The human wakes up; opening his or her eyes to a society that he believes closes its eyes to the entity’s potential. No distinction needs to be made regarding the human’s race or belief systems. Gender, sexual orientation, age, or ethnicity. I present the human individual in the early twenty-first century. We delve into his writing, where he feels he is free. I speak of the right and power to engage in certain actions without control or interference. This is a notion that should only be true if mankind chooses to believe it rather than if mankind feels obligated to believe it. The vision in his mind is of a Brave Experiment.
We learn until the day we die, and after we die others are supposed to learn from our deaths. If we are all learning, then why don’t we treat others like fellow students? Students who try to teach each other and help each other can achieve success and well-being. I’m not speaking of some guy walking around Manhattan and screaming that ‘Jesus was a black man, not a Caucasian slave driver!’ That’s not a pupil-to-pupil dialogue. You walk down the street, and people look you over, up and down, and God forbid if you speak. Even your words are analysed. Searched for hostility and/or a conflict of opinion. I’m not advocating a society where you can’t walk down the street without being hugged. That would be fake. No, I picture a world where community meetings and forums overtake the vacant alleys and the sombre, lonely days in which some higher power intends us to be alone despite our best efforts. I’m sorry for you, though, very sorry. And by you, I mean the ‘shells’. A word I‘m going to use to describe the soulless people. Those who can sit and laugh with a fellow human while secretly despising them. Or, even worse, liking the fellow human until another shell taints their image of this person.
I don’t claim to be a saint. And I am no martyr. I’ve done so much wrong in my life. So much so that every day my mind recalls a nightmare that I created.
The human race. And it is a race. Animals walking upright in a bitter competition, trying ‘get ahead’. Ahead of what? Me? You? Your neighbour? Your friend? We are all family. What comes out of challenging your own family members? Only bitterness, anger, and grief. Remember this when you mug someone, get that raise, put someone down or simply ignore them out of indifference.
We cannot deny the belief that all people have the right to think, feel and desire. In essence, feelings lead to thoughts, which lead to actions. If people were made to feel that all logical thoughts were accepted from birth, a greater sense of positive feelings would ensue, leading to more purposeful actions. Of course, we neither live in a vacuum nor should we create one. A critic would ask how we judge what a purposeful action is without creating Orwellian thought police or some sort of Big Brother ideal. What governing body would make the distinction between right and wrong? More importantly, how could they, a small minority, encompass the ideals of everyone they were speaking for? We must ask why people, in any and every society, should care about what is being outlined in this Brave Experiment? Most importantly, why can’t people see the need for the formation of a post-national society?
Simply put, if all feelings are accepted, we can make the jump to purposeful action through the nursery strategy. The nursery strategy states that the majority of free minds, without tangential influences, will produce logical thoughts if their feelings are accepted and nurtured. So, how do we achieve this in a stable society or human community? More importantly, what is a tangential influence? How do we make this transformation in our own society without creating ill feeling? Is there an element that would nullify this entire cause? Past movements that championed great ideals were warped by their lack of balance between ideology and methodology, as with communism and democracy. Balance is key. Without it, the Brave Experiment will have neither the respect of mass culture nor of the groups leaning toward the centre of the political spectrum. It is also understood that centrist ideals are not accepted as necessarily correct. They simply lie between each end of the spectrum of thought.
Pragmatically speaking, the mechanics of New Freedom will dictate its design within society. To be able to link ideas, one must first understand the rift that makes them singular. One must understand the phenomenon of a seemingly objective lens. It carries with it no authoritative or paternalistic sense but rather a rare sort of truth. Because humans carry predisposed notions, they have orientation points. It must be understood that a spectrum of thought is like the concept of multiple dimensions. There is simply no such thing as a completely objective view. It’s how we go about unpacking ideals that forms societies and the people they consist of. If all societies were homogenous, the Brave Experiment would not exist. Individuals harbour different ideals. Understanding these differences is key. Note that even the centrist notion cannot be assumed to be acceptable. Change is the only constant in the universe. It’s how we adapt to it that makes us who we are.
There is no organisation yet worthy of carrying out the nursery strategy. This statement, in and of itself, suggests why we have reached such a critical time in our history. The fact that the term New Freedom, in the minds of many shells, is a term that is not yet ripe for use indicates its importance. Before mankind reaches the point of no return set forth by Old Freedom. Old Freedom: the rise of a nationalism in which citizens are free within their nations. This concept has become a parasite for our species, and it will one day warp our minds beyond the point of no return, the point at which the justification of any idea becomes so clouded that humanity can never attain full consciousness. We will destroy our chance at evolving. Species can doom themselves; they have destroyed themselves before with their lack of foresight. New Freedom will provide a path to consciousness so that we can continue to evolve. New Freedom is our last hope, something that we must obtain before we can ever get to Third Freedom. Third Freedom will only come when humanity breaks free of Old Freedom and the animal kingdom.
