≡ Menu

Scarcity Causes All Wars and Violence

Someone recently exclaimed: “How can we kill children and their mothers for a piece of land, an ideology or a religion?!…” The note was regarding the current Gaza Crisis. The issue prompted me to respond from a Post-Scarcity perspective and address the causes of war.

I know it’s a rhetorical question, or perhaps it isn’t, but nevertheless I will highlight how all wars are about land; it is about the resources arising from land. Humans often battle over scarce resources thus humans kill other humans to acquire greater resources. This is the nature of all violence. Survival is improved for the winner of the war.

The ideologies or religions of aggressors versus defenders are arbitrary. The beliefs are meaningless randomness despite great meaning people attribute to this or that belief. Disregarding the nonsensical and irrelevant arbitrariness of the specific belief, we must note how beliefs are very important for uniting one faction against another in the battle over resources. Religious ideologies are merely tools, weapons, in the battle over scarce resources. Religion is a cultural rallying point, a vehicle allowing the leaders to control their soldiers-supporters.

There is less need to battle over resources in our current era but the battle to acquire scarce resources is a deeply engrained survival trait, from the beginning of life on Earth, thus it’s a hard trait to break despite growing evidence that we are approaching the age of Post-Scarcity.

I’m not justifying war or violence, I am merely explaining why people have wars (why people kill people). I don’t want to justify any war, I am against all wars because there are more intelligent ways for humans to interact But it is important to explain why people have wars; it is important to explain why people do what they do. Many people don’t care about other people being killed. They are inured to the horror thus they blithely ignore the latest atrocity in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Russia, India, Israel, Palestine or any other part of the world. It is sad but true. It is collective widespread systemic anomie, which is a problem caused by scarcity where brute-survival trumps sensibilities. Perhaps the biggest scarcity problem is a scarcity of intelligence.

Someone suggested blood feuds are not scarcity based, but I suggest otherwise. A blood feud or vendetta is a scarcity issue because past battles to survive based on scarcity continue to have vitality due to current scarcity.

Another person suggested psychopathy is not a scarcity issue. Still, I suggest otherwise. I think psychopathy is wholly a symptom of the social dysfunction created by scarcity. Scarcity creates social dysfunction thus when scarcity exists there is VERY fertile ground for being a psychopath. Psychopaths can only exist in a scarcity-situation because without scarcity the seeds of psychopathy would not grow. I also highlighted how human violence is not merely animal derangement relating to a more primitive part of the human brain.

Violence in primitive animals does exist, furthermore it is scarcity based. Note how chimps can be violent towards other chimps. In the following video an enemy chimp is killed and eaten in a minor chimp war. Why is a raid occurring into land controlled by neighbouring chimps? Does more land equal a diminution of food scarcity? Would they need to eat their enemy if food and land were not scarce? Is this any different to the initial question asking why humans kill other humans for a piece of land?

I also discovered another good video regarding chimps. Note the following demonstration of how chimps can gang-up on and ultimately kill a member of their own tribe

Animals also practice infanticide, notable in hippos and polar bears, which again is a scarcity issue. This violence in animals is about scarcity, exactly the same as humans. The violence can either be a direct attempt to gain more resources or it could be about hierarchical standing, which is also all about scarcity because greater hierarchy entails greater purchasing power.

It has been also suggested that human violence is merely ego-based thus Post-Scarcity cannot eliminate violence, but I disagreed. The ego-mind is the source of everything human, but it does not mean everything can be reduced to an ego-mind cause. Fighting is an issue of scarcity, the ego wants to survive but survival is threatened due to scarcity thus the ego fights to survive. If people felt there was absolutely no threat to the their existence then there would be no need to fight despite the ego being what it is. The problem is that scarcity does threaten our existence.

Soon everything will be free due to Post-Scarcity thus awareness of the coming Post-Scarcity epoch could avert some of the violence. We can start to reduce monetary suffering now. Greater awareness of the looming era of freedom, an era where everything is free, could entail leaders in the human hierarchy investing, with unrestrained abandon, into technologies crucial for creating Post-Scarcity, thereby accelerating the arrival of it. When people realize how everything in the not too distant future will be free, there is less need to madly control profits, there is less need to hoard money. The stranglehold on the economy can be relaxed, there is no need to squeeze out the last drop of money from poor people, there is no need for violence.

Land scarcity will soon be obsolete. We are approaching an age where anyone will be able to print their own personal spaceship, then fly off into space where planets are essentially infinite. 3D-Printers combined with super-efficient nanotechnolgy and Artificial Intelligence will ensure everyone is self-sufficient with easy access to essentially limitless resources. Currently our 3D-printers, marvellous that they are, are primitive and dumb, but relatively soon printers will be integrated with AI, and then will be close to intelligence exploding. Printing another printer is great. Imagine when we can print AIs or AI-printers as easily as we print chess pieces. Violence and scarcity will soon end.

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia writes for Singularity-2045, a Post-Scarcity orientated website dedicated to increasing awareness regarding the coming technological utopia. The goal is to make the Singularity happen sooner instead of later.

Like this article?

Please help me produce more content:



Please subscribe for free weekly updates:

  • SHaGGGz

    What exactly do you mean by scarcity? Surely you can’t mean a lack of resources that immediately threatens one’s physical survival, because we have countless cases of billionaires whose next ten generations would never have to work a day in their lives and still lead lives of luxury. What motivates such people into skewing the entire politico-economic system to their relatively smaller gain for the vastly larger loss incurred by most of humanity? They aren’t motivated by scarcity as such, but merely an unquenchable, pathological pursuit of power over their fellow humans. Also, psychopathy has nothing to do with resource scarcity – it is a congenital neurological abnormality.

