http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/cycling/13382.aspx
"We want to know what you think about the Mayor's priorities for making cycling safer in London"
Deadline for responses Friday 11 December
Thursday, 29 October 2009
Monday, 26 October 2009
Second class?
Recently the paintwork on the road around Barking station was "refreshed" and v smart it looks too. However, the cycle decals were excluded. I'm open to persuasion as to the merits of these decals without any other markings, but not refurbishing them like the other markings just makes cycling look like a second class form of transport.
Fellow travellers
http://www.fellowtravellers.co.uk/
"Fellowtravellers' alternative transport system puts control of public transport in the hands of the people who use it – by enabling users to create new bus, minibus and shared-taxi routes which meet real need; and by raising efficiency, economy, and reliability across the board."
"Anyone with a PSV licence, local authority private hire or taxi licence, or section 22 permits and a suitable vehicle can offer a route through Fellowtravellers. To help providers to plan and develop routes, any member of the public can suggest a route they would like to see delivered.To help providers assess potential routes, they can post prospective routes on site and gain valuable customer feedback and expressions of interest before fully committing themselves to delivery.
"Fellowtravellers' alternative transport system puts control of public transport in the hands of the people who use it – by enabling users to create new bus, minibus and shared-taxi routes which meet real need; and by raising efficiency, economy, and reliability across the board."
"Anyone with a PSV licence, local authority private hire or taxi licence, or section 22 permits and a suitable vehicle can offer a route through Fellowtravellers. To help providers to plan and develop routes, any member of the public can suggest a route they would like to see delivered.To help providers assess potential routes, they can post prospective routes on site and gain valuable customer feedback and expressions of interest before fully committing themselves to delivery.
Providers can post routes which they intend to deliver as regular daily services, or for one day only (perhaps filling the empty leg of an existing booking). The service will be inexpensive because longer contracts and multiple passengers will enable providers to keep costs down; it will be safe because all fellow passengers will be registered Fellowtravellers' users; and it will be reliable because local competition will motivate providers to deliver the best service at the keenest price."
Saturday, 24 October 2009
Veloroutes
http://veloroutes.org/bikemaps/?route=38512
This digital mapping site was tipped in August/September 2009's 'Cycle', CTC's magazine. It's built on the ubiquitous Google maps and looks not unlike bikely, that I think I've mentioned here before. The writer of the letter says it's "American based but covers the UK too". There are too many of these route recording sites, but that doesn't mean this one isn't good.
The specific route I've linked to starts in Creekmouth, Barking, but appears to cross the river there - where there is no means to do so. It then zig zags all over the shop.
This digital mapping site was tipped in August/September 2009's 'Cycle', CTC's magazine. It's built on the ubiquitous Google maps and looks not unlike bikely, that I think I've mentioned here before. The writer of the letter says it's "American based but covers the UK too". There are too many of these route recording sites, but that doesn't mean this one isn't good.
The specific route I've linked to starts in Creekmouth, Barking, but appears to cross the river there - where there is no means to do so. It then zig zags all over the shop.
Saturday, 17 October 2009
Just like the old days
As more enlightened councils are looking for ways to increase cycling permeability in their boroughs, I have once again had to write to ours to ask them not to introduce one-way working in Axe Street, Barking.
Admittedly, they only removed the one way working introduced in the (early) 1970s recently to facilitate building works, but here is an opportunity restore a little bit of Barking's street network to full cycling access. The person to write to to object is Darren Henaghan. Objections have to be in writing. The notice is in thenews (Council Newspaper) p20 of the 17 October edition.
Admittedly, they only removed the one way working introduced in the (early) 1970s recently to facilitate building works, but here is an opportunity restore a little bit of Barking's street network to full cycling access. The person to write to to object is Darren Henaghan. Objections have to be in writing. The notice is in thenews (Council Newspaper) p20 of the 17 October edition.
