Apr 052017

Bob Podoloksy on Maximizing Peace and Prosperity Through Truth and Creativity

Bob Podolksy is the son of well-known physicist Boris Podolsky who along with Albert Einstein and Nathan Rosen wrote a paper on Action at a distance in 1935. Bob talks about Peace, Prosperity, and Freedom via maximizing Truth, Awareness, Love, and Creativity (TALC). Bobs talk is about ways of getting to peace, the importance of organization, entropy vs evolution, and dimensional quadrature.

Jan 162014

Irena Sendler Smuggles 2500 children out of Warsaw ghetto

Irena Sendler Saves children Irena Sendler
Died: May 12, 2008 (aged 98)
Warsaw , Poland
Irena Sendler memorial

During WWII, Irena Sendler got permission from the Nazi’s  to work in the Warsaw ghetto, as a  Plumbing / Sewer specialist.

She had an ulterior  motive. Irena smuggled Jewish infants out in the bottom of the tool box she carried. She also carried a burlap sack in the  back of her truck, for larger kids. Irena kept a dog in the back that  she trained to bark when the Nazi soldiers let her in and out of the ghetto.

The soldiers, of course, wanted  nothing to do with the dog and the barking which covered the kids/infants noises.

During her time of doing this, she  managed to smuggle out and save 2500  kids/infants. Ultimately, she was caught,  however, and the Nazi’s broke both of her legs and arms and beat  her severely. Irena kept a record of the names of all the kids she had smuggled out,  in a glass jar that  she buried under a tree in her back yard.  After the war,  she did her best to locate any parents that may have survived and to reunite the families

Most had been gassed. Those kids she helped got placed into foster family homes or adopted.


Slide Show Wins Peace Prize

In 2007 Irena was up for the Nobel Peace Prize. She was  not selected. Politician, Al Gore won, for a slide show on  Global Warming. Later another politician, Barack Obama, won for his work as a community organizer for  ACORN.

I’m doing my small part by  forwarding this message. I hope you’ll consider doing the  same.  It is now more than 67 years since the Second World War in Europe ended. This  article is  a memorial chain,  In memory of the six  million Jews, 20  million Russians, 10 million  Christians and 1,900 Catholic priests who were  murdered, massacred, raped, burned, starved and  humiliated! Now, more than ever, with  Iran , and others,  claiming the HOLOCAUST to be ‘a myth’, it’s imperative to  make sure the world never forgets,because there are others who would like to do it again. This e-mail is intended to reach  40 million people worldwide!

Join us and be a link in the memorial  chain and help us distribute it around the  world. Please send this e-mail to people you  know and ask them to continue the memorial chain. Please  don’t just delete it.. It will only take you a minute to pass  this along.

Denise (Dede) Snyder
Granite City Abstracting
9015 Ogden Ave NE
Otsego, MN 55330
Take care and Blessings to you and yours. Sue Anne
Everything happens for a reason and a purpose and it serves you!

Life is about to surviving the storm, and how having fun to dancing in the rain.
God and Bitcoin We Trust!
Your Thoughts, they become Words.
Your Words,  they become Actions.
Your Actions, for they become Habits.
Your Habits, for they become Character.
Your Character, becomes your Destinee.”

Apr 212013

Bob Podolsky

Physicist, Psychotherapist, and Author Bob Podolsky  takes his experience from his psychotherapy practice and combines it with his experience from his physics and systems analysis career to understand what would have to change in order for humanity to thrive.

It turns out their is a root cause of most of the problems in the human condition! We have been taught to believe there are a great deal of the problems in the world like war, slavery, taxation, crime, pollution.   It turns out these are simply symptoms of the problem.  The real problem is Hierarchies.  There is an alternative that was developed by Bob and John David Garcia. The system combines ethics and unanimous agreement between the participants to increase creativity.  Unless humanity makes substantive changes to the way we organize as humans we are doomed to extinction!

Apr 192013

Ron Paul launches Peace and Prosperity Institute

Published on Apr 17, 2013

For the first time since leaving office, Ron Paul returned to the spotlight this week. The recently retired congressman launched a new foreign-policy educational effort from Washington on Wednesday called the Institute for Peace and Prosperity. Some fellow lawmakers past and present – including Walter Jones, Dennis Kucinich, John Duncan, and Thomas Massie are on the Institute’s board, and they are aiming to change more than policy as RT’s Meghan Lopez explains.


The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity is a project of Dr. Paul’s Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (F.R.E.E.), founded in the 1970s as an educational organization. The Institute continues and expands Dr. Paul’s lifetime of public advocacy for a peaceful foreign policy and the protection of civil liberties at home.

The Institute mobilizes colleagues and collaborators of Dr. Paul’s to participate in a broad coalition to educate and advocate for fundamental changes in our foreign and domestic policy.

A prosperous America is profoundly linked to a foreign policy rooted in peaceful relations and trade with all. With peace, comes real prosperity.

Ron Paul’s real legacy in his writing, teaching, and in politics is his success bringing people of very different backgrounds and perspectives together under the common cause of peace, individual liberties, and prosperity. His institute energetically continues this kind of “coalition-building” in all aspects of its work. The Institute board is itself one of the best examples of how broad a coalition can come together and work for the same shared goals and values.

First and foremost a resource for supporters, the Institute provides timely news and provocative analysis through its engaging website. Features such as “Congress Alert” and “Neo-Con Watch” bring to life the latest threats to our liberties at home and abroad in a capsule format. Longer features and press analysis, as well as blog posts, regularly appear, giving the Institute the character of an online magazine.

The Institute places special emphasis on education and on the next generations, with a foreign policy summer school for university students studying international affairs and journalism.

