R-Evolution is enough easy to understand. It is just simple like this: R is for the suffix "re" which means again. Evolution is for improve or increase the level of knowledge and the relative level of life at which we are living now. But it is a words joke as well, because it remind us the word "revolution" which everybody knows what it means.
The Western World Society (from now WWS) it is arrived at a crossroads: to die or survive. WWS is now like the antique Roman Empire. The critique mass of the Roman Empire arrived at a point that its growth was no longer possible. Its social body was too huge to maintain itself alive. When a body is too big it starts to move very slowly. If a body move slowly all his organic processes doesn't work properly. So it starts a process of corruption of the body. This process, early or later, will terminate with the body itself.
Roman Empire, as said, was too big at a certain point of its history. Corruption was basically the evil, like a virus, that destroyed the empire. But the political Roman class didn't understand what was going to happen. However, when the moment of the truth turned up, the Roman Empire was able to survive under a different shape. It shared itself in two parts: the Sacred Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire. This was the way that the Roman Empire invented for surviving at itself. At the critical moment to be in front of a crossroads, the Roman Empire found a way to re-inventing itself. We can call it R-Evolution, if you agree.
WWS, like Roman Empire in that time, is now absolutely needing to re-invent itself because this is a matter of surviving. Let me do some examples if you wish to understand what we are talking about.
For sure the most important problem of WWS is now energy. Thanks to an awakening consciousness campaign already started at the end of the '70 we now know and understand that oil is not forever. Since then we have been learning that one day humanity can fall into the tragedy to have no more availability of energy sources. So we have started a run against the clock to find alternative energy sources. We are progressively trying to find out or invent other ways to produce energy, because we have assumed that coal, gas and oil are limited quantities for our excessive hunger of energy.
A lot of people in the world are working every day in the energy renewable sector. This a good purpose, but there is a mistake at the base of their research job. The mistake is very easy and is the following: researchers must find every new source of energy always subjected to the imperative need that it must be inexpensive i.e. economic. In other word researcher's inventions or discoveries are welcome only when they represent a money saving on the actual budget of costs of an energy company.
Well, if you look at this from the point of view of an investor this makes sense. What is the investor's wish? To make money avoiding to miss the invested money. But since this wish has become like a "categoric imperative" of Kantian memory, all that we get is limited new energy sources. Limited in terms of quantities, for instance, or limited in terms of quality. Wind and solar energy are surely respecting the limit to be not too much expensive, but in terms of quantity and quality most of the time they are failing because we cannot depend on the whims of wind and clouds. No wind, no energy. Clouds in the sky, no energy. This is too much arbitrary, don't you believe?
The real standard of measurement should be the utility of a new energy source, not only its economic value. Here some examples. Hydrogen source is not still fully working because oil companies do not allow its development. They don't want to invest money to change their infrastructures. All that they matter is to make money and money and money. Even when we assist to big natural disasters like in Gulf of Mexico or the silent forgotten disaster of the Delta of Niger river.
Hydrogen energy is widely demonstrate is a clean and secure energy with a zero pollution impact. But for people who should invest in it there is a defeat: too much expensive. So almost nobody who really could support investments in hydrogen energy has decided to fully impulse its development. There is actually no evidence that cars will circulate thanks to hydrogen fuel in the next five or ten years. The justification is because it is expensive forgetting, on the other side, how much useful it could be for our health and life.
Another example now: the fusion energy. Fusion energy is the most intelligent and reliable way by which us, the humanity, we can finally solve the necessity of a permanent source of energy. There is a big project about fusion energy. Its name is ITER (iter is a latin word so, please, don't pronounce it as in English). Iter in Latin, more or less, means "the way to follow". I encourage you to visit the web site of the project following this link: http://www.iter.org/ or http://www.iter.org/video/26 (for a just 60 seconds video)
Apparently all should be perfect with ITER project. It is reliable and not dangerous in terms of radioactivity, it is a clean energy with a very low impact pollution, it is even responding to the economic need to be inexpensive. Just for your info you should know that the cost of the entire project is the equivalent of the cost of only two days of oil consume in the whole world. In other words if all the humanity should stop to consume oil energy for just two days, the result would be that all the money not spent in these two days would be the entire cost of the ITER project for fusion energy. I don't know you, but it seems very cheap in my opinion. I think and hope that you agree.
