TGNC

images/uploaded/file/RFID%20Coins.pdf 

We're not so far removed from the animal kingdom in some things, you know.

Watch any group of animals and you'll see, as part of their social interaction, they maintain what we've come to call a "pecking order," with the strongest getting the first pickings of any kills, and/or the females. I reckon you'll have seen it all happen on TV.

As we moved up the intelligence ladder we never managed to leave this part of ourselves behind. With us, though, the issue was land ownership, which I suppose could equate to hunting territories in the animal kingdom but we were moving out of the hunter-gatherer stage and into farming. This was the birth of feudalism - the "mine is what I can capture and keep" form of government which results in ordinary people finding swords in stones and turning into kings and so forth.

Whatever - the outcome is that the strongest prevails and becomes the central holder of wealth, with tribute being due to him (and they were "hims" back then). The more territory held, the greater the wealth; the greater the wealth displayed, the more likelihood of getting one's pick of the ladies.

Land ownership continued to be the single greatest wealth display, right up to and including the early 1900's - the period under review in Jack London's book, which you can find elsewhere under the No57 banner. Land ownership by this time meant constant income in the form of rents and this led to situations of overcrowding such as Jack London reported. Also, during this time, Britain had managed to get away from the feudalist system and had - it claimed - adopted democracy. This was a lie; Britain has never had true democracy. What was introduced in Britain and later maintained in the United Kingdom, is best described as a benevolent tyranny.

At the time of writing - May 2011 - UK-ites have once more shown that they really couldn't care less about who turns up each day in Wasteminster. An average of something like only 46% bothered to vote in what was probably the most important referendum that this country has ever had, including the one about whether or not to join the Common Market back in the 1970s.

If I was a politician I would be very worried by what this means. To my way of thinking, the majority of our population have just told our politicians that they are considered irrelevant. We already know that the country is really run by the Civil Service and the government is no more than a glorified debating society who are only out to line their own pockets no matter who is elected. What that might mean should the UK public decide upon a change of government system is worthy of some concern because it looks kind of like a voting process might not be a part of the plans of those who advocate the change. This is something that I wouldn't want to see happening, which is why I am suggesting that the issue needs to be looked at now, so that any change can be planned and introduced as a workable system.

I've uploaded four PDFs for you, which I hope you will wish to discuss and evaluate. What I suggest might seem to be the impossible, but with the way things are going in the world-wide economy and the potential chaos that could arise from the problems of today, I'm hoping you might want to give the ideas a wee bit of thought because early action on the part of a large number of people could help to ensure that the society of the future will not ruled by the strongest in a return to feudalism.

We need to have a system in place that will afford protection and adequate means to the weak as well as the strong. It is possible to have such a system - the kibbutz proves that much. What we have to get past is the perception that any single group or individual needs to hold the reins of power. The only single group that needs to do this is that which contains everybody. The naked apes. The human race.