At this point the Wall Street lawyers and Strauss persuaded Eisenhower that the United States Bureau of Standards' scientists were in competition with private enterprise and must be curbed. Strauss assured Eisenhower that the corporations would take on all the bureau's discarded scientists. What the Wall Street lawyers' grand strategists realized was something momentous—to wit... that in the new 99.9-percent invisible reality of alloys, chemistry, electronics, and atomics, scientific and technical know-how was everything. Physical land and buildings were of no further interest to cap¬ italism. Metaphysical know-how was the magic wand of the second half of the twentieth-century world power structures. Physical properties were subject to deterioration, taxable, and cumbersome. Advised to do so by their lawyers, capitalism and private enterprise set about after World War II to monopohze all strategic technological know-how—i.e., all metaphysical properties—and to dump all physical properties. They called for an economic program by which people would be forced to buy the apartments and houses—to get all physical properties off capitalism's hands.

The post-Eisenhower era becomes most suitably identified as that of lawyer capitalism and of "no-risk," sure-thing, free enterprise.

The whole of atomic development was know-how. Scientists had the know-how, and anybody without their technical information could not even speak their language. The Know-How Club, monopolized by lawyer capitalism, was a very tight club. Furthermore, the nonmember four billion plus human beings on planet Earth knew nothing about the invisible micromacro, non-sensorially-tune-in-able reality. Large private enterprise had now hired all the know-how scientists and engineers. They seemingly could keep the public out of their affairs forever. The world power structure had the U.S. government completely emasculate the Bureau of Standards. There was an earnest and concerned battle by a few responsible scientists to keep the bureau intact, but they were overwhelmed. Henceforth all science must be done by the private corporations themselves or under their subsidized university-college and private laboratory work. To appreciate the extent of this know-how monopoly of the big corporations, one need only look over the wording of the scientist and engineering help-wanted advertisements of the big corporations^ in the many pages of The New York Times Sunday business section or of their counterpart publications in other big cities, s.

In the invisible, esoteric world of today's science there is no way for the American government or public, without the U.S.A. Bureau of Standards' scientists, to follow the closely held technical secrets of the big, profit-oriented corporations. To a small extent such popular journals as Scientific American help people follow details of this-and-that special case science without learning of the significance of the information in respect to comprehensive socioeconomic evolution.

No economic accounting books list metaphysical assets. Metaphysics is held to be insubstantial—meaning in Latin "nothing on which to stand." Patents can be granted only for special cases—i.e., Hmited physical-practice appHcations of abstract generalized principles, which principles alone are inherently metaphysical and unpatentable, being only "discovered" and not "invented." But physical patents are capital.

We have two fundamental realities in our Universe—the physical and the metaphysical. Physicists identify all physical phenomena as the exclusive manifest of energy: energy associative as matter or disassociative as electro¬ magnetic behavior, radiation. Both of these energy states are reconvertible one into the other. Because there is no experimental evidence of energy being either created or lost, world scientist-philosophers now concede it to be in evidence that Universe is eternally regenerative.

In 1800 Thomas Malthus, later professor of political economics of the East India Company College, was the first human in history to receive a comprehensively complete inventory of the world's vital and economic statistics. The accuracy of the pre-Trafalgar 1800 inventory was verified by a similar world inventory taken by the East India Company in 1810. In a later—post-Trafalgar—book Malthus confirmed in 1810 his 1800 finding that world-around humanity was increasing its numbers at a geometrical progression rate while increasing its life-support production at only an arith¬ metical progression rate, ergo, an increasing majority of humans would have to live out their short years in want and misery.

"Pray all you want," said Malthus, "it will do you no good. There is no more!"

A half-century later Darwin expounded his theory of evolution, assuming that nature's inexorable processes were the consequence of the "survival only of the fittest species and individuals within those species."