It will aggressively promote student writing on foreign affairs on its website and will launch a student writing award program to recognize the best of college journalism.

Apr 042013


Bradley Manning nobel peace prize

Bradley Manning to Receive the Nobel Peace Prize

During the last week of March, more than 30,000 people signed a petition urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Bradley Manning. While the numbers continue to mount on the petition website, so do the comments from individual signers.

Thousands have already written personal notes to explain their support for the petition. I hope the Nobel committee reads the comments carefully when the petition arrives in Oslo later this spring.

As a U.S. Army private — seeing massive evidence of official deception, human rights abuses and flagrant killing of civilians — Bradley Manning did not just follow orders. Instead, he became a whistleblower, supplying vast troves of documents to WikiLeaks, exposing duplicity that had enormous impacts from Iraq and Afghanistan to Egypt and Tunisia.

Manning, now 25 years old, could be in prison for the rest of his life. But while the U.S. government tries to crush him, it’s clear that many Americans love him — and would be thrilled to see him win the Nobel Peace Prize. The following samples of comments from petition signers begin to explain why:

“Bradley Manning knowingly risked his freedom in order to bring the true facts of war to the public. The courage and insight of such a young person is worthy of the highest recognition.”

Sheila C., Kings Park, NY

“Manning is a U.S. political prisoner being persecuted for blowing the whistle on war crimes by the powerful, including his own corrupt government. He should be given the Nobel Peace Prize.”

Ruth K., Greenbelt, MD

“If you are looking to regain your reputation after giving the award to a warmongering president, I can think of no more important or honorable figure than this political prisoner.”

Catherine C., Santa Monica, CA

“This poor, incredibly brave person has been scapegoated nearly to death for his extraordinary heroism in revealing just a bit of the truth behind the ideological gloss of war and politics. Please give him the support and recognition he deserves — you may save his life and you will certainly support a higher consciousness in many if you do so.”

Cathy C., Boulder, CO

“Wall Street bankers who looted our nations go scot free. Petro chemical companies who poison millions go free. A young man who releases truth in a democracy is terrorized endlessly by his government. We must stand up for truth tellers.”

W.D., Overland Park, KS


“Manning has done more for peace in our time than any other individual. He risked his freedom to inform the world of war crimes and other wrongdoing by his country.”

William P., Prescott Valley, AZ

“He has done more than anyone to challenge the hubris of a government’s foreign policy that is based on belligerence and aggression.”

Myles H., Baltimore, MD

“Please give the peace prize to those who truly merit it, like Manning, not to politicians who further militarism and war.”

Albert R., Naperville, IL

“The Norwegian Nobel Committee will need courage even to consider awarding Bradley Manning the Peace Prize.”

Robert B., Honolulu, HI

“It’s about TRUTH!”

Mary P., Center Moriches, NY

“Bradley Manning is a hero in the deepest and truest meaning of that word.”

Jennifer A., Dickson, TN

“This young man risked everything to reveal war crimes being committed by his government.”

Joanne H., Columbia, MD

“I feel Manning was acting in the spirit of the Nuremberg trials in taking individual responsibility for illegal activities that he was witnessing.”

Nick W., Point Reyes, CA

“I’ve personally been inspired by Bradley Manning’s courage and moral dignity. His actions and character give me hope that the world can be a safer and more just place for everyone.”

Brock D., Pittsburgh, PA

“The modern version of Daniel Ellsberg deserves the honor his efforts warrant!”

Doug W., Reno, NV

“Information is the lifeblood of democracy. Bradley Manning is a patriot and a hero.”

William C., Sherman Oaks, CA

“People who expose atrocities for the sake of humanity deserve to be publicly honored.”

Veda S., Camano Island, WA

“Giving Bradley the peace prize would send a strong message against the kind of secrecy that is associated with violence that Gandhi spoke so strongly about.”

Leo S., Chesterfield, NH

“He is definitely deserving! He did an extremely courageous thing. It’s wrong that he is detained and tortured. Awarding him this prize is the least we can do.”

Patricia M., Denver, CO

“As clear a choice as Jesus Christ.  (And I’m not religious.)”

Kenneth K., Highland Park, IL

“This man is a hero for exposing the evil practices of our Government. We’re guaranteed a transparent Government, but what we get is shadowy deals, evil bargains, and more. We need to get back to basic principles of doing what’s right.”

Raymond P., Cathedral City, CA

“What an appropriate and great idea the Nobel Peace Prize for Bradley Manning!”

Lesley S., Santa Monica, CA

“Bradley Manning’s ‘crime’ was to bring the truth out into the open, to shine a light on evil policies our government wants to hide. He is a hero, and should be rewarded for his integrity.”

Patricia F., Ashburnham, MA

“The people of the United States and the world should be grateful to Bradley Manning for exposing the folly of U.S. wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has made a great sacrifice for peace.”

Laurence R., Highland Park, NJ

“I believe him to be one of the heroes of this country. Unfortunately The Media is owned by vested interests in this country, so the rank and file Americans only believe what they are told to believe, so because he and Julian Assange embarrassed the powers that be his heroics will never be widely known or appreciated.”

Thomas C., Albuquerque, NM

“Bringing covert actions and diplomatic operations out into the open helps make all governments and corporations better actors on the world stage.”

Greg C., Austin, TX

“You might also request President Obama to return his.”

Reginald S., San Francisco, CA

“One person deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize is Bradley Manning for bravery despite the risk to his personal safety. The criminals go unpunished, while the messenger is condemned.”

Helga G., St. Louis, MO

“This young man has put his entire future on the line to bring us information that he felt every American should be aware of. We have treated him terribly. If we cannot get the information that is concerning the behavior of our country, we are dooming our democracy to failure. Protect this young man for his courage and award him the Nobel.”

