Planetary Phase of Civilization


mentalfloss
Avatar
#1
Was reading up on this. I find all this stuff pretty fascinating, but there seems to be a natural hostility to the idea of global interdependence and I'm not sure why.

Planetary Phase of Civilization

The Planetary Phase of Civilization is a concept defined by the -- (GSG), an environmental organization that specializes in -- and --. Proponents of the Planetary Phase of Civilization state that it refers to a current historical transition from a world of capitalist states and -- societies to a world of increased global connectivity with new global institutions (like the -- and the --), new information technologies, environmental change in the --, economic --, and shifts in culture and consciousness. Although the concept is hotly debated in some circles, most reputable scientists give little credence to the theory and assert that current global economic interconnectedness is a function of advanced technology rather than the emergence of anything new in cultural or sociological terms.

In a historical perspective, the Planetary Phase of Civilization is viewed by its proponents as the third significant transition in civilization. Though history is complex and difficult to distinguish, they argue that changes from the -- to -- and then to the -- are the first two macro-shifts in human society and culture. These transitions can be differentiated based on social organization, economy, and communications. The Stone Age consisted of the least complex versions – -- and villages, --, and spoken language as the only means of communication. The shift into Early Civilization brought more structured -- and --, settled --, and writing. Society became more complex in the Modern Era with --, industrial systems and printing, which enhanced communication and further increased the complexity of society. Proponents argue that unlike prior transitions, the Planetary Phase marks a new geologic era, the --, in which human activity fundamentally alters -- and the --.

In Great Transition: The Promise and Lure of the Times Ahead, the GSG argues that historical transitions appear to be accelerating as each successive period lasts for a shorter amount of time than the previous one. It speculates that the current Planetary Phase will last for about 100 years, during which there will be a clear progression in science and technology toward a more complex and environmentally interdependent society. The GSG uses this assumption to create scenarios which lead to varying futures ranging from Breakdown to -- to --. The GSG contends that the most desirable scenario is a "--" to an environmentally and socially sustainable global civilization. This scenario, however, depends on the emergence of a -- as a potential actor to contest the power of transnational corporations and state governments.

The concept of the planetary phase of civilization has become popular in the academic field of --. In "Building a Global Culture of Peace"-- -- states that "...we have entered a planetary phase in the development of civilization - what the historians call an era of global history." In his article entitled "Paths to Planetary Civilization,"-- -- describes this planetary civilization as one in which "The consensually created and globally coordinated ecosocial market system begins to function" and "The natural resources required for health and vitality become available to all the peoples and countries of the human community."
This kind of scenario analysis helps analysts think in an organized fashion about future alternatives, key decision points, and possible obstacles to global development. It then becomes possible to determine how to avoid the less-favorable directions and encourage changes to nurture a more beneficial one.

--
 
Machjo
Avatar
+3
#2  Top Rated Post
I think world federation and world citizenship are inevitable. We can either go to it the easy way or the hard way kicking and screaming, but either way it will come.

However, I still believe that even that society would be more capitalistic than socialistic. It might have some socialistic elements such as free universal compulsory education and the like, but still more capitalistic than socialistic.
 
Dexter Sinister
Avatar
+2
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Was reading up on this. I find all this stuff pretty fascinating, but there seems to be a natural hostility to the idea of global interdependence and I'm not sure why.

Narrow mindedness, short term thinking, failing to see the big picture, something like that I think is the explanation. Most of the objections to it that I've seen appear to be rooted in fear of loss of sovereignty by individual nation states. Considering all the death and destruction and waste that's been generated by nation states warring with each other since they first appeared, I find it hard to believe that loss of national sovereignty would be a bad thing. As long as everybody loses it equally at the same time.
 
Machjo
Avatar
+1
#4
Total national sovereignty is no longer possible. I could see a decentralized federal structure, but the age of the nation-state is long outdated in the modern age.
 
mentalfloss
Avatar
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter SinisterView Post

Considering all the death and destruction and waste that's been generated by nation states warring with each other since they first appeared, I find it hard to believe that loss of national sovereignty would be a bad thing.

Yes, belligerent nationalism seems stupid to me.

Monkeys fighting monkeys over pieces of the ground.
 
Machjo
Avatar
+1
#6
A perfect example of the problem is with Caanda's sovereignty claims in the North. We could simply define those boundaries via already established international laws, or we could wate billions on militarization even though other countries with much larger populations could easily outspend us on that front, not to mention that a strong military without any international legal standing will do nothing to legitimize any illegitimate claims anyway. Going through the proper international process would be far more cost effective and effective generally since it would be recognized by all other nations as a legitimate claim.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
+1
#7
A global state is inevitable, but it will take a quantum leap in human consciousness for it to work. As we have seen, corruption on all levels of governance is universal. On a universal level, the corruption would be catastrophic. The New World Order as envisioned by Bush senior and the Rockefellers would be a totalitarian nightmare.
 
The Old Medic
+2
#8
Ah yes, and someday, all of the swords will be beaten into plowshares.