Karl Marx compounded Malthus's and Darwin's scientifically convincing conclusions and said, in effect, "The worker is obviously the fittest to sur vive. He is the one who knows how to handle the tools and seeds to produce the life support. The opulent others are 'parasites.'" The opulent others said, "We are opulent and on top of the heap because we demonstrate Dar¬ win's 'fittest to survive.' The workers are dull and visionless. What is needed in this world is big-thinking enterprise, courage, cunning, and fighting skill." For the last century these two ideologies, communism and free enterprise, have dominated the political affairs of world-around humanity. Each side says, "You may not Hke our system, but we are convinced that we have the fittest, fairest, most ingenious way of coping with the lethal inadequacy of life support operative on our planet, but because there are those who disagree diametrically on how to cope, only all-out war can resolve which system is fittest to survive."

Those in supreme power pohtically and economically as of 1980 are as yet convinced that our planet Earth has nowhere nearly enough life support for all humanity. All books on economics have only one basic tenet—the fundamental scarcity of life support. The supreme political and economic powers as yet assume that it has to be either you or me. Not enough for both. That is why (1) those in financial advantage fortify themselves even further, reasoning that unselfishness is suicidal. That is why (2) the annual military expenditures by the U.S.S.R., representing socialism, and the U.S.A., representing private enterprise, have averaged over $200 billion a year for the last thirty years, doubling it last year to $400 billion—making a thus-far total of six trillion, 400 biUion dollars spent in developing the abil ity to kill ever-more people, at ever-greater distances, in ever-shorter time.

Given that 143 million people visit accredited zoos and aquariums each year, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums is entitled to the claim that the association is building North America's largest wildlife conservation movement. Zoos and aquariums are mainstream environmental organizations. Their supporters, some 48 million registered members, are extraordinarily committed to conservation, and AZA zoos and aquariums back up their boast with money, spending some $250 million in 2006 on i,719 conservation and science projects in ninety-seven coun tries and regions.

Corporate America is also evolving as it adjusjsts busineiess practices to embrace conservation. Many American banks, for example, have committed to the World Wildlife Fund's Equator Principles, limiting investment only to companies and projects committed to environmental protection. WalVlart now only sells fish it has bought from sources t that practice sustainable harvesting methods, as certified by the Marine Stewardship Council. Increasingly, business leaders regard our forests and wetlands as ecological assets that must be protected to support human life, public positions ±at their mainstream customers applaud.

An excellent example of America's new environmental enterprise is demonstrated by the experience of media mogul Ted Turner who invested some of his vast fortune to ranch the American bison, an ungulate adapted to the dry western ecosystem in Montana. Bison are easier on the land than cattle and are a source of leaner, healthier meat. Turner owns about 40,000 head, more bison than any person or government. He buys western land and devotes a portion of this property to his growing population of bison. Recently, he opened Ted's Montana Grill, a restaurant chain with locations in many states ±at serves primarily bison burgers, a delectable sandwich, stimulating the market for his innovative meat products.

Bison has not replaced beef by a long shot, but Turner's new enterprise is a creative response to the challenge of gently using the natural assets of ±e western frontier. No one forced Turner to ranch bison instead of cattle, but by producing a healthy, ecofiriendly dinner staple, he provided a uniquely sustainable solution to the problem of farming arid land. Similarly, African entrepreneurs have ranched local forms of livestock, Ankole cattle, for example, associated with the Tutsi tribe in Central Africa, and other local wildlife to protect their soil and plants against the harsher effect of imported beef cattle. Throughout the world, the preference for indigenous and suitably adapted local livestock has proved to be a better ranching practice as these animals can use sparse vegetation and require less water to survive.

There is fundamentally no business case for private enterprise to advance a space frontier. When you advance a frontier, you are making mistakes that the capital markets choose not to value. You have to create patents to enable things that you don't know will work. Anytime you are the first person to do something on that scale, the history of human civilization has demonstrated that the only funding available to do that via governance.

And so what then happens is the patents get issued. The Government figures out how to do it. They make it sort of routine but their innefficient because it's the government. Then you seed it to private enterprise.