Laurie B., North Hollywood, CA

“You gave the prize to Barack Obama hoping for peace which was not delivered. Manning has ALREADY delivered. And is very much in need of international support.”

Peter B., Brooklyn, NY

“And free him too.”

Keith P., Boulder, CO

“Just as Daniel Ellsberg’s release of the Pentagon Papers exposed much of the ugly truth about the conflict in Vietnam, Manning has spoken truth to power and the masses. We can argue about justifications for military intervention more appropriately when some of the less savory realities are known.”

Edward & Pamela B., Baton Rouge, LA

“As a Sgt USMC Vietnam 1966/67, I urge you to not only award Bradley Manning the Nobel Peace Prize, but to rescind President Obama’s award.”

Robert B., Orange, TX

“We should have a law against criminalizing whistleblowers. The government will continue to make stupid mistakes and the citizens have a right to know the truth.”

Sylvia D., Tulsa, OK

“Thanks Bradley. The truth will make us free.”

Blase B., Los Angeles, CA

“Bradley’s in prison while those responsible for these heinous acts of cowardice are free. It’s so easy to condone war when isolated from reality.”

Daria R., San Jose, CA

“He acted out of social consciousness. His actions were not treasonous and he was not aiding the enemy. It has been criminal how he has been treated since his arrest.”

Gregg D., Chattanooga, TN

“If anyone ever really earned the peace price, it is Bradley Manning.  Please give the world a favor by electing him for this award.”

Liza F., Chapel Hill, NC

“Bradley Manning is the bravest, strongest and most righteous man in our military today. His treatment by our ‘government’ has been nothing less than criminal. This needs to be brought to the attention of everyone on Earth.”

Susan W., Pilot Hill, CA

“Someone in my family died on 9/11. How do we address the underlying causes that might drive someone to commit an act of terrorism in the first place? Might the information allegedly leaked by Manning galvanize people to hold their political leaders more accountable? And so we might be able to enact meaningful changes in the realm of foreign policy? Our current policies will only end in more blowback. Thank you, Bradley Manning.”

Rick C., New Milford, NJ

“Indeed, this young man DOES walk in the shoes of Dr. King.”

A.J. A., Potsdam, NY

“Bradley Manning knew what he was risking in taking his stand against the U.S. government and it was an act of inspiring selflessness. Please recognize his willingness to stand up against what has become a monstrous self preserving beast of a government.”

Robert B., Charlotte, NC

“Bradley Manning is a hero willing to put his life on the line to speak out about war crimes that are not acceptable in a civilized world.”

Linda L., Trinidad, CA

“This man has sacrificed a great deal for all of us who believe in honest government and genuine democracy.”

Kaye F., Longmont, CO

“Let’s walk the walk!”

Richard R., Albuquerque, NM

“My beloved country, the USA, is spending too much money and lives on militarism. We have invaded other countries on the basis of lies. I believe this young man will be seen as a hero some day. That he is in prison says much about the USA and its military.”

Marcie B., Flagstaff, AZ

“It is the hawks who are threatened by Manning and want to nip this kind of behavior in the bud.”

Shelley D., Issaquah, WA

“Wow, what it would do for the world to honor someone who actually acted for peace with courage and self-less-ness. Having that reference would give enormous hope for people around the world and for humankind!”

Connie S., Santa Barbara, CA

“This is a wonderful idea! Bradley Manning certainly deserves it, and if he receives it, it would have to shame the U.S. government into releasing him.”

Rose B., Austin, TX

“Rarely have I felt so strongly about a Nobel nominee’s qualification for the honor. PFC Manning has given a significant part of his life, night and day, to bring truth to light and reduce human suffering. History will judge him a hero. History starts here, now.”

John K., Laurel, MD


“Bradley Manning is a hero of the people. He should be freed and given the Nobel Peace Prize AND a ticker-tape parade in NYC.”

Leonard M., San Marcos, CA

“Give peace and Bradley Manning a chance.”

Martha L., Dixon, CA

“I am Proud of Bradley Manning and how he took action to expose the treachery of my government to stop it. Bradley Manning deserves the Nobel Peace Prize along with Julian Assange!”

L. L., San Diego, CA

“Bravery and altruism are what stands between us and the power and greed of unscrupulous might which has no conscience.”

Caroline T., Ann Arbor, MI

“Bring the trial into the light of day. Don’t let Manning be ‘disappeared.’ This is America.”

Jeffrey G., San Carlos, CA

“Bradley is a political prisoner in our country that preaches freedom and democracy on the outside but does so many illegal things behind our backs without transparency!”

Steve & Sharon B., Oxnard, CA

“Bradley Manning has done more than anyone in the world to let all people know the deplorable state of U.S. militarism.”

Gail O., Portland, OR

“In 2001, the world began a steep descent into terrible, ethical unknown. We are now in free fall, thanks to the unbridled and abetted preemptive strikes on two countries Afghanistan and Iraq. The most pressing issues on the planet — inequality and climate collapse — have effectively been negated and conflict is escalating daily based on new and old rivalries throughout the world. Soon, much of the world’s species will inevitably be condemned [to] death-struggles over food, water, air and brute force. Bradley Manning will go down — if we live to write the history of the world in 2200 — as one of great souls of our age. He deserves recognition now by all those concerned with the crises we now face and must solve together as a planet and a human society.”

Ari M., Lennox, MA

“Peace is unattainable without sacrificial lambs, apparently.”

William T., Ellicott City, MD

“No peace possible without freedom of information!”

John K., Elizabeth, CO

“Let this kid go. As a Vietnam vet I say put Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush in jail. They actually got people killed — for nothing. And I mean nothing.”