Clearing up messy gardens
B&D council have started a campaign under their "Love Where We Live" initiative to clear up messy front gardens in the borough. If you wish to report one, phone 020 8215 3010. This apples to all front gardens, not just council properties. Those unable to maintain their own front gardens, such as elderly people, may be able to get help. There will also be a tool library giving once only loans of gardening equipment to people who cannot afford their own.
I sourced this information from the council's newspaper, thenews, page 5 of the 17 October edition. I couldn't easily find anything on the council's website.
This made the BBC news on 22 October - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8320093.stm
I sourced this information from the council's newspaper, thenews, page 5 of the 17 October edition. I couldn't easily find anything on the council's website.
This made the BBC news on 22 October - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8320093.stm
Teacup service replaces Circle Line
From December, instead of just running round the Circle, Circle Line trains will run from Hammersmith, through Edgware Road, right round the Circle to Edgware Road again to terminate and reverse.
This will enable trains to be near their depot at Hammersmith more frequently to receive routine maintenance and therefore be less likely to be taken out of service with faults.
The concern is what it will say on the front of the train that isn't at best uninformative and at worst confusing to people who might set off to Hammersmith in the wrong direction.
This will enable trains to be near their depot at Hammersmith more frequently to receive routine maintenance and therefore be less likely to be taken out of service with faults.
The concern is what it will say on the front of the train that isn't at best uninformative and at worst confusing to people who might set off to Hammersmith in the wrong direction.
Monday, 12 October 2009
Blakes Corner Abuse
The roadway from Station Pde to Ripple Rd is open again, mainly to let East London Transit (ELT) buses through. Each end of the newly re-opened stretch sports "no motor vehicles" signs with "except buses" qualifications or similar). Sadly, even before ELT starts to run, motorists are ignoring the signs and driving into / through the area.
If this were "cyclists" there would be calls for some cruel and unusual punishment to be inflicted, but motorists - despite their claims that they are put upon - can apparently get away with illegality such as this, even whilst driving past the police station.
If this were "cyclists" there would be calls for some cruel and unusual punishment to be inflicted, but motorists - despite their claims that they are put upon - can apparently get away with illegality such as this, even whilst driving past the police station.
Eco man with a van
http://www.ecovanandman.com/
"Eco Van & Man is a London man and van removal company with a difference. Not only do we provide a highly professional, competitively priced moving and storage service throughout London but we are totally committed to caring for the environment.
Our aim is to run our business on a completely sustainable and carbon neutral basis and not only have we invested in the finest electric and LPG vans, recyclable materials and committed people but have undertaken to set up and invest in an Eco charity and our own Eco forest to offset the few carbon generating aspects of our operations."
"Eco Van & Man is a London man and van removal company with a difference. Not only do we provide a highly professional, competitively priced moving and storage service throughout London but we are totally committed to caring for the environment.
Our aim is to run our business on a completely sustainable and carbon neutral basis and not only have we invested in the finest electric and LPG vans, recyclable materials and committed people but have undertaken to set up and invest in an Eco charity and our own Eco forest to offset the few carbon generating aspects of our operations."
Friday, 9 October 2009
Barking to lose 179 bus service
Edited 16 October following clarification from TfL
When ELT routes EL1 and EL2 start up in February, the 179 route will terminate at Ilford and no longer serve Ilford Lane and Barking. I missed the consultation on this - it's now a done deal.
The letter I have from TfL says the bus frequency in Ilford Lane will be 16 buses per hour (combined 169, EL1, EL2).
TfL responded to my query saying that from early next spring the 369 route will cease, EL2 will run between Ilford and Dagenham Dock and EL1 will run the same route but terminate at Thames View Estate. EL3 will start up in 2013 and run between Barking and Dagenham Dock via Barking Riverside.
When ELT routes EL1 and EL2 start up in February, the 179 route will terminate at Ilford and no longer serve Ilford Lane and Barking. I missed the consultation on this - it's now a done deal.