The Dutch East India Trading Company [was] not the agency that found America from Europe. That was Columbus funded by Queen Isabella. There was Magellan also funded by Spain. They laid the groundwork to find out where to go, does the Earth have an edge or not, is it something worth doing. Then, behind them, the Dutch East India Trading Company came to conduct business. In a way safer than could have possibly been economically justified had they been the first to do it.

You look at the railroads that cross the United States. Newt Gingrich mentioned that as entrepreneurs leading the way, but he neglected the fact that Lewis and Clark got there first on a major funded expedition under the Jefferson Administration.

So you lay out the land, you map the rivers, you map the terrain. Then you've got an understanding of what the risks are for the capital markets to then value. Then they come in behind.

So I see any participation of the private enterprise in Space Exploration, not the first ones to go to Mars, not even to go back to the Moon, but to make our access to low-Earth orbit the efficiently-costed exercise that it really should have been at the beginning of the shuttle but was never realized.

The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state. The expense of government to the individuals of a great nation, is like the expense of management to the joint tenants of a great estate, who are all obliged to contribute in proportion to their respective interests in the estate.

In the very largest way of looking at planet Earth's socioeconomic-evolution events, we must observe that humans are designed with legs and not roots. Yesterday, humanity developed temporary roots as it cultivated its life-support food root-grown on the land. The metals made possible metal canning of food and mobilization of machinery. Today, all of human existence depends on the swift, world-around intercommunication system operating at 186,000 miles per second. We have transformed reality from Newton's "at rest" norm to an Einstein's 186,000-miles-per-second norm. Socioeconomically we have synchronized with the omni-intertransformative kinetics of the entire Universe.

Planetary economics has now shifted from a physicalland-and-metals capitalism to a strictly metaphysical, omniplanetary, omnicosmic-wealth know-how capitalism. The once noble and essential but now obsolete nations belonged to the rooted socioeconomic land-capitalism era of humanity. In reality, humanity is now uprooted kinetically and occupying the whole planet. Capitalism is dumping its immobile real estate and depending on science to synchronize its affairs with the invisible realities, misassuming, however, that science knows what it is all about. To successfully dump all its real estate, capitalism has all but ceased "renting" and through enforced selling of "cooperatives" and "nothing else but condominiums" is forcing the citizenry into anchored exploitability, while it is always increasing the corporate deployability and mobile shift-about-ability around the world.

When individuals shunt the comprehensive cosmic regeneration into exclusive advantaging of only their own survival and enjoyment and succeed in prolonged local short-circuiting of cosmic regenerativity, they disqualify the invention "human" as a reliable function of regenerative Universe. They are just as irresponsible in the cosmic system as the company employees who pocket the cash register contents for their own account. This is cosmically true of a childless multimillionaire maneuvering himself into a position to make a big profit involving "hardheaded," absolutely selfish decisions that will knowingly and legally deprive many others of survival necessities-- "to hell with the next generation"--which deal will win him the applause of other powerfully rich individuals because it makes them feel more comfortable about their own summa cum selfishness.

If you ignorantly believe there's not enough life support available on planet Earth for all humanity, then survival only of the fittest seems self-flatteringly to warrant magnaselfishness. However, it is due only to humans' born state of ignorance and the 99.99 percent invisibility of technological capabilities that they do not recognize the vast abundance of resources available to support all humanity at an omni-high standard of living.

We have now scientifically and incontrovertibly found that there is ample to support all humanity. But humanity and its leaders have not yet learned so in sufficiently convincing degree to reorient world affairs in such a manner as to realize a sustainable high standard of living for all.