Ken L., Pinehurst, NC

“I thought we would learn from Vietnam, but we did not.  Exporting war for profit has to end, and Manning’s courage must not be forgotten.”

Roger S., York, PA

“The public has a right to information. That is the basis of democracy. Bradley Manning has the courage to give us the truth. I cannot think of a more deserving individual.”

Trish S., Sparks, NV

“The selection of Bradley Manning would put ‘Peace’ back into the Nobel Peace Prize.”

Gail H., Mesa, AZ

“Although I’m an Obama supporter, I’m ashamed that he is still allowing the military to persecute Bradley Manning.”

Cathy L., Grayling, MI

“He deserves it. Obama did not, though I supported it at the time.”

Burton C., New Castle, NH

“He is a hero to the whole world!”

Phoebe S., Berkeley, CA

“Manning is a sterling example of the power of one individual sacrificing himself for the good of humanity.”

Encke K., New York, NY

“The media silence is deafening.”

Daniel S., Manchester, NH

“He did break the law but he’s serving time for that. Sometimes to serve the greater good laws need to be broken.”

Rachel D., Seattle, WA

“He has done so much to expose the criminal behavior of some leaders of the American empire.”

Frederick C., Montclair, NJ

“Whistleblowers are the true heroes! And he really needs this.”

Carol Anne F., Berkeley, CA

“Give the Nobel Peace Prize to a true hero of the human race, a man who transcends borders and has placed his own self a distant second to the needs of others. Brad Manning is a great human being. Give him the Nobel, please!”

Eric W., Austin, TX

“According to U.S. military brass, it is ok to commit war crimes but it is not ok to expose them. Giving Bradley Manning the Nobel Peace Prize will give hope to millions of peace loving people around the world. Please consider it.”

Ali M., Princeton, NJ

“I suppose this enters me into a database somewhere, but this man deserves our thanks for revealing the lurid backstory of diplomacy and the hypocrisy of our ‘leaders’ (and I use that term loosely). This country needs the truth.”

Arthur G., Chamblee, GA

“Those who blow the whistle on the evil actions of government need to be applauded and rewarded, not imprisoned.”

Kenneth E., Ormond Beach, FL

“This is a moral imperative. Bradley Manning has already spent too much time incarcerated for supporting our right to know how our leaders betrayed us with war for profit. Do the right thing!”

Josephine P., Brooklyn, NY

“Bradley Manning has endured terrible conditions in a U.S. military prison because he thinks that citizens of a democracy should know what their government and military are doing in their names; that transparency rather than secrecy nurtures democracy and peace.”

Edith M., Milwaukee, WI

“Bradley Manning has been jailed and tortured. He has been denied his constitutional rights. He has sacrificed himself to prove war crimes and to help bring peace to Iraq. He is the Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King of this century. He should be awarded The Noble Peace Prize.”

Deb B., Pittsburgh, PA

“With all due respect, try giving the Peace Prize to a REAL champion of peace, for a change.”

Lionel S., Pahoa, HI

To read more comments from supporters of a Nobel Peace Prize for Bradley Manning, or to join them in signing the RootsAction.org petition urging the Norwegian Nobel Committee to award him the prize, click here.


Norman Solomon is co-founder of RootsAction.org and founding director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. His books include “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” He writes the Political Culture 2013 column.

Mar 252013

Napoleon Hill – Think And Grow Rich – ORIGINAL Full Length

Here is the full length original First edition video footage published by Napoleon Hill in march 1937 This video is perfectly named Think And Grow Rich which first popularized the Law Of Attraction.

The Law of attraction is defined simply by acknowledging that thoughts are things… to define clearer…. You Are What You Think…. Like Attracts Like…. You Become Your Dominant Thoughts…

For Anybody who is looking to change there life for the good and become successful in all areas not just business but personally, i would advise them to study this material.

Napoleon hill compiled this knowledge from the worlds millionaires back at the turn of the century..

Desired Outcome


The Desired Outcome

Since the dawn of recorded history, humanity has craved and dreamed for the advent of a just, verdant, and peaceful social order. A society that is truly thriving and most individuals would have rich, full, creative lives. A society where all men and women are truly EQUAL.  Some people might have more responsibility than others; no one or no group would be able to coerce another person or group using fraud or force!   A society where peace is the norm, crime was non-existent and all people have easy access to healthy food, clean water and non chem-trail laced skies. A society where humans lived in harmony with each other with the earth and all its creatures.   Such a society is hard to describe because such it would be everything that the society of the 21st century earth is NOT! Are we closer to that kind of society today than we were EIGHT THOUSAND years ago – when government, as we know it, was invented? I think not.

The Great Question

For about the past twenty years I have sought the answer to one Great Question: What has to happen for such a desirable world to be manifest? To find an answer to this question I have applied a wide variety of intellectual tools, including:

  • The Scientific Method
  • Logic
  • The operational point of view
  • Math
  • Formal systems analysis
  • Neurolinguistics
  • Archaeology
  • Organizational Development
  • Characterology
  • Political science
  • Economics
  • Psychology
  • History

  • Sociology

The exciting upshot of this lengthy search is a potentially valid answer to the Great Question. It may not be the only answer – but it is very likely a good answer – certainly, an answer worthy of your serious consideration.

The Big Problem

In order to understand my answer to the Great Question, it is necessary to grasp the nature of the Big Problem – the obstacle that has kept our species from really thriving since we emerged from the forests and caves millennia ago. My analysis reveals that such evils as war, terrorism, hunger, poverty, genocide, race-hatred, widespread addiction, inter-personal violence, and the like, are actually all symptoms of the same phenomenon – namely: Inadequate Socio-cultural Evolution.