The letter I have from TfL says the bus frequency in Ilford Lane will be 16 buses per hour (combined 169, EL1, EL2).
The two separate routes that will make up the ELT are:
- Ilford to Dagenham Dock via Barking town centre
- Barking town centre to Dagenham Dock via Barking Riverside
TfL responded to my query saying that from early next spring the 369 route will cease, EL2 will run between Ilford and Dagenham Dock and EL1 will run the same route but terminate at Thames View Estate. EL3 will start up in 2013 and run between Barking and Dagenham Dock via Barking Riverside.
The Zeitgeist Movement
I've written about this "outgrowth" - to use one of Peter Joseph's favourite words - of the Venus Project before, but thought I'd have a stab at explaining it in my own words - well more in my own words.
There are several starting points, so I'll begin with technnological unemployment. There are many people working in jobs that could be done as well or better by machines. This is because the system says they have to have a job to get money and they have to have money to get food, but why is the system like this? Worse still, there are some people working in jobs that are pointless or counter productive - my example previously was of single mums being constrained to work in fast food outlets - a contradiction of the government's policy that we eat healthily. These single mums are being taken away from the worthwhile job of raising children.
People should be able to have life's essentials (food, shelter, potable water etc) as their birthright and should not have to work for them.
Under the current system people have to work to eat, and of course people have to buy things so that others can be paid. The so-called "cycle of consumption". It's no good making things that would last for ever as people would only buy them once and the people that make them would be out of work and unable to eat. Therefore, we deliberately make things that break or wear out and need repairing or replacing. The repair work is more work for people to do, which is held to be good, and the stuff that's thrown away basically adds to our sickening pile of waste.
The common factor in all this is money, which was necessary when resources were scarce as a way of allocating them, but are resources truly scarce? With rapidly advancing technology, we can in theory know exactly what resources we have at any one time and allocate where need is greatest. Technology can also help us get the best yields of food from land and sea in a sustainable way. Instead of this we have stratification where in one part of the world people are dying of starvation and in another they're dying from the opposite.
The mechanics of money itself are quite ridiculous. All the money in existence is on loan from banks and interest is due on every penny of it. Therefore more money is owed than actually exists to pay it back. Another reason we have to go to work is to earn money to pay back loans to the bank. It is no less than slavery. Every so often the difference between the money owed and the money that exist becomes so apparent /severe that we have a financial crisis, as we are having now.
The argument runs that with no money there would be no incentive to do the things that need doing, but is this really true? People the world over do things voluntarily and would probably do more if they didn't have to work all day too. Many of them are doing voluntary work to "give something back" to society as they plainly don't get that from their paid work. Further, much of our work is to earn enough money for the basics including the loan from the bank that we pay back as rent or mortgage in exchange for a place to live. Some of the basics are things we must buy in order to be able to go to work - transport being the most obvious example. For most people there's not much money left for inessentials or time left to spend it.
The financial crisis we are having is just that - a financial crisis. It's only because money touches so many aspects of our lives that it seems worse than it is. Your house or flat didn't cease to exist at the crunch moment. The sun still shines, plants still grow and every other species on the planet carried on as if nothing happened.
A true economic system is based on real resources - a resource based economy. The monetary system helps destroy and squander these resources - and it has to because it can only work with scarcity. It pays to pollute water because it makes it scarcer and therefore costlier. The fact or belief that mains water is impure or sub standard also creates - along with advertising - a market for bottled water.
In a resource based economy we would conserve our resources, especially the non-renewable ones. This would require us to know what we have, and technology would help us do that. Without money, vast numbers of jobs would disappear - especially the ones that are only about handling money - banking, insurance etc, but also advertising and also the many jobs that are completely unnecessary or could be automated.
The Zeitgeist Movement denies the need for government and politics. Governments can pass laws to make things happen, but other people actually make them happen. If you're ill you go to your GP, not your MP.
