gather. We would have algorithms to compare alternative systems of sems that conflicted and sorted systems of sems into alternative world descriptions of the 2012 state, with different forecasts.

Since historical sems are included, we have access to trends from earlier, through 2012 and projected further for decades.

The most striking pattern would be the growth of the human population, changes in humankind’s organization and interactions. The effect of humankind on the biosphere would be clear, going back millennia, and with the many projections related to climate change and other serious attacks on basic biospheric subsystems.  Some forecasts are very dire, leading to the full collapse of social systems, drastic population reductions, and great suffering. Even extinction is possible.  Most forecasts leave the biosphere scared for millennia.

The Climate Meme project  is an initially tiny effort that hopes to go viral.  Even the UN and World Bank has recently called the alarm. The biggest threat, methane from melting permafrost is too scary to post mainstream.

There are forecasts that could avoid the worse case scenarios, but they need to be initiated soon and massively.  We are talking about A FEW YEARS !

Since secret documents are part of our fantasy database we can get a more accurate picture of the state of humankind in 2012 and projections.  The deviousness of leaders and power groups is revealed far beyond even the most critical analyses of 2012.  There is great fragility, but also a high capacity for resilience in the ecology of human power.  The distribution of knowledge and competencies among the population is dismal.  It is very difficult to see how the basic systems of power can change significantly in time to avoid planetary disaster.  Even if they start to move, there is no existing Dialog/Deliberation/Decision whereby they can take sufficient action in time.

Yet, there are other patterns of activity exhibited by some humans.  In midst of decay and poverty there are millions of small groups creating innovative ways of doing things better. Unfortunately, few of these spread to other populations, and we are not studying why.  There are groups, and even whole populations resisting the power elites, by various means – but they are unlikely to succeed. And even if they did topple the ruling systems, they are unequipped to solve the climate change threat (and other threats), in time.

There is also a rapidly growing pattern of emergence in the digital world, much directed to the innovative creation of new tools and techniques to enable human persons to organize in new ways and create a better world.  Although most of these persons are aware of climate change they prefer to devote their time and efforts on positive projects and seem to avoid the issue of time constraints. In spite of the accelerating speed of change in the digital world, an honest assessment of projections raise serious concerns that the contemporary timeline for the new digital emergence will be too late to curtail the worst of climate change. Some believe the emergence will be the form for humanity after the collapse – but this is not supported by the data at this time.

Is all lost?  Are there other scenarios consistent with the database that might be not only the best, but even “miraculous” in how humankind could not only survive, but metamorphosize in time to avoid total collapse and implement actions to mitigate the effects of climate change on the biosphere and begin restoration of many damaged ecological subsystems.

nuet is a woven, inner world where that is a positive futures scenario from 2012; and nuet also contains the whole dirty picture of civilization.  After five decades emerging, nuet has finally been recognized as potentially significant by three other highly intelligent, creative, and competent persons who are giving significant portions of their busy life in assisting nuet’s sems (generated over five decades) to be accessible online for those interested.  Some of the ideas from nuet may assist the successful development of Y-World.

nuet’s take on the objective of Y-Worlds is to actually create the fantasy database of relevant human sems cited at the beginning of this essay and to facilitate human interaction with these sems in creating more sems – more and better organized – upon which humans in Y-Worlds will be able to organize sufficient actions to improve the future of humankind.  My concern is whether Y-Worlds can be functional and gain popularity in time to have any impact on climate change or moderate the social turmoil anticipated in the futures’ projections?

Can we risk waiting for Y-Worlds to mature, along its current envisioned path, before we begin trying to effect the direction of humankind?  The platform and processes created by Y-Worlds would be expected to construct scenarios of action involving growing numbers of persons that culminate in significant change in decisions and actions by humankind as a whole.

nuet humbly proposes that the basic future scenarios about social change that emerged within nuet over five decades is an adequate draft of what Y-Worlds would generate in a few years at best. Examined from a different perspective, the Bootstrap UPLIFT Scaffolding (BUS) design and implementation can be viewed as another version of Y-Worlds. How long would it take to create a beta version of BUS? Can the visions of Y-Worlds and BUS be integrated?

Although the conceptual design of BUS and the UPLIFT process is holistically abstract, the early populations to which BUS would serve would be seafed in learning/organizing basic knowledge and skills for survival/thrival, preparing them to later comprehend the planetary changes to come and the roles they must prepare themselves to fill. The “S” in BUS stands for Scaffolding. Users of BUS would be woven into robust social sysnets to support both basic, local survival needs and uplift NuEdu processes.

Concurrently, those persons already gifted with knowledge to comprehend the future emergence of an uplifting humankind and technical competencies for creating and maintaining BUS infrastructure will participate in the continuing diversification of BUS for unique populations.  The social and societal nature of an uplifting humanity should be what is needed to further successful emergence. The design of a future sustainable/resilient global humanity should be explored, but no decisions made until the vast majority of humankind can competently and knowledgeably participate in the decisions.