The human race has scared itself into a frenzy. Every action is questioned to the point where people’s heads spin out of control. Liberals and conservatives alike, who once prided themselves on their solid principles, are falling apart because they don’t know which end is up. If people can live in a society that accepts boundaries, then self-defeating conflict will end. The concept of a boundary is provocative in New Freedom, as it seems to imply a loss of humanity. On the contrary, however, New Freedom offers a different definition of a boundary. A self-defeating boundary is one that curbs our individualism, which is the antithesis of New Freedom. The Brave Experiment recognises boundaries that destroy species. Such boundaries pride themselves on destruction and the propagation of the elimination survival method, like the creation of doomsday weapons and the birth of our own Armageddon.
A tangential influence would be any thought process that lives outside the realm of this cause’s ideals, which may or may not one day be incorporated into society. With an increase in tangential ideals, we would see a decline in balance, which would spin any new society out of control and past the point of remedy. Simply put, the sponging ideal is one that has not yet formed a bond with New Freedom. The sponge soaks the life force out of New Freedom, thereby warping its tertiary structure and rendering it useless.
The current whirl of our species has created two distinct notions. Either the next step in achieving self-consciousness is through some divine fiat or the conditioning of human behaviour is creating a dystopian society. The Brave Experiment does not plan to rub a magic lamp or take babies away from their parents so that the parents cannot inculcate their offspring in their accustomed wantonness. It is known that our children are our infinite selves; they carry us beyond our mortal lives. The Brave Experiment is not advocating that people give up their mortality for the survival of the human race. No, instead New Freedom advocates giving up self-defeating principles for the survival of the race. In essence, when a person comes to the conclusion that an idea is self-defeating, they will no longer believe in it, and it will no longer be accepted as something that should cross the threshold to immortality through their children. When people accept the nursery strategy, they accept this logic.
It is clear that change is a constant. Not accepting New Freedom because it will change the way we view the interrelated universe is self-defeating. It would mean blinding ourselves to reason. It is clear from past history what this leads to: holocausts and wars between nations. What does this break down to? Wars between ourselves. Thus, the propagation of the elimination survival method.
Believing that children make parents immortal just because their ideas are being passed down, whether these ideas are logical or not, is false. Parents become immortal when they pass down immortal ideas and thus achieve consciousness. This can only happen when the older generation and the younger generation reach an equilibrium of thought, where the young learn as much from the old as the old learn from the young. Thus, we can see the end of book burning as a visualisation of this concept. Tossing away history, in whatever shape or form, would destabilise the equilibrium that makes New Freedom viable.
The nursery strategy does not gamble that enough competitors in a system appreciate competitive codependence and that competitors still using the elimination survival method will not harm individuals practicing the nursery strategy. Anyone who wishes to partake in a final resource-denial attack on his own people would be successful only to the point that a loose fanatic would be. The relationship with the Brave Experiment and the government will explain this dilemma. This is where the umbrella model becomes so critically important.
Imagine the entire human race under one umbrella that protects us from the evils that we as a people create. In essence, it would be a social structure that protects us from ourselves, that protects us from both ends of a spectrum of thoughts that could potentially lead to actions that would cripple the Human Union. Therefore, I propose the umbrella model. This raises an important question: How can one entity construct a model that is representative of all humans with individual feelings, thoughts, and actions? Individuals come up with original ideas; this has been the trend throughout our existence, and it will always be this way. It is up to the other individuals to accept the original idea and embrace it.
The shells might say that the umbrella model is corrupt because it evokes something transcendent and that it distinguishes between the protectors and the protected. They will say that codependent survival does not have any clear dominator and that it will create a food chain or elimination survival method of living.
On the contrary, the umbrella model is the facilitator, the functional body of New Freedom. It creates a viable environment for the creation of the Human Union. Simply, it creates an infrastructure for the propagation of the cause, much as traffic lights are useful for directing traffic so that we don’t crash into each other. Once Third Freedom is achieved, the umbrella model becomes obsolete, but we need to get there first. A facilitator is not a dominator. Of course, this distinction highlights our current flawed institutions, like the United Nations, which is neither a facilitator nor a dominator. It does not tell us to adapt or compromise when it creates sanctions and creates an army of nations that propagate the elimination survival method. However, a functional body that clearly upholds codependence is by nature neither imposing nor dominating. It creates the environment for the Human Union.
The Human Union fundamentally refers to the bonds that form between individuals. Thus, if we understand how to create these bonds and what they theoretically consist of, we can hope to apply theory to this reality. So, the umbrella model and the nursery strategy would create the bonds that form the Human Union in the Brave Experiment.