Unlike genetic evolution that has thus far been beyond human capability to control, or even influence, socio-cultural evolution is extra-genetic – and therefore susceptible to human choices and decisions. Unlike the tremendous advances of technological evolution (which is also extra-genetic), our socio-cultural evolution hasn’t advanced significantly since feudal times. While the names of our institutions have changed, the basic methods by which they operate, and the principles underlying those methods, haven’t changed at all in at least eight thousand years – and possibly much longer. In a nutshell, our species’ institutions continue to make very unethical decisions on the same basis that they always have in the past.

Of special interest in the field of socio-cultural evolution is our grasp of ethics. The general lack of understanding of the most basic principles of ethics is manifest in almost all our institutions – particularly big businesses, organized religions, and governments. The result is that law-makers routinely enact laws that coerce us into obeying laws that forbid us to act ethically – or what is worse, require us to engage in acts that are unethical. Governments (all of them) are thus reduced to mere power-brokerage cartels that benefit a very small number of individuals at the expense of billions of others. In the analysis that follows I explore the fundamental ethical principles that drive our societal development, the effect our ethics have on our laws, and how our laws serve the hidden purposes that underlie the way our governments and other institutions function. Following this analysis, I propose a Grand Experiment (for which I am asking your support) that could potentially alter the course of extra-genetic human evolution in a most desirable way – and I provide evidence supporting the decision to proceed.

The Big Problem – The B.O.R.G.

The Titania Project


Now that we understand the E+ Ethic and the falsehood of the Comforting Lies, it makes sense to ask what we can do to correct the situation.  The TITANIA PROJECT is a plausible answer to this question.

It is a demonstrable fact that all the blessings of life in human society can be causally traced to someone’s creativity. This means that advances in science, business, the arts, technological progress, social evolution, material prosperity, spiritual awareness, and even love and happiness all derive from creativity. Creativity is literally the life-spring of all we value and hold dear in life. It behooves us therefore, to organize our private and public institutions around a set of ethical principles that maximize the creativity of our citizenry.

Accordingly, TITANIA is dedicated to the promotion of peace, love, creativity, and personal evolution through the pursuit of three objectives:

1. Abandonment of the Comforting Lies,
2. Widespread adoption of the E+ Ethic /Titanian Code of Honor and
3. Replacement of our hierarchic institutions with a new kind of institution, known as an Octologue  that refutes the Comforting lies and embraces the E+ Ethic.

Success in this endeavor requires massive education of the public.  Using the Ethical Group known as the Octologue, that is scientifically designed to encourage feedback and boost Creativity, we can use this technology to create the society we wish to live in.   The larger version of the Octologue is known as a Holomat, which is a group of Octologues linked together.  These HoloMats can also be linked together making larger HoloMats.  As Titanian Citizens  are trained to use the technology, the process starts growing it builds on it self slowly at first then faster and faster. Being Octologues grow at a factor of 8, and the participants experience increased creativity,  it will grow at a rapid rate.  Many HoloMats need to be filled to create a thriving society

Ethical Means and Ethical Ends



By Robert E. Podolsky
I distinguish here four categories of unethical acts and note that the most harmful in our society are those in which the decision to act unethically is the result of ignorance or misunderstanding concerning basic ethical principles.  In particular I examine the most harmful and widespread fallacy that ethical ends can be attained by unethical means.  This simple mistaken notion is arguably the single greatest source of evil in the world today.  When this fact is generally understood the world of humanity will be a far better place in which to live.

Types of “Sins”

At any given time a person wishing to act ethically must choose a particular action over other possibilities knowing that the information on which the decision to act is based is incomplete.  Therefore the individual making the choice must estimate the probabilities of various consequences that are foreseen as possible results of the choices available knowing that unimagined consequences are possible and that yet-to-be-imagined choices may exist with still more unforeseen consequences.  Sometimes the moral individual makes these choices in full awareness of their personal limitations and sometimes not.  But no one can know with certainty all the outcomes of their acts, not even after the action has taken place.

For the reasons given above, we all make mistakes in choosing our actions; and sometimes our actions, made in moral good faith, have results that we deem unethical.  Knowing this is humbling to us all.  When it happens we say, “Oh, if only I had known; I would have acted differently”.   For lack of a better name, let me call these unintended lapses “Type One Sins” or T-1s for short.  Such moral lapses are literally unavoidable no matter how committed we are to acting as ethically as possible.  They are made with the least possible awareness that the outcome will be unethical.

Now let us consider unethical acts undertaken with more awareness on the part of the one acting that the action will have destructive results. At the other end of the spectrum from the T-1s are actions that are taken knowing full well that they are hurtful and destructive; yet they are taken nonetheless; the actor often enjoying the knowledge that someone is being hurt. Such actions are sadistic at best and unmitigatedly evil in their more extreme manifestations.  Let us call such actions “Type Four Sins” or T-4s for short.

Enacted in the absence of malice are those hurtful actions taken with regret on the part of the one acting; believing that circumstances render it the most ethical choice available.  For instance, consider the medic who administers an emergency tracheotomy to save the life of a person choking to death in spite of the fact that there is some pain inflicted in the process.  The medic takes no pleasure in the infliction of this pain; recognizes that the infliction of pain is unethical and does so anyway seeing no other way to save the patient’s life.  Let us call unethical acts of this variety “Type Three Sins” or T-3s for short.

And finally I come to the subject of this article; namely those moral lapses that result in unethical outcomes because the person acting lacks a fundamental understanding of ethics.  This category, which I shall call “Type Two Sins” or T-2s for short, is, as we shall see, the most serious challenge on the planet to humanity’s long-range survival.

How so?  Consider the following.T-1s are unavoidable; but are never carried out systematically and are never institutionalized.T-4s are only committed by psychopaths, sociopaths, and other persons who are devoid of conscience.  Such people are in a very small minority, are easily identified, and are rarely tolerated in human society, the majority finding their way into our “corrections” systems at a fairly early age.