Finding the right balance between cooperation and competition has been the goal and bane of Western politics for centuries. Adam Smith recognized that the economic needs of the individual are better met by unleashing the ambitions of all individuals than by planning to meet those needs in advance. But even Adam Smith could not claim that free markets produce Utopia. Even the most libertarian politician today believes in the need to regulate, oversee, and tax the efforts of ambitious individuals so as to ensure that they do not satisfy their ambitions entirely at the expense of others. In the words of Egbert Leigh, a biologist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, "Human intelligence has yet to design a society where free competition among the members works for the good of the whole." The society of genes faces exactly the same problem. Each gene is descended from a gene that unwittingly jostled to get into the next generation by whatever means was in its power. Cooperation between them is marked, but so is competition. And it is that competition that led to the invention of gender.

Working Assumptions

Here is a partial list of assumptions that we are making as we go about the development work of this wiki. These assumptions help one to understand our motivations and approach.

1. Underlying dynamics of human civilizations are related to peoples' resource base. The resource base, and its control through the control of other humans, is the feedstock for power and its accumulation. Resource conflicts occur because people have not yet learned to manage the global resource base without stealing from others. In other words, society dynamics have not transcended the brute struggle for survival. As a society, we remain on the bottom steps of Maslow's pyramid. Transcending resource conflicts by creation of abundance, on the unit scales of few hundreds to few thousands of humans, is a present possibility under the assumption of open source knowledge flows and advanced technical capacities for material production.
2. Today, most humans are controlled not by a commercial force (armies) but by information and social engineering that feeds the commerce itself. Understanding means of social control; understanding the mechanics of one's mind, body, and spirit; learning to discern mechanics of mind control and propaganda as they are used in controlling agendas; and applying learnings to meditation, expansion of consciousness, and evolution of one's awareness and powers are all crucial if civilization is to escape the control of commercialism and is to give up its dependence on a centralized, planned economy.
3. Said propaganda and conditioning has successfully removed the notion of self-sufficiency as a viable means of livelihood. Most people are afraid of self-sufficiency and consider it a return to the stone age. Most people cannot envision that advanced civilization can be created in small (100-1000 person), self-sufficient, highly skilled communities. Furthermore, most people do not realize that it is possible to educate, skill, and evolve human beings such that an integrated, self-sufficient lifestyle option that promotes advanced civilization on a small scale of human organization is created. It it possible to achieve this level of excellence if people are taught real knowledge and wisdom, as opposed to undergoing global workforce training.
4. Education curricula have typically deleted practical applications deliberately, to produce subjects of the global workforce. If education is reinstated then self-sufficiency will emerge as a natural option.
5. Self-sufficiency is not an antisocial behavior, but a means to full individual and community accountability for resource conflicts, foul politics, and other corruptions of large-scale endeavors. (review works of Gandhi, Schumacher, Fuller) Self-sufficiency is a means to highest quality life by definition, one is in control of one's destiny when one is self-sufficient. The assumption of self-sufficiency is that its practitioners must be highly skilled, and not products of centralist education.
6. By self-sufficient, we mean in full control of providing one's needs. Note that self-sufficiency refers to needs - those things that allow one to survive in absolute health - and not wants. Self-sufficiency does not imply a solo, isolationist endeavor. Self-sufficiency may be accomplished with the help of as many people as it is possible to maintain full accountability, transparency, and sound ethics within that group. This group may be dispersed globally. Historically, sociology of human settlements has shown that this scale of self-sufficiency is a few hundred people. (see E.F. Schumacher; other references)
7. The State promotes well-paid incompetence, largely through specialization, such that subjects produce sufficient surplus to pay for their own oppression.
8. Education, media, and social engineering programs have subjugated human integrity to passive consumerism, with its related problems (resource conflicts, loss of freedom such as wage slavery). The only way out of this is creating a framework within which humans can prosper: provision of true education, learning of practical skills, stewardship of land, advanced technology for the people, and open access to economically significant know-how.
9. Import substitution is reducing dependence on external feedstocks and replacing them with local ones. People in control of their resources control their own destiny. Thus, to localize the essential parts of an economy completely is the prime formula for social stability. Localization should not be considered a struggle, but merely a possibility. It is a possibility that is not recognized because most people, as specialists, lack integrated technical literacy and skills that make a local economy feasible.