BUSSS = Bootstrapping UPLIFT Scaffolding, Systems, Scenarios is the overarching conceptual scheme of which BUS is a networked family of material products. To nuet, the BUSSS scheme if the best route to achieve the following objectives:

1)       Rapidly reduce suffering, poverty, and despair among the exploited or abandoned populations on Earth. An uplifting of all humankind is prerequisite for multi-millennial survival/thrival. Their uplifted competencies will be essential if humankind is to survive the Crisis-of-Crises it faces.

2)       Rapidly prepare those whose objective is to tame and reform existing societal structures and save Civilization. For many, this is a scaffolding through which persons will come to comprehend the true challenge of attempted transformation of large, hyper-complex, and structurally dysfunctional societies. If/when they gain the competencies for successful transformation they may realize that it would be much easier to continue their own emergence and replace the old systems. Meanwhile their transformational competencies will be very useful in preparing the old orders for smooth replacement. Wild cards may give advocates for reform powerful tools for transformation that we cannot envision today.

3)       Rapidly seaf the emergence of a nu humankind to peacefully replace (not transform) civilization with a global humanity that is beyond civilization as a butterfly is beyond the caterpillar it metamorphically emerged from.

BUSSS is not guaranteed for success. Humankind is fully engaged in a massive challenge of both survival and establishing a quality initial condition for the future multi-millennial survival of Humanity/Gaia if humankind survives. Nuet feels a future, emerging Humanity/Gaia will be a visionary carrot, along with real possibilities of a better life for those living today (although significantly changed) as a concrete carrot, to complement the very real concern about potential failures in our efforts to survive.


Author: nuet

01/24/1935. BS-physics RPI 1956; MS-physics UofChicago 1958; PhD-physics Yale 1965; PhD-Edu Psy Uof MInnesota 1970. Auroral Research Byrd Station, Antarctica 11/1960-02/1962. MINNEMAST curriculum dev 1964-68. Woodstock. faculty Pima Community College, Tucson 1974-1997. Transdisciplinary scientist, philosopher, educator, futurist, activist. PC user since 1982. "Wife". daughter, 2 grandsons. 5 dogs & 7 cats. Lacks mental imagery in all sensory domains.

gdeepwater moderator

"If/when they gain the competencies for successful transformation they may realize that it would be much easier to continue their own emergence and replace the old systems." in my mind, this is the potential of YWorlds, and it's underlying premise, that what is needed is a viable alternative civilisational model which enhances and enables the human population in it's requirements for thrivable planetary experience.


 @gdeepwater Societal institutions have analogs to both inertia and momentum, which are not easy to influence in short term. It will take humankind a while to better comprehend these processes. If YWorlds has a strong fixation on adaptation and transformation when it reaches the decision point (reform or replace) its momentum may be too strong (too many dependencies on the old) so that deciding replacement would be too painful, and may even threaten the viability of the emergence movement. Also, to enable a successful replacement things would need to be prepared for, which would take time.  For example, the parallel organization of operational management of critical institutions I discuss in my  This Great Day scenario. A movement dedicated to transformation may not give adequate attention to the prerequisites for the replacement option and may even restrict it. As we know, human behavior, especially within groups, is often in conflict with explicit intentions.


Also, strategies for either reform or replacement must fully comprehend many ugly details about the real power structures in established systems, otherwise reform would likely be blocked or replacement strongly resisted.  Yet, too much public attention to the ugly underbelly of established systems would bring premature attention to the emergence movement, leading to suppression efforts. The emergence movement should be under the threat radar of establishment intelligence. The emergence movement must be pubically viewed as a self-help movement for "the people" and not a real threat to establishment rule.  We will be observed, as radical internet blogs are observed today, but where suppression efforts are only implemented if a real threat is perceived. However, even this may change if establishments become paranoid, which may happen if populations become more oppressed, such as we seen in austerity programs, and popular resistance increases. If one of the objectives of the emergence movement is to really assist populations in distress (as did the Occupy movement during Sandy) they may be seen as an asset to establishment.


Also, these issues will be different under different power regimes.  Variations of the emergence movement in the USA and allied nations must be in concurrent development in all other power regimes.  Emergence must be planetary in scope, but also tailored to each region and culture..


I feel that these details [Endgame considerations] need to be part of the emergence movement from the start.  The focus might be at the decision point, reform or replace, or a mix. We must keep in mind that although gaming may be a tactic, this is not a game. The consequences of our decisions will be very real.


What are the momentum vectors in contemporary YWorlds?  Can others be added so that planning can be second order: maintain as many options as possible and don't commit to fixed future scenarios (first order planning/programming)?


The insertion of the term "programming" brought to mind a concern whether using high powered computer support for emergence may (unintentionally) insert momentum vectors into the programs? Might the computer programs give bias to first order planning? Can the computer programs give bias towards second order planning (with first order planning limited to the execution of short term projects)?