T-3s are usually mitigated in their harmfulness by the thoughtfulness and reluctance of the person acting.

But T-2s are another story altogether.  As we shall see, their destructive scope can be systemic; they have the potential to make humanity extinct; and, what is more, they are often institutionalized by governments, businesses, religions, and other powerful interest groups whose resources make them far more destructive than T-1s, T-3s, and T4s together.

Defining the Good Act

For an in depth discussion of ethical principles the reader is referred to EPILOGUE: The Bloodless Revolution that begins on page 53, and the Bill of Ethics given in Appendix A preceding.  Most of us have no problem understanding that an act or behavior that benefits someone and harms no one is clearly ethical.  Similarly we understand intuitively that an act or behavior that harms someone and benefits no one is clearly unethical.  Our difficulties with ethical concepts begin when we contemplate an act or behavior that has both beneficial and harmful consequences. So, for purposes of the present discussion, consider the following two definitions as candidates for the foundation of a system of ethics.

1.       An ethical act is one that benefits at least one person (even if only the person acting) while harming no one (including the person acting).

2.       An ethical act is one that causes more benefits to people than it does harm.

For the present I put aside the task of defining what constitutes a “benefit” or” “harm”.  That part is comparatively easy.  Just assume for the moment that adequate definitions of these terms are in fact available.  The hard part is the choice between the two definitions.  The first definition asserts that to be ethical an act must harm no one; and that therefore an act that harms someone is unethical.  This definition therefore forbids the achievement of ethical ends by unethical means.

The second definition, however, allows the use of unethical (harmful) means if the act does more benefit than harm.  Let’s assume for the moment that it is possible to quantify benefits and harms (this can in fact be done) and notice that this definition would lead us to believe that ethical ends can be achieved by unethical means.  This has in fact been the ethic, which most human societies have adopted.  Opinion to the contrary notwithstanding, this is the preferred choice of governments, corporations, and religious institutions worldwide. It is historically what we have actually done.

As similar as these definitions seem, the outcomes produced by the choice of one or the other are as different as night and day.  One choice leads to the maximization of peace, love, and prosperity and the other leads to wars, genocide, poverty, cruelty, exploitation and slavery.  There are at least three distinct and essentially independent proofs of the preceding assertion.  I call these the “Historical Proof”, the “Golden Rule Proof”, and the “Logical Proof”. These are presented in the following.


Values and Beliefs

To help understand the distinction between the two definitions of a good act and its significance I review the concepts of values and beliefs.  I have personally interviewed over a thousand people asking questions about what they want more of in life; what they really value.  The similarity between people’s answers is pretty amazing.  Health, basic comforts, spiritual peace of mind, love, freedom, mobility, good relationships and time to enjoy them; access to truth; mental stimulation, work that feels meaningful, growth stimuli, pleasure, happiness, and opportunities to enhance the lives of others are among those frequently mentioned.  It is not hard for most of us to agree on what is “good”; what we value.  In this respect humanity is pretty homogeneous. We have little disagreement about our basic values.

Far more difficult it is to reach any kind of agreement on what will actually bring us what we value.  What we believe is needed in order to attain what we want we refer to as our individual belief system.  All living things have values and belief systems.  Even a plant that has just enough awareness to value sunlight may turn its leaves perpendicular to the rays of the sun in the belief that this will increase its access to that which it values.

When it comes to belief systems we tend to lose our objectivity; to trust faith over truth even though reality consistently demonstrates the fact that objective truth is repeatable, verifiable, and pragmatically irrefutable.  In other words we tend to believe what we want to believe even if our collective experience contradicts us.

Let’s go back to the example of the plant that turns its leaves perpendicular to the rays of the sun.  In situations where plants compete for sunlight those that have this awareness, belief, and ability enjoy a competitive advantage.  Other things being equal, they do get more sun than their less phototropic counterparts.  This fact has been thoroughly established by many experiments by many different experimenters using a wide range of techniques.  So in the plant’s case the belief that phototropism maximizes sunlight reception is correct.  One might say that plants that believe otherwise are wrong and that many of them suffer for lack of the correct belief.  In fact, some have probably become extinct for lack of the correct belief.

Similarly when we choose the basic definition of our ethics, that which we define as a good act, we may or may not choose correctly that which will optimize our chances of getting what we most value in life.  If we choose incorrectly we too may become extinct for lack of the correct belief system.  In this way we can compare the values of various belief systems. Definitions, like other statements are composed of information that can either be “true” or “false”.  True information is that which when believed increases the intelligence of the believer. “Intelligence” in this context is the ability to predict and control events in the observable universe, or equivalently to initiate and sustain causal relationships between such events.  This definition of true information is the basis of science and in many ways can be seen as defining science.  That is to say any discipline that uses this definition of truth may be said to be a science.

Now let’s review the two definitions stated previously which I from now on refer to as E1 (Ethic 1) and E2 (Ethic 2) respectively:

1.       An ethical act is one that benefits at least one person (even if only the person acting) while harming no one (including the person acting).

2.       An ethical act is one that causes more benefits to people than it does harm.

These two definitions are similar in that both value “benefits” while seeking to avoid “harms”.  But each of these definitions, when accepted, yields a dramatically different belief system. In other words while sharing the fundamental values inherent in each definition, people adopting one or the other of these definitions as the basis for their behavior will behave very differently.  As in the case of plant phototropism, there have been enough “experiments” with these two definitions for us to know how individuals and groups develop when one or the other of these two ethics is adopted.  One of these definitions is “true” and yields a belief system that maximizes the intelligence of the believer; and the other is “false” because it substantially diminishes the intelligence of its believer.

