Timothy Wilken, MD
writes: Our present political-economic system is obsolete. It no longer works. The evidence for that claim can be found around us. Maybe, it is time for a change. …

The possession of an object does not mean that the possessor
has a moral or rational claim to ownership of the object.

The
political, economic, and social structures of our present world are all
based on our concept of ‘property’ and property rights.

Recall from the
Basics section, my discussion of the shifting of human values as
humanity evolves from adversary processing to neutral processing to
synergic processing. Adversary wealth is physical force. Neutral wealth
is money. And, synergic wealth is mutual life support.

Therefore
adversary ‘property’ is property obtained by force or fraud, and then
held with physical force.

Neutral ‘property’ is property purchased in
the fair market, and held by right of law enforced by neutral
government. Remember Neutrality was an evolutionary advance from
Adversity, at the time of Neutrality’s inception most possessions were
adversary. They had been obtained through force or fraud and held with
physical force.

The new institutions of Neutrality never made any
attempt to correct what by the new values of Neutrality would be past
injustices. Neutral values would prevail in future, but the past was
left alone. This resulted in the legal precedent wherein possession is
9/10 of the law. In other words, at the time Neutrality was
institutionalized, all existing ‘property’ whether adversary or neutral
was made legal ‘property’. However, all new ‘property’ was required to
be neutral ‘property’–that is ‘property’ acquired by paying a fair
price in a free market to the rightful owner, or that ‘property’ which
is created directly by the mind and labor of the owner.

Most of the
founding fathers of Neutrality were beneficiaries of ‘adversary’
property and in no hurry to give it up. They also believed that in the
long run these injustices would slowly be corrected, and all property
would eventually come to be ‘neutral’ property.

We will see later that
this was not the case. While synergic ‘property’ is not yet defined, it
would have to be property that was obtained without hurting or ignoring
anyone, and even more importantly, it would have to be property that
was mutually life supporting–that is it would have to be property that
had a beneficial effect for self and others.

If humanity is to advance
to Synergy, our concept of ‘property’ and property rights must change
radically in the future.  (09/21/08)
more…