Well, the question now is: have you ever heard about ITER in the last five years? If not, don't you wonder why? Why such an important project like this which involves more than half of the world population is passed almost under silence? Did you know that EU, USA, Japan, China, India, Russia and South Corea are working all togheter in this project through their scientists and governments?
The answer because maybe you don't know ITER is very easy. The nuclear energy power lobby has fought against this unbelievable project that is able to change forever the way by which we are depending on coal, gas and oil energy. This project is much more than a simple form of renewable energy. This is definitely the way humanity can solve the unsolved, till now, problem to have clean energy forever. But since nuclear power energy lobby doesn't want to loose his personal power, its job in these last ten years has been to delay economic resources to develop the fusion energy project. The consequence is that ITER has now a delay of ten years on his plan of development.
Humanity cannot miss so much time, because we are fighting against the clock in this desperate run to discover new energy sources. But in the world there are people so blind that they do not understand the importance of this concept. They prefer to see people fighting against each others. They prefer to see people dying in terrible wars with the aim of assuming the control of energy sources instead of implementing alternative way of clean energy available for all.
Do you understand now why I wrote, some lines above, that WWS is in front of a crossroads? Do you now understand why I wrote that WWS it is at the same point to which already arrived Roman Empire in its growth?
But if Roman Empire could survive, as empire, sharing itself in two portions and in this way maintaining alive its nature, WWS cannot do the same. The kind of technology we use today and, most of all, the interdependence between all the western populations on Earth does not allow us to imagine that all we have to do is to share our territories, because the world is already enough shared.s We don't need more divisions. On the contrary sometime we need union. Like in ITER project where people of 39 different nationalities are working all together.
This is the right approach for the future: to work all together, with perseverance for reaching the same purpose. The goal now is this: can we change our way to think and behave to avoid a disaster?
If the answer is yes (and personally I think that "Yes, we can") we have some hopes for the future of our species. But if the answer is not, why we are here then? What are we doing? Are we here just to see our ends, our self-destruction maybe?
When I talk about to change the way to think and behave I am referring to little but meaningful actions in our daily routine. Look at Internet for instance. People of too much states in WWS do not fully understand the importance of this media. There are too much people still living in the past, in past way of communicating I mean. Too much meeting in person, for instance. Why have been invented the tool of a video conference if we are still using the antique way to meet us in person for business purposes? The reason is that there is still too much people unable to manage PC and Internet technology. Or maybe cars and air planes producing companies do not want to miss their customers. To be clear: there is too much ignorant people on this planet that do not want to learn how to use new technologies or substitute a mean with another one. If these people do not change the way they look and think at the job, even their behaviour, of course, is a direct consequence. They will use too much cars or air planes to have meetings, for instance. This means that they are still using an old way to communicate. They are still thinking that the right way is to have meeting in person and not through a video conference. Their behaviour means more consume of oil. More oil, more pollution. More oil, more wars to have control on the last energy sources.
Are you now starting to understand where is the problem and why we are not behaving in the correct way? Do you now understand because it is an urgency to change the way to think and behave if we want to save our same lives?
If we do all this in a reasonable times, there are some hopes for us, for humanity I mean. But if we continue to waste time into useless discussions of opportunities, behind which are hidden big economic interests of a few people, then we are condemning our species to proceed along the road of the extinction.
What do you think is better at this point of human history? Is it better to make a R-Evolution (to start the "reset bottom" in informatic language) or just accepting that a few egoistic people (the dominant elites) must impose us their pace towards the end of human history?
R-Evolution is the word. R-Evolution is the verb. R-Evolution is the way. Just follow it if you wanna win your prize. Trust me, please.