The true definition is the first: “An ethical act is one that benefits at least one person (even if only the person acting) while harming no one (including the person acting).” Individuals and groups adopting this definition are universally better off than those who don’t.   We’ll have more to say about this later.

The second definition turns out to be one of humanity’s greatest stumbling blocks.  It often seduces us into forgetting that the choice of the “lesser evil” is still a choice of evil. Governments, corporations, and religious bureaucracies throughout the world have long given in to the temptation to adopt this definition and the belief systems that result from its adoption.  The unacknowledged prioritization of the desires for power, money, and self-righteousness lead the adopters of this definition to think that if they benefit from their decisions, that harm done to others is acceptable.  It is easy for such people to see that they benefit more than they are harmed by this ethic (at least on a short-term basis); and therefore not so easy to see that the ethic itself is flawed and that it causes them and others enormous harm on a long-term basis.

Let’s examine some of the historical consequences of this false belief system. One common theme that results from the adoption and institutionalization of E2 is the idea that the well being of some people (sometimes referred to as “the few”) must be sacrificed for the well being of others (sometimes called “the many”).  Hence:

  • All instances of slavery throughout history are based on this premise, resulting in the suffering and annihilation of millions of people.
  • Religions that condoned or required human sacrifice were based on this premise; which is part of the reason that most such religions are essentially extinct today.
  • Marxist-Leninist regimes have always been based on this premise, resulting in near-universal poverty for those living in such countries.
  • The government practice of taxation is based on this belief, resulting in the financial enslavement of billions of people today.  I would go so far as to assert (Podolsky’s theorem) that every time a government seeks to solve a societal problem by levying a tax that in the long run the society is harmed far more than it benefits.
  • The rise of corporate power and its concomitant partnership with government is the result of this belief; and results in the disenfranchisement of billions of people worldwide.
  • The power-ascendancy of religious organizations is the result of this misconception, and has been the basis of pogroms, jihads, crusades, holy wars, inquisitions and similar large-scale atrocities for thousands of years.
  • Many activities seen as normal components of war are based on this idea; not the least of which is the concept that civilian casualties are an acceptable price to pay to win a war.

These are just a few examples of institutionalized T-2 sins as I have defined them here.  Each and every one of them has at one time or another been justified by adoption of E2 as the prevailing ethic.  This historical perspective tells us that these evils occur in spite of our wish to cause more good than harm; and in fact happen in large measure because we chose to define a good or ethical act as one that creates more benefits than harms without placing a limit on the amount of harm that is permissible. How can this be?

To answer this question let’s go back and take a closer look at the consequences of Ethics Definition Number 1.  It states: An ethical act is one that benefits at least one person (even if only the person acting) while harming no one (including the person acting).  Note that this definition logically implies that any act that is harmful to someone is unethical…by definition.  Acceptance of this definition precludes all the harmful consequences listed above as resulting from Definition 2.  It means it is not acceptable to sacrifice the one for the benefit of the many.  It is not acceptable to take away people’s resources by force no matter who benefits; so only voluntary “taxes” are ethical and Marx’s redistribution of wealth is unethical.  Control of government by institutions that place a highest value on power or profits is unethical; so public disempowerment by corporations and organized religions is necessarily unacceptable.  And of course, warfare that harms non-combatants is also unethical, as are business practices that degrade the environment.

To put it bluntly, our society is in a mess today because we don’t have an institutionalized understanding that ethical ends cannot be achieved by unethical means.  If our institutions incorporated this awareness and committed themselves to Ethics Definition 1 (E1) all the aforesaid T-2 sins would be abolished and a far more successful society would have a chance to evolve.  This is the most important issue that humanity faces today; yet here in the United States, one of the most successful and enlightened countries in the world, we don’t address this issue publicly; our presidential candidates give no hint of being aware of it; and the media for all their investigative expertise are oblivious to it.

At this point I have one unfinished item to deal with.  How are we to recognize “benefits” and “harms”?  The best definition I have seen is that an act is beneficial if it increases someone’s creativity or any of its logical equivalents.  A resource is a logical equivalent of creativity if the increase or decrease of that resource necessitates a corresponding increase or decrease in creativity and vice versa.  Some examples of creativity’s logical equivalents are awareness, love, objective truth, personal growth, and evolution.  Similarly, an act is harmful if it limits or diminishes creativity or any of its logical equivalents for anyone.  It should also be noted that creativity might be thought of as the product of ethical awareness and intelligence as symbolized by the equation C=EI, where C can be positive or negative; and negative creativity is the equivalent of destructiveness or entropy maximization.  In this sense “evolution” and “entropy” are logical equivalents of “good” and “evil”.

In the first paragraph of this chapter I said that the single greatest source of evil in the world today is the idea that ethical ends can be achieved by unethical means.  Subsequently I have shown that this mistaken notion historically generates unethical deeds of the T-2 variety and that such misdeeds are widely institutionalized and wreak great harm on all humanity.  One of these Type Two sins I have not yet mentioned; and it is arguably the most destructive.  It is called “bureaucracy”.  “Bureaucracy” is often thought to be a synonym for “organization”; but it is not. It is not even a logical equivalent of organization.  As John David Garcia first pointed out to me, bureaucracy is the systematic elimination of corrective feedback; and at its worst is the elimination of feedback concerning ethics. It is this phenomenon that brought down the Soviet Union and the Roman Empire and many other regimes throughout history. It is gradually destroying the United States and its allies even now.  Unless we reverse this entropy-increasing trend we too will go the way of earlier fallen regimes and quite possibly we may destroy all humanity in the process.