Practically speaking, people will only entertain a concept such as New Freedom if they believe it can be practically applied to their life or it can serve as a model through which they can measure themselves. This model is not defined as utopian. This distinction is necessary. A utopian society cannot exist, at least for humans, because every individual has a different definition of the perfect society. However, the Human Union, once implemented, would create a tangible state of humanity that constantly struggles for progress. This is a basic human fundamental in applications through time. The Brave Experiment’s methodology is both theoretical and tangible, which subsequently provides a reason for people to adopt it.
It is key to understand that the aim of New Freedom is not to establish a means of world domination or the creation of a thousand-year Reich. This notion is contrary to the Brave Experiment. Domination implies, and is, assimilation into a single thought process, into a society that won’t change because its only means of survival is to sustain a constant to achieve balance and stability. The Brave Experiment recognises that societies are always changing because transformation is part of human nature. Therefore, the Human Union will lead to timeless bonding by adopting change through the recognition of human nature. The transformation of people from coexisting parts in tension with united parts.
The functional structure will correlate directly to New Freedom’s cause. This will nullify the hypocrisy that cripples people’s belief in the ability of a governing body to support the ideals of a new society. In all current governments, there is ideological conflict between the way they operate and the ideals of the society that encompasses it. This becomes problematic as we consider concepts such as war, economics and the concept of justice in relation to policing the people.
Functional Structure of the Brave Experiment
It is important to note that the functional body of the Brave Experiment has no powers over local governments. Local governments are defined just as they exist in current societies. Although social trends are sure to influence the government, as they always do, the two institutions are to remain separate to maintain stability. If either the Brave Experiment or a local government tries to coerce the other institution, they would inevitably both fall apart because of the lack of balance. Avoiding the chain of events that would destroy two important institutions is surely the best encouragement to maintain the equilibrium.
Whether a person lives in a capitalist society or a communist society, there is no such thing as free money. The only difference is how one attains the money. The concept of free money is the antithesis to the Brave Experiment. Any struggle requires resolve, which is part of the fabric of this cause. A discussion of money is of great importance because money defines how most governments operate and their subsequent effect on economics. There is no new government in New Freedom. The government of New Freedom already exists. Its ideal is to evolve to become a living, breathing, self-sustaining entity. The universe is ruled by entropy, and the universe has been irrevocably set into motion. To harness this motion and determine the positive energy product is key.
Maintaining the Balance of Power
Ideals can’t feed people. The starving masses can’t fill their stomachs with theories. However, we currently live in a society that promotes the survival of the fittest. The Brave Experiment embraces capitalism’s emphasis on striving for greatness as well as communism’s unity through equality, but it shies away from their fallacies. People can easily fall through the cracks of society, and political doctrines are not always well-correlated with their applications. Governments must compete, but they must compete within codependence to ensure the survival of the species.
New Freedom recognises the multiple ways that people gall between the cracks of society, but the fiscal concern is emphasised in this discussion. Working together to achieve a better life as a collective unit, without infringing on those already on the path to freedom, is a fantastic goal and one we should foster.
The rich get richer because they receive the benefits of the collective unit, as does the middle class. As the income of a person decreases in this society, so does the sense of prosperity of principals. When an individual feels he has failed, he falls into a downward spiral. However, when he feels he is a part of a collective with accepted principles, a different cascade of events will ensue. Instead of a downward spiral, the solace found in the Union will give the poor the collective unity they need to attain sustenance. Hence, the image of vagrants stealing each other’s wagons filled with the remnants of their former lives will be obsolete if they feel it is no longer accepted as a way of life.
Simply put, as the umbrella model and nursery strategy take shape in society, the social bonds that will ensue will fill the cracks in ailing capitalist and communist societies by not only wiping out poverty but also by taking the strain off the government resulting from costly programs, such as welfare. As taxes the government imposes dramatically decrease, more money will be invested in the Brave Experiment if people feel obligated to do so. Why does the Brave Experiment need money? Simply because money is needed in any society to purchase the commodities needed for a social institution that is independent from the government. Money will be required to build infrastructure.
People united under a common cause will always try to better themselves. People united under the Human Union will better themselves. If New Freedom cannot coexist with a government, within the current economy, then the principles that New Freedom is founded on would be hypocritical. New Freedom simply acts as a catalyst that speeds up the rate of progress in relation to the ideals championed by both institutions. Entities that recognise shared resource–survival dependency will tend to band together against entities that are trying to effect non-survival through resource destruction. Thus, homicide is rejected, and governments will become increasingly introspective and critical of war.
Therefore, organisations would not be destroyed but protected under the umbrella model and maintained through the nursery strategy. It must be recognised that there are no guarantees that a final effort resource-denial attack won’t be launched. However, there are no guarantees in this universe. We must work with this contingency. A living entity must have competition to fuel the adaptation-survival process.