In the meantime, I WILL keep my firearms.

If you study monkeys, they fight all the time. So do all apes, as well as virtually every animal on this planet.

And NEVER forget, we are just another form of animal!
 
darkbeaver
#9
Who would rule Imperial Earth?
 
DurkaDurka
+1
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

Who would rule Imperial Earth?

Kim Jong Il, The Dear Leader.
 
darkbeaver
Avatar
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by DurkaDurkaView Post

Kim Jong Il, The Dear Leader.

That's what I thought. Might as well just forget global interdependence. I think we can depend on global interdependence to be the same old enlightened dominion snake oil.
 
Machjo
Avatar
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by The Old MedicView Post

Ah yes, and someday, all of the swords will be beaten into plowshares.

In the meantime, I WILL keep my firearms.

If you study monkeys, they fight all the time. So do all apes, as well as virtually every animal on this planet.

And NEVER forget, we are just another form of animal!

I haven't seen anyone sniffing other people's butts in public, pissing in public and squating in public recently. So I guess there are differences between humans and others.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

I haven't seen anyone sniffing other people's butts in public, pissing in public and squating in public recently. So I guess there are differences between humans and others.

The only difference is that we have laws against those activities and those laws are only in place because we can't accept that we are animals. That would indicate that our gods are also animals if we were created in their image. The only real difference between man and the rest of the animal kingdom is that we have egos that like to puff themselves up to hide their insecurities.
 
Machjo
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

The only difference is that we have laws against those activities and those laws are only in place because we can't accept that we are animals. That would indicate that our gods are also animals if we were created in their image. The only real difference between man and the rest of the animal kingdom is that we have egos that like to puff themselves up to hide their insecurities.

Law or no law, butt-sniffing just ain't my thing.
 
Cliffy
#15

Cheech and Chong and the dogs Ralph and Herbie - YouTube

 
darkbeaver
Avatar
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Was reading up on this. I find all this stuff pretty fascinating, but there seems to be a natural hostility to the idea of global interdependence and I'm not sure why.

Global interdependence is not an idea it was made reality with ocean going ships. If you don't understand the natural hostility to Rome or to the city of London you should continue reading.

Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

The only difference is that we have laws against those activities and those laws are only in place because we can't accept that we are animals. That would indicate that our gods are also animals if we were created in their image. The only real difference between man and the rest of the animal kingdom is that we have egos that like to puff themselves up to hide their insecurities.

The only difference between man and animal is the quality of knowledge afforded by long contemplation.
 
Johnnny
#17
Awe the sweet smell of inevitability!!!!
 
taxslave
Avatar
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

Who would rule Imperial Earth?

Me. I don't trust anyone else.

At some point a world government is inevitable. The greatest opposition seems to come from the left primarily because they think that they might not get something for nothing. I thought that the EU was a good first step but there was too much difference in value of their economies for it too work yet. It is a good working model and we can learn a lot from it wether the EU survives or not.
 
CDNBear
+2
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

Who would rule Imperial Earth?

The Freemasons are my top choice.
 
SLM
+3
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

The Freemasons are my top choice.

Would we all get a secret decoder ring then? That would be pretty cool.
 
taxslave
Avatar
+1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

The Freemasons are my top choice.

But according to some on here the jews already rule the world. Or at least all the money which is the same thing.
 
darkbeaver
Avatar
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Me. I don't trust anyone else.

At some point a world government is inevitable. The greatest opposition seems to come from the left primarily because they think that they might not get something for nothing. I thought that the EU was a good first step but there was too much difference in value of their economies for it too work yet. It is a good working model and we can learn a lot from it wether the EU survives or not.

Alexander the Great said that Napoleon said that Hitler said that. There is nothing inevitable about it except the attempts. Opposition is absolutely necessary for human advancement. Global governance spells the end of progress for the commons, if you can call our present state a progression in anything other than celestial position cuz nothing else has changed even with the advent of high tech. We can learn from the EU that it was a stupid idea engineered to fail just at the right time.

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

But according to some on here the jews already rule the world. Or at least all the money which is the same thing.

The power that rules the world remains hidden, that's how they stay the power that rules the world. Anyone we see smiling and waving in their new suits might as well be posters. The hereditary power of this planet knows how to survive undetected excepting those incidents that result in inexplicable cessation of breathing. They have a very good very bad religion and it has no cradled babies or fleece balls with eyes. I hope that adds something to the discussion. That's what I think, and their coming to get us too. Mass door to door carbon tax collection. Mark my words.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

Alexander the Great said that Napoleon said that Hitler said that. There is nothing inevitable about it except the attempts. Opposition is absolutely necessary for human advancement. Global governance spells the end of progress for the commons, if you can call our present state a progression in anything other than celestial position cuz nothing else has changed even with the advent of high tech. We can learn from the EU that it was a stupid idea engineered to fail just at the right time.

Yup, Neanderthals with high tech weapons does not evolution make.

Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

The power that rules the world remains hidden, that's how they stay the power that rules the world. Anyone we see smiling and waving in their new suits might as well be posters. The hereditary power of this planet knows how to survive undetected excepting those incidents that result in inexplicable cessation of breathing. They have a very good very bad religion and it has no cradled babies or fleece balls with eyes. I hope that adds something to the discussion.

Politicians are just the front line scape goats should the rabble get pissed. Even if it were possible to get to the Illuminati, they would still be no closer to the actual ruling class.
 
darkbeaver
Avatar
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

The Freemasons are my top choice.

Kind of a stuffy bunch ain't they? I was thinking that someone would have nominated me by now. Imagine a planet, every lake is full of beer and between every lake is the magic forest where cannabis trees reach stupendous altitude that makes it imperative to climb with spikes for days before getting to the bud. And that is just a couple of my ideas that will take effect as soon as I get the call.

Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Yup, Neanderthals with high tech weapons does not evolution make.


Politicians are just the front line scape goats should the rabble get pissed. Even if it were possible to get to the Illuminati, they would still be no closer to the actual ruling class.

Why oh why must we use and abuse the memory of those gentle brainy bipeds. Time and time again I have to hear the racial slurs, the insensitive jokes and the cruel suggestions about my relatives and I just can't listen to it anymore. I am half neanderthal. There I'm out. That wasn't so hard.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

Kind of a stuffy bunch ain't they? I was thinking that someone would have nominated me by now. Imagine a planet, every lake is full of beer and between every lake is the magic forest where cannabis trees reach stupendous altitude that makes it imperative to climb with spikes for days before getting to the bud. And that is just a couple of my ideas that will take effect as soon as I get the call.



Why oh why must we use and abuse the memory of those gentle brainy bipeds. Time and time again I have to hear the racial slurs, the insensitive jokes and the cruel suggestions about my relatives and I just can't listen to it anymore. I am half neanderthal. There I'm out. That wasn't so hard.

We are probably all part Neanderthal. Those Cro magnon dudes were not above boinking the odd slant head. But you are right. Neanderthal is used as a derogatory slur when in fact, it has been determined they were quite technologically advanced for their time. Too bad they didn't have condoms though. We might have been spared politicians and foot ball players.
 
darkbeaver
Avatar
#26
Well it's late here I have to be at the watering hole early time to get under the skins. Have a nice evening cliffy.
 
SimpleSimon
Avatar
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

A global state is inevitable, but it will take a quantum leap in human consciousness for it to work. As we have seen, corruption on all levels of governance is universal. On a universal level, the corruption would be catastrophic. The New World Order as envisioned by Bush senior and the Rockefellers would be a totalitarian nightmare.

Cliffy, that is the money quote. Well said. A totalitarian nightmare. I would add as well that it doesn't matter what political or social orientation was to dominate this new world utopia, it would be totalitarian. The only difference between that and the totalitarian states these days is there would be nowhere to escape to.

Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

I haven't seen anyone sniffing other people's butts in public, pissing in public and squating in public recently. So I guess there are differences between humans and others.

You haven't seen that? Where have you been?
 
Bar Sinister
Avatar
+1
#28
There have been many visions of the future, but the one I find most fascinating is that of the Star Trek universe, in which humanity has finally gotten its act together and headed out for the stars. In such a scenario capitalism is viewed as a failed social and economic experiment, and people are given leadership positions based on merit rather than on birth or wealth. This extends even to completely alien species. It is an interesting and optimistic concept. One would hope that the various branches of humanity will eventually work out their differences rather than continue in the muddled and selfish fashion that has marked most of human history.
 
Machjo
Avatar
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Me. I don't trust anyone else.

At some point a world government is inevitable. The greatest opposition seems to come from the left primarily because they think that they might not get something for nothing. I thought that the EU was a good first step but there was too much difference in value of their economies for it too work yet. It is a good working model and we can learn a lot from it wether the EU survives or not.

Odd, isn't it, considering "Workers of the world unite" and all that jazz". Now the NDP is no less nationalistic than Harper's Conservatives, albeit in different ways. OK, maybe a little less, but not much less.
 
Bar Sinister
Avatar
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Odd, isn't it, considering "Workers of the world unite" and all that jazz". Now the NDP is no less nationalistic than Harper's Conservatives, albeit in different ways. OK, maybe a little less, but not much less.

The attitude of political parties so far as Canada has always been a little different from other nations. In most countries the right of centre parties historically have been more isolationist and more nationalistic, but in Canada it has primarily been the parties on the left that have been most likely to defend Canada's national interests. In particular parties like the NDP have always been more concerned about the selling off of resources to foreigners while parties like the Progressive Conservatives (or Conservatives) have been most welcoming of uncontrolled foreign investment. There is a similar attitude regarding foreign policy with the parties of the right and centre much more likely to rush into foreign adventures like Afghanistan than the parties of the left believe it is Canada's role to stay clear of such obvious foreign entanglements.
 

Similar Threads

2
Phase 1 Complete
by I think not | Feb 9th, 2006
0
Resource Wars Phase III
by vista | Aug 19th, 2004
no new posts