Talking of being ill, the pharmaceutical companies are often criticised for making money out of the vital medicines that people - who often can't afford them - need. But they are just working in the same monetary system as everyone else. It just so happens that they're a very pointed example of the absurdity of our current system. It's true that they need money for research and that to get money they have to sell pills and potions. Also, people have to be ill to need the pills and potions. In a resource based economy, knowledge about the beneficial effects of plants, chemicals, minerals, etc, would be shared (pharmaceutical companies have to compete with each other). Jacque Fresco (originator of the Venus Project - see blogs passim) often says that celery juice can reduce blood pressure, but pharam companies can't make money out of it. This absurdity would not occur in a resource based economy. [NB I'm not giving out medical advice - just repeating what Jacque Fresco says. A little internet research will confirm that celery juice is certainly good for you - hardly a surprise.]
Without money we wouldn't be slaves to work and we'd have far more time to educate and enlighten ourselves. Education wouldn't be a competive chase for grades supported by a system that teaches exam passing as a skill, it would be a proper quest for understanding and knowledge as we all know deep down it should be - it's what we mean when we say "education".
The Zeitgeist Movement spends a lot of time pondering how the "transition" from a monetary to a resource based economy will come about. Spreading the word and convincing people is one way in the hope that popular uprising will help bring about the change. If the financial system collapses it will help too, but it seems likely that there will be some suffering before the change comes about. The environment needs saving urgently now. If the biosphere can't sustain life it won't matter what economic system we have!
Even if we're willing to make he change, there's a lot of work to do. Even just getting the information systems in place is a major undertaking, though there's more in place than we might imagine. At the moment the best IT is used for war, which obviously would have no place in a resource based economy, and so all the hardware and human skill that's used for that would be freed up for socially progressive use, but in a co-operative, non-monetary society all computing power could be harnessed to the same ends.
Removing or reducing the residual need for human labour would be another big challenge as so many things are designed to be cleaned/maintained/repaired by human hands. One of the big ideas from the Venus Project is entirely new cities built to last by robots. I must admit the idea is attractive but the possibility seems rather remote or far fetched. But what do I know? Jacque Fresco says it will be more sustainable to build new cities than maintain and repair old ones, which sounds plausible, though the best bits of old ones will be kept as museum cities.
Altogether, the radical ideas of the Zeitgeist Movement / Venus Project offer an attractive and sustainable way to live on the planet. Our current system is neither of these things, but a disgrace.
There are several starting points, so I'll begin with technnological unemployment. There are many people working in jobs that could be done as well or better by machines. This is because the system says they have to have a job to get money and they have to have money to get food, but why is the system like this? Worse still, there are some people working in jobs that are pointless or counter productive - my example previously was of single mums being constrained to work in fast food outlets - a contradiction of the government's policy that we eat healthily. These single mums are being taken away from the worthwhile job of raising children.
People should be able to have life's essentials (food, shelter, potable water etc) as their birthright and should not have to work for them.
Under the current system people have to work to eat, and of course people have to buy things so that others can be paid. The so-called "cycle of consumption". It's no good making things that would last for ever as people would only buy them once and the people that make them would be out of work and unable to eat. Therefore, we deliberately make things that break or wear out and need repairing or replacing. The repair work is more work for people to do, which is held to be good, and the stuff that's thrown away basically adds to our sickening pile of waste.
The common factor in all this is money, which was necessary when resources were scarce as a way of allocating them, but are resources truly scarce? With rapidly advancing technology, we can in theory know exactly what resources we have at any one time and allocate where need is greatest. Technology can also help us get the best yields of food from land and sea in a sustainable way. Instead of this we have stratification where in one part of the world people are dying of starvation and in another they're dying from the opposite.
The mechanics of money itself are quite ridiculous. All the money in existence is on loan from banks and interest is due on every penny of it. Therefore more money is owed than actually exists to pay it back. Another reason we have to go to work is to earn money to pay back loans to the bank. It is no less than slavery. Every so often the difference between the money owed and the money that exist becomes so apparent /severe that we have a financial crisis, as we are having now.