When employees the world over can go to their “superiors” and criticize their employers’ ethics without fear of reprisals, bureaucracy will no longer be a major problem for humanity.  When those same employees can reveal their challenges to those same “superiors” and receive helpful feedback that makes them better at their jobs we will have little to fear from the depredations of bureaucracy.  Until that day the insistence by so many that ethical ends can be achieved by unethical means will continue to eat away at our species’ potential. Which force will dominate our lives in this new century; evolution or entropy?


Many people claim to live by the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. But I shall prove now that choosing E2 as one’s operative ethic is in contradiction to the Golden Rule.

One obvious implication of the Golden Rule is the admonition, “Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you.” This is a corollary of the Golden Rule, as it follows from it by logic alone.  Of course both admonitions could be contained in one by stating the rule: “Do unto others only as you would have them do unto you.”

Now consider what happens when one takes an action that is constrained only by the E2 ethic.  In general such an action has consequences that produce both beneficial and harmful effects where the harms are constrained to be less than the benefits. In some instances the benefits and harms will be sustained by the same individual; but in general the benefits and harms are permitted to apply to separate people, whereby one or more persons are benefited and one or more are harmed.  Now I ask, “Did the people harmed volunteer to be harmed?  Did we do unto them as we would have them do unto us?” In all honesty we can only answer “NO, OF COURSE NOT” to these questions.  Therefore the E2 ethic is an insufficient constraint to prevent its adherents from doing unto others as they would NOT have others do unto themselves.  The E2 ethic therefore unequivocally violates the Golden Rule and should be unacceptable to anyone who esteems the Golden Rule as their highest ethic.


In this section I shall prove by logic alone that the E2 ethic is unacceptable if we are ever to have universal peace and prosperity.  I do this because some of us do not give any special credence to ethics such as the Golden Rule because it derives from biblical lore.  No matter.  We can show in effect that the E2 ethic contains its own contradiction; that an act sanctioned by E2 must be unethical if it is not also sanctioned by E1.

To understand this proof one must first consider the fact that in general an act sanctioned by E2, unless also sanctioned by E1, will have as consequences both beneficial and harmful effects. Observing those effects we recognize a principle of separability: An act or behavior, which has both beneficial and harmful effects, is logically and ethically indistinguishable from two acts, one having beneficial consequences and the other having harmful consequences. This fact is apparent when you consider that after the consequences have been manifested you cannot tell whether the cause of those consequences was one act or two.

Now I go back to an earlier statement.  An act that has only beneficial consequences is clearly ethical; and an act that has only harmful consequence is clearly unethical.  From this we deduce that in general an E2 sanctioned behavior is the logical and ethical equivalent of two acts, one of which is ethical and the other unethical. But a behavior cannot be both ethical and unethical.  Any behavior that encompasses an unethical act must be unethical.  Therefore I conclude that any act sanctioned by E2 that is not also sanctioned by E1 must be unethical.  Therefore adoption of E2 must lead to unethical behavior.  This is how the institutionalization of E2 causes so many serious societal problems (T-2 sins). If we have any hope of success as a species, humanity must come to grips with this issue by institutionalizing E1 in place of E2.


The choice of an ethic determines the quality of the values and belief systems that derive therefrom.  As we have seen, the ethical definition that leads to a healthier society is the E1 ethic that defines an ethical act as one that benefits someone without harming anyone.  I believe I have proven unequivocally that adoption of the E2 ethic (which defines as ethical any act that results in more benefit than harm) must lead to unethical outcomes; and in particular has led to wholesale evils through the attempt to achieve ethical ends by unethical means.  The “Historical Proof” shows that human experience is a clear demonstration of the failure of E2 to limit the harms done in the name of benefits for the many.  The “Golden Rule Proof” validates this empirical observation by showing that the E2 ethic violates the Golden Rule. And finally the “Logical Proof” shows that E2 contains its own contradiction; so that any institution defining its ethics by adoption of E2 is likely to create more harms than benefits in spite of its intention to do otherwise.

Based on the above, one might well ask how the E1 Ethic is adopted by Titania. So lets talk a bit about Titanian Organization.

Titania, the Open Source Creative and Ethical Society


The Message of Universal EthicsTitanian octologue

TITANIA is an open source Ethical association promoting PeaceLoveCreativity and Personal Evolution in THRIVING human society.  The TITANIAN organization model is a new kind of international institution that is non-hierarchic and rigorously non-bureaucratic in both its structure and decision-making processes.   The Titanian organization is based on voluntary interaction between individuals, yet at the same time organized.   Throughout recorded history up to the early 21st century AD, Power Brokerage Cartels (BORG) have trapped humanity in hierarchic (Pyramid) control models, whose prime feature was coercive interactions between individuals.

To keep humanity asleep; being that you’re awake now, you know what we mean, The BORG used a well crafted systems of violence, mass hypnosis / indoctrination to sustain non-truths and double-speak, known as the Comforting Lies.  These Comforting lies perpetuate a an omni-present State, one that is at war with the individuals that comprise it.  Thus, in keeping humanity asleep / hypnotized, the BORG State gets away with the outright Killing of more than 200 million people in the 20th Century, the murder of 20,000 people per day through malnutrition / extreme poverty, and the outright fleecing of individual creativity in a militaristic system of regulation, legal plunder, taxation and extortion.

Titania is based on a Code of Honor that provides a set of unique principles for its mission and procedures. More than twenty years in the making, this is NOT something you have seen before.

It is the dream of TITANIA’s founders that humanity will evolve into a moral society in which most, if not all, of humanity’s problems will have been solved.  Imagine living in such a world!  Isn’t living in that world, what you always knew could exist, and wanted to exist, been YOUR dream as well? TITANIA is the choice for you! Isn’t it time we brought Sanity back to Humanity?

Let’s get started, by considering the desired outcome of the society we want to create.