My Ideal World

Some would say that conditions in the world right now are worse than they have ever been, and that may be true for some things: climate change, modern war, public political scandals, etc. Those, however, did not prompt me to think about my ideal world; playing Pandemic 2 did.

The game involves you creating a disease that is supposed to eradicate the human population while the human population eventually attempts to fight back by creating a vaccine to your virus/bacteria/parasite. The disease starts in a randomly assigned country, whether it is the United States or Madagascar. At a certain level, the disease becomes noticed (though the game is flawed in that it takes a long time for a country to notice an outbreak, whereas in real life 200,000 people exhibiting unique symptoms with the same disease would be very public) and countries begin to close their borders, their ports, and their air travel. While it is a game that takes a scenario to an extreme, it is worth thinking about.

For example, would countries cut off all communication with each other upon discovery of the disease within the affected country, or would medical aid flow into the affected country? Most likely, the latter would happen. The game makes no mention of this contingency. (Eventually, everyone in all affected countries become infected unless a vaccine is developed.)

How does this lead into my grandiose portrait of an ideal world? Two simple words: International cooperation, my friend.

In my ideal world (and political conservatives will likely vilify me for this), the world has a unified government. This unified government is all-encompassing, including all countries under one united Earth umbrella. Countries reserve a degree of autonomy, much like states do within the United States. The united world government, however, remains predominant in all cases dealing with law. Having all countries under one government would improve the world by:
-Expediting international cooperation in times of duress, such as during natural disasters.
-Ensuring universal human rights for all people.
-Bolstering the economies of traditionally weaker countries.
Before I begin talking about this world's economic system, it is necessary to state that countries dedicate more money towards education and scientific research than military spending, religious spending, etc. Health is paramount, so proven carcinogens such as tobacco are gone, as well as manufactured food additives, such as high fructose corn syrup and partially-hydrogenated oils.
At first, the economy would be based on traditional trade between countries, i.e. food, transportation, etc. Eventually, as technology develops, food and products will be commonly synthesized by advanced technology, thus rendering the trade of items for profit superfluous. (Research into this is being carried out in Japan already, though not as directly as I would hope.)


Thus, the economy would no longer be based in money due to an abundance of necessary goods.

This would entail a new fundamental philosophy of all human existence: Instead of each individual doggedly pursuing an accumulation of material capital in order to live well, the value of education and pursuit of knowledge would have to replace money as the driving force of mankind.

Knowledge can be progressed by the exploration of space. Humans have yet to break the seal on the vast scores of knowledge the galaxy, let alone the universe, holds. We reside as a veritable dust particle in a mansion. There is so much to explore and learn that only generations from now will humans truly understand their place in the universe. (That is, if this future comes to fruition.)

Being an Atheist, I can only hope that my imagined future is full of Atheists; however, that's unlikely, so tolerance for all beliefs will be a key concept in this overly idealistic future. Even more fundamental concepts that should be taught are logic, rationality, and empathy. A combination of the three, with each assuming an equal role in human relations and interaction, can assure equal understanding both between humans and the world in which we live.

You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.

That's all for now,
Das Flüg

P.S. I may have neglected to mention some things, so just leave any concerns/questions in the comments section and I'll respond forthwith.

Why I Would Never Want to Be President

A lot of kids, especially young ones, have dreams of one day presiding over the highest office in the United States: the Presidency. I bet that if one were to go into a third grade class and take a straw poll of desired careers, "president" would be among the top, along with "astronaut," "fireman," "doctor," and "high school dropout." This isn't surprising, as the US educational system has inflated and pampered the holy image of the presidency as something sacred and integral to the very functions of the planet. I hate to burst that veritable bubble, but the seasons will continue to change, the years will continue to pass, and the circle of life will continue regardless of whether or not there is an American presidency. There will likely continue to be the high office, however, and it is one that I do not covet in the least. Why?

1. Public exposure: When one becomes president, the private life of the person ceases to be private. All affairs (both literal and sexual) become public knowledge, one's family becomes scrutinized and the unyielding eye of an ever-vigilant infotainment press will spread vitriol in order to produce whatever profit they can. Unfortunately, once one becomes a public figure in the US, suing for the right to privacy becomes an extraordinarily difficult process (as it was already). The privacy of one's home is forfeit.

2. Dealing with wingnuts: This is self-explanatory. As can be seen today, wingnuts with oddly large followings can spread falsehoods in order to create a disturbance in what could otherwise be called civilized debate. Especially in an age of increased partisanship where the leaders of opposition parties make it their duties to simply say "no" regardless of truth, a president would be unable to sway many with reasonable, rational arguments. Winguts also create a high degree of factionalism within the US, though not in the Madisonian sense; instead, the wingnut will seek to create strife and discord simply to promote his/her own political ambitions.

3. Influences: Money plays a very large role in US elections. Without money, one cannot promote oneself with sufficient exposure so as to garner votes. This is why the influence of money from others, especially outsider contributions, weighs so heavily on every candidate; if that candidate does not uphold his/her promise to his/her contributors, it is reasonable to assume that the person with the money can just as easily turn against the candidate. If you are going to run for public office of any kind, be sure to have plenty of funds to support yourself.

4. Stress: The overall level of stress for a president is extraordinary. Looking at any president over their terms, the amount of gray hair accrued and well-focused age lines become easily apparent.


5. Blame: Presidents take blame for things in and out of their control. The economy, bureaucratic failures, even the weather; the President is viewed as the arbiter of all. The President constantly has to defend himself and his party while at the same time deflecting blame onto those who rightly deserve it. Of course, perceptions of a president's culpability will never change for some, and constant scrutinizing and derision will always entail.

I'd rather be a wingnut.

That's all for now,
Das Flüg

A Serious Man Post

Since I haven't done a political piece in a while, I figure that the one person who actually reads my blog (You) would appreciate something well-written and erudite. Hooray for consideration!

What's on my mind right now is the possible connection between the release of the Lockerbie bomber and BP's drilling contract with Libya. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, also known as the Lockerbie Bomber, was sentenced for life imprisonment after the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which killed 270 people. (There is speculation that he was simply a scapegoat, but that is a topic about which I know too little.) He was released last year to a hero's welcome in Libya due to a diagnosis of terminal prostate cancer. This obviously raised quite the disturbance in Scotland, as many wondered why a man who senselessly killed hundreds should be given compassion at the end of his life. But, that is only the beginning of the story.

It seems that BP, the highly-revered defenders of all that is black and grimy, influenced the UK government's decision to release Megrahi in order to secure an oil contract with Libya. If BP did not already seem like the dominatrix of the world, whipping us while we enjoyed it, now BP appears to be Hedonism Bot from Futurama, basically doing whatever feels like it would give them pleasure.



Corporate greed at its finest. So, what happens now? Well, if I were president (which only happens in approximately 3 of the infinite parallel universes), I would likely cut all contracts with BP, have them fined, and send them to work on the next Michael Bay movie because, let's face it, Transformers 2 was worse than waterboarding.

On a side note, I'm pretty sure those Russian spies caught in the US were the rejects from the KGB, since the information they were searching for could easily be found on the internet. Hell, it's posted on whitehouse.gov, opensecrets.org, etc. They were probably the kids who ate the crayons during KGB school.

That's all for now,
Das Flüg

P.S. Check out my friend's and my Youtube channel at www.youtube.com/uguestsproductions. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll subscribe to our channel because you love us. :)