The argument runs that with no money there would be no incentive to do the things that need doing, but is this really true? People the world over do things voluntarily and would probably do more if they didn't have to work all day too. Many of them are doing voluntary work to "give something back" to society as they plainly don't get that from their paid work. Further, much of our work is to earn enough money for the basics including the loan from the bank that we pay back as rent or mortgage in exchange for a place to live. Some of the basics are things we must buy in order to be able to go to work - transport being the most obvious example. For most people there's not much money left for inessentials or time left to spend it.
The financial crisis we are having is just that - a financial crisis. It's only because money touches so many aspects of our lives that it seems worse than it is. Your house or flat didn't cease to exist at the crunch moment. The sun still shines, plants still grow and every other species on the planet carried on as if nothing happened.
A true economic system is based on real resources - a resource based economy. The monetary system helps destroy and squander these resources - and it has to because it can only work with scarcity. It pays to pollute water because it makes it scarcer and therefore costlier. The fact or belief that mains water is impure or sub standard also creates - along with advertising - a market for bottled water.
In a resource based economy we would conserve our resources, especially the non-renewable ones. This would require us to know what we have, and technology would help us do that. Without money, vast numbers of jobs would disappear - especially the ones that are only about handling money - banking, insurance etc, but also advertising and also the many jobs that are completely unnecessary or could be automated.
The Zeitgeist Movement denies the need for government and politics. Governments can pass laws to make things happen, but other people actually make them happen. If you're ill you go to your GP, not your MP.
Talking of being ill, the pharmaceutical companies are often criticised for making money out of the vital medicines that people - who often can't afford them - need. But they are just working in the same monetary system as everyone else. It just so happens that they're a very pointed example of the absurdity of our current system. It's true that they need money for research and that to get money they have to sell pills and potions. Also, people have to be ill to need the pills and potions. In a resource based economy, knowledge about the beneficial effects of plants, chemicals, minerals, etc, would be shared (pharmaceutical companies have to compete with each other). Jacque Fresco (originator of the Venus Project - see blogs passim) often says that celery juice can reduce blood pressure, but pharam companies can't make money out of it. This absurdity would not occur in a resource based economy. [NB I'm not giving out medical advice - just repeating what Jacque Fresco says. A little internet research will confirm that celery juice is certainly good for you - hardly a surprise.]
Without money we wouldn't be slaves to work and we'd have far more time to educate and enlighten ourselves. Education wouldn't be a competive chase for grades supported by a system that teaches exam passing as a skill, it would be a proper quest for understanding and knowledge as we all know deep down it should be - it's what we mean when we say "education".
The Zeitgeist Movement spends a lot of time pondering how the "transition" from a monetary to a resource based economy will come about. Spreading the word and convincing people is one way in the hope that popular uprising will help bring about the change. If the financial system collapses it will help too, but it seems likely that there will be some suffering before the change comes about. The environment needs saving urgently now. If the biosphere can't sustain life it won't matter what economic system we have!
Even if we're willing to make he change, there's a lot of work to do. Even just getting the information systems in place is a major undertaking, though there's more in place than we might imagine. At the moment the best IT is used for war, which obviously would have no place in a resource based economy, and so all the hardware and human skill that's used for that would be freed up for socially progressive use, but in a co-operative, non-monetary society all computing power could be harnessed to the same ends.
Removing or reducing the residual need for human labour would be another big challenge as so many things are designed to be cleaned/maintained/repaired by human hands. One of the big ideas from the Venus Project is entirely new cities built to last by robots. I must admit the idea is attractive but the possibility seems rather remote or far fetched. But what do I know? Jacque Fresco says it will be more sustainable to build new cities than maintain and repair old ones, which sounds plausible, though the best bits of old ones will be kept as museum cities.
Altogether, the radical ideas of the Zeitgeist Movement / Venus Project offer an attractive and sustainable way to live on the planet. Our current system is neither of these things, but a disgrace.