New Freedom does not wage wars; governments wage wars. However, when ideals supported by the Brave Experiment diffuse into governments, in the long run the principles of waging war would become increasingly questioned. Of course, this will not occur overnight because evolution takes millennia. However, the Brave Experiment outlines the path for change. On a day-to-day basis, one way to guarantee survival is through the non-survival of defeatist competition. However, history repeats itself because the current model is ineffective because we live in an interrelated universe. Let’s break free of a recurring history and make our own.
Those who accept New Freedom as logical but deny its existence are just as bad as societies that understand their ills but do nothing to amend them. They fail to embrace change, a fundamental necessity. They abhor what is logical and accept something stagnant and thus stale. They create an environment that allows the creation of holocausts, wars, racism and human suffering. They want to oppress humans, perhaps not physically but mentally. They want to keep us from achieving self-consciousness.
Logic in the past or present is still logic. It’s timeless and can’t be discarded. If we are ever to achieve timelessness, we need a methodology to do so. New Freedom does not state that it is the only path to do so. Such a statement would be antithetical to this entire argument. However, if we warp logic, warp the Brave Experiment, it will not work. Warped logic is not logic; it is something else.
To accept a belief as logical but indefensible is simply defeatist in nature, not to mention contradictory. For if something is logical, it is defensible by nature. It defends itself and becomes its own argument. On the other end of the spectrum, if we as a species fail to uphold an ideal that will carry us toward self-consciousness and the capability of achieving evolution before extinction, just because we incorrectly deem it as indefensible, we are cheating ourselves. We are denying ourselves our full potential. To deny ourselves our potential is a crime, and this is the big picture that the Brave Experiment addresses.
It is important to understand that the small problems we face are due to a much bigger problem. We have recognised this, but we have never come up with a strategy and model that are universal enough to cancel out the small problems, which thus become much larger than they really are. These include problems related to race relations, morality, the purpose of governments and the dynamics of interpersonal relationships among co-workers, family and friends. The list goes on forever, which directly correlates to why our ability to achieve greater self-consciousness has been blocked. Before we can fix the big picture, with any application, we must understand the dynamics of how the smaller parts relate to each other. Basic anatomy dictates this to surgeons. Mechanics face the same dilemma when they fix a car. The interrelated universe thus becomes New Freedom ideology.
The implications of New Freedom are obvious and its presence is necessary. Our species, without achieving consciousness, will never outgrow its self-destructive tantrums. In the present, there is plenty of room for another World War. Do we truly need another catastrophe for codependence to be burned into our bones? Or perhaps it will be, when we as a species die out. The Brave Experiment says this does not need to happen. Let’s not let it happen.
We are alone with ourselves now. There is no human community, no human union. Communities can never be too independent but can become too estranged, and thus they will compete with each other through the elimination survival method. We need new communities, independent yet interwoven. Connected through communication and the flow of thought. Let us use technology to our advantage, so that cell phones no longer trap us in isolated worlds but are used as tools for independence in an interrelated society and universe. Our partners in life thus need not be our neighbours but can be from anywhere in the human universe. The closer home is, the more incestuous we are, and the shorter our line of survival. Do not try to change or warp another culture or become an alien in it. This is elimination survival: destroying them to make us. Live with others without coercion. What should rub off will on them and you will. Nobody in the Brave Experiment needs to change anyone.
Not everyone can go everywhere. This is accepted. However, the more we interpollinate American with European with Arabian with African with Latino, the closer we will come to creating a common social genius. People who live with other cultures, or experience them, do not have to be taught to respect them. Successful people in strong unions become complacent, indulgent, selfish and self-defeating. People in alien environments, or who accept alien ideals, can compromise, adapt and survive to create the Human Union.
There needs to be a balance between what is public and what is private. We can have an equilibrium between the two as well as an equal presence. The mass transportation of people and the ideas they harbour is an example of how to facilitate change. We must make the diaspora of ideals readily available to anyone in the Brave Experiment. Only then can we have the accepted rift between what is individual and what is a part of the Human Union.
We must form the backbone of the Human Union. The presence of institutions that harbour those who have slipped through the cracks of a crippled society create an environment for the dominators of Old Freedom. Only then can we achieve Third Freedom and self-consciousness and create a viable environment for the basic human principles that propagate codependence.
We must write our own epilogue…
‘I am under the impression more and more that this is not reality. That I will wake up any second and I’ll be in diapers or I’ll be married with kids. The list of possibilities is endless. I can be in a state hospital somewhere in a straitjacket or I could be a bum on some sidewalk asking for money. The worst possibility I can think of is that this is reality and I’ll wake up tomorrow with the same problems.’
‘First we were all migratory. Then we settled and separated. Then once again we began to explore after we had created a home for ourselves. Some of us gained an advantage and reaped the benefits from our own people in distant lands. Then some tried to be kings and rulers over their equals. Then, the Brave Experiment came, and we all became more human.’
Leave a Reply