Thursday, 8 October 2009
Stop SMIDSY – sometimes sorry just isn’t enough
CTC – the UK’s national cyclists’ organisation is calling on all cyclists to add their voices to its new campaign to combat bad driving. Stop SMIDSY is a major campaign to end the culture of brushing off dangerous incidents with the excuse “Sorry Mate I Didn’t See You”. It aims to change lax attitudes towards bad driving and the failures of the legal system to respond to it when it occurs.
By encouraging cyclists to report crashes and near misses on the new Stop SMIDSY website, www.stop-smidsy.org.uk, CTC will build up a picture of how cyclists are treated by other road users, with the ultimate goal of transforming drivers’ attitudes to reduce danger on the roads.
The website enables cyclists to report not only crashes and near misses, but also dangerous and threatening behaviour, along with the subsequent reaction from the police, prosecutors and the courts. The information cyclists provide will help CTC to build up a picture of the scale of the problem and to highlight individual cases showing the difficulties that cyclists face. Visitors to the site can also find information on the law, get practical tips on dealing with bad driving and seek legal support via CTC’s claims line.
CTC’s Campaigns Coordinator Debra Rolfe said: “Stop SMIDSY is about giving cyclists the opportunity to speak out about what’s happening on our roads. Far too many drivers are getting away with just saying ‘sorry’, rather than being taken to task for their poor road skills. That’s why we’re calling on anyone who cycles to help Stop SMIDSY”.
By encouraging cyclists to report crashes and near misses on the new Stop SMIDSY website, www.stop-smidsy.org.uk, CTC will build up a picture of how cyclists are treated by other road users, with the ultimate goal of transforming drivers’ attitudes to reduce danger on the roads.
The website enables cyclists to report not only crashes and near misses, but also dangerous and threatening behaviour, along with the subsequent reaction from the police, prosecutors and the courts. The information cyclists provide will help CTC to build up a picture of the scale of the problem and to highlight individual cases showing the difficulties that cyclists face. Visitors to the site can also find information on the law, get practical tips on dealing with bad driving and seek legal support via CTC’s claims line.
CTC’s Campaigns Coordinator Debra Rolfe said: “Stop SMIDSY is about giving cyclists the opportunity to speak out about what’s happening on our roads. Far too many drivers are getting away with just saying ‘sorry’, rather than being taken to task for their poor road skills. That’s why we’re calling on anyone who cycles to help Stop SMIDSY”.
Sunday, 4 October 2009
Public spirited
The railings in the area around Upney Station have recently been replaced and very smart the new ones look, too.
However, at the steps to/from Lambourne Road, the council didn't take the opportunity to clear the large amount of litter in the green space next to the steps. The workers pushed the litter away to a line a couple of feet from the steps and there it stayed.
This morning, I saw one public spirited man with an orange bag (recycling) picking up some of the litter - presumably the recyclable bits. Good on him! If only there were more like that - or even better fewer oiks chucking their empty cans, bottles, etc on the floor wherever they feel like it.
However, at the steps to/from Lambourne Road, the council didn't take the opportunity to clear the large amount of litter in the green space next to the steps. The workers pushed the litter away to a line a couple of feet from the steps and there it stayed.
This morning, I saw one public spirited man with an orange bag (recycling) picking up some of the litter - presumably the recyclable bits. Good on him! If only there were more like that - or even better fewer oiks chucking their empty cans, bottles, etc on the floor wherever they feel like it.
Saturday, 3 October 2009
Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project
I don't remember where I first came across Jacque Fresco, founder of The Venus Project, but I have watched much of his material on YouTube. I've also written about it here before. Jacque is now 93 or 94 years old, but still fascinating to listen to. In a live Q&A, the ideas come tumbling out of his mouth in a connected - but not especially organised - way. Frustratingly for questioners, his answers do not always relate terribly well to the question, which isn't helped by the fact that he's rather deaf, and his partner Roxanne Meadows summarises and relays the questions to him.
I went to hear him speak today at the City University at Northampton Square. We saw a video (designing the future), heard a talk. I didn't hear anything new (I've seen a lot on YouTube) but I thought I'd hear him in vivo before nature inevitably takes its course.
Jacque's core idea is a bit communist in the best sense - the fraternity (and I should say sorority - though Jacque is not terribly PC) of all, but he denies that it's politically communist and is equally scathing of all politicians who he would say simply talk about /promise things, without being able to do anything about them. Jacque's premise is that engineers and technicians are the only effective improvers of our society.
The most appealing aspect of Jacque's grand design is co-operation, in contrast to competition, but as competition is usually if no always for the pseudo-resource we call money, his model requires us to abolish money. This is superficially appealing, but raises the question of how we allocate scarce resources without money to place a market value on them. Jacques argues that there is in fact abundance of life's necessities - or at leat there could be if we we co-operated and if we didn't squander vast resources on war - a high level expression of destructive competition.
Without money, people stop making / doing things to get money and make / do things for the general good of humanity. Those who suggest money is the solemotivator are easily dismissed in that people do act philanthropically (and less than they might if they didn't have to do a 9-5 turn to earn a crust).
Jacques profligately produces designs of futuristic (6o's style futuristic) buildings and transport. The futurist element of his work is prominent and he embraces sustainability, whilst rather radically arguing that the automated building of standardised, modular cities is less energy intensive that the more obvious 'green' approach of reparing and restoring what we already have. It is difficult to judge whether Jacque's futuristic designs are far fetched and whether the aesthetic aspect is necessary for the functionality he seeks to achieve.
Those of us who share Jacque's vision of the future high-tech, sustainable, money-less, labour free world are called upon to spread the message. The BIG problem is how we would make the transition from as-is to this better society. Jacque and Roxanne regret that only a crisis is likely to provoke such a radical change, and that an incremental, conservative transition is unlikely to come about. Either way, I don't think many of us will live to see it.
I went to hear him speak today at the City University at Northampton Square. We saw a video (designing the future), heard a talk. I didn't hear anything new (I've seen a lot on YouTube) but I thought I'd hear him in vivo before nature inevitably takes its course.
Jacque's core idea is a bit communist in the best sense - the fraternity (and I should say sorority - though Jacque is not terribly PC) of all, but he denies that it's politically communist and is equally scathing of all politicians who he would say simply talk about /promise things, without being able to do anything about them. Jacque's premise is that engineers and technicians are the only effective improvers of our society.
The most appealing aspect of Jacque's grand design is co-operation, in contrast to competition, but as competition is usually if no always for the pseudo-resource we call money, his model requires us to abolish money. This is superficially appealing, but raises the question of how we allocate scarce resources without money to place a market value on them. Jacques argues that there is in fact abundance of life's necessities - or at leat there could be if we we co-operated and if we didn't squander vast resources on war - a high level expression of destructive competition.
Without money, people stop making / doing things to get money and make / do things for the general good of humanity. Those who suggest money is the solemotivator are easily dismissed in that people do act philanthropically (and less than they might if they didn't have to do a 9-5 turn to earn a crust).
Jacques profligately produces designs of futuristic (6o's style futuristic) buildings and transport. The futurist element of his work is prominent and he embraces sustainability, whilst rather radically arguing that the automated building of standardised, modular cities is less energy intensive that the more obvious 'green' approach of reparing and restoring what we already have. It is difficult to judge whether Jacque's futuristic designs are far fetched and whether the aesthetic aspect is necessary for the functionality he seeks to achieve.
Those of us who share Jacque's vision of the future high-tech, sustainable, money-less, labour free world are called upon to spread the message. The BIG problem is how we would make the transition from as-is to this better society. Jacque and Roxanne regret that only a crisis is likely to provoke such a radical change, and that an incremental, conservative transition is unlikely to come about. Either way, I don't think many of us will live to see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)