  • Brilliant! I’ve wrote an article examining our irrational resource allocation as a result of the vestigial neurological remains from evolution during a time of scarcity. Share your thoughts if you get a chance. http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/anti-terrorism-spending-disproportionate-to-threat/

  • Yes scarcity is lack of resources and although rich people are relatively comfortably their riches are nevertheless scarce, their riches are not limitless, thus they do feel their wealth is precarious. I am sure Mark Zuckerberg was very worried, threatened, when FB shares dropped severely after the very high initial opening price.

    Billionaires are very much motivated by scarcity because everything in our world is determined by scarcity, thus things have prices and scarce things have higher prices thus every second of every day our world continually reminds everybody of how our world is utterly based upon scarcity of resources.

    When you need to pay for everything there is a realisation that the thing you are paying for is limited, which is why there is a price for it. This world of limited goods is precarious because if something is limited then their is a fear of loss. Billionaires are constantly battling the competition, there always a chance they could be the next MySpace or Blockbuster, thus they are motivated by fear of poverty. A fear of poverty can only exist in a world of scarcity. Yes, on the whole, it is unlikely billionaires will ever be poor, but living in a world of scarcity means the fear is unavoidable.

  • SHaGGGz

    But in a finite universe, resources will never be literally limitless. From the perspectives of our even relatively historically recent ancestors, we live in a time of unimaginable abundance, and they could easily imagine that we have evolved past the need for fighting over resources. Obviously, this hasn’t happened. This is the Jevons paradox at work: as our ability to exploit ever greater resources, our consumption increases as well, so what makes you think that this will change once we attain technologies that seem similarly unimaginable from our current vantage, such as molecular nanotech and space colonization? Our consumption patterns will adjust, our notion of what is an acceptable baseline will adjust, and thus we are still stuck with the familiar scarcity dynamics.

  • Is our universe finite? NASA states it is not known whether or not our universe is finite or infinite because the universe is so big, thus an edge has never been discovered. If there is an edge, a limit, to our universe, I am 100% sure when we find the edge, or when we come close to limits regarding the essentially limitless resources of our universe, then we will have the technology to create new universes beyond the edge of our current universe.

    I think Jevons Paradox regarding PS is a Red Herring, analogously comparable to how increasing efficiency in healthcare has not yet created immortality. We live in times of greater abundance but similar to how we live in times of greater sophistication regarding healthcare, yet we continue to be mortal, our level of abundance has not yet reached a level where obsolescence of violence is possible similar to how immortality is not yet possible despite increases in healthcare.

    The argument that new diseases will eternally make immortality impossible are not valid similar to how exponentially increasing technology will be linked to exponentially increasing consumption. Looking at the evidence we see how today we consume more than we have ever consumed but despite increases in our consumption prices are decreasing while the power of our technologies increases.

  • On the issue of psychopathy I do not deny psychopaths have “abnormal” brain structures but that so-called “abnormality” is only socially destructive due to the predominantly socially destructive environment of capitalism, in which they are forced to exist. Our civilization is socially dysfunctional, fundamentally at the core, due to how we all fight over scarce resources. Everything is a price war. Capitalism is about about making a killing, thus the fundamental social dysfunction of capitalism (scarcity) causes the different brain structure of psychopaths to become toxic whereas if our civilization was not based on a mad fight to acquire more resources than our competitors I am sure no toxicity would occur.

  • SHaGGGz

    There is no credible conception of an infinite universe that I’m aware of. The amount of energy and galactic superclusters in existence is unfathomably large, but nevertheless finite. There is no edge in the sense that we could never reach it given our current understanding of relativity.

    I don’t see how Jevons paradox is analogous to the healthcare situation. Transcending mortality is one milestone or cluster of milestones that we traverse, whereas Jevons paradox entails a perpetual homeostatic shifting of expectations and behaviors. The bug to be ironed out here is not the absolute level of resources available for consumption, but human nature itself, particularly our drives for acquisitiveness and status. Having more atoms to play around with doesn’t change this fundamental human dynamic.

    Psychopathy predates (pun unintentional though thoroughly enjoyed) capitalism, though the latter’s current hypertrophied state is definitely conducive to domination by psychopaths. And while capitalism does indeed have many ugly aspects, it is the only thing that has gotten us closer to the PS utopia you dream of, so I’m puzzled by your seemingly hysterical categorical denunciation of it. I would be interested to see credible evidence for your assertion that capitalism itself is what’s responsible for our currently observed prevalence of psychopathy.

  • If there is no credible conception of an infinite universe then there is no credible conception of a finite universe, or if there is a universe limit there will be limitlessness beyond the universe.

    NASA writes: “If the density of the universe is less than the critical density, then the geometry of space is open (infinite), and negatively curved like the surface of a saddle. If the density of the universe exactly equals the critical density, then the geometry of the universe is flat like a sheet of paper, and infinite in extent.” http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html

    So it seems our universe could be infinite.

    “The current theoretical belief (because it is predicted by the theory of cosmic inflation) is that the universe is flat, with exactly the amount of mass required to stop the expansion (the corresponding average critical density that would just stop the is called the closure density). Recent observations (such as the BOOMERANG and MAXIMA cosmic microwave background radiation results, and various supernova observations) imply that the expansion of the universe is accelerating. If so, this strongly suggests that the universe is geometrically “flat”.” http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question35.html

    “No one knows if the universe is infinitely large, or even if ours is
    the only universe that exists. And other parts of the universe, very far
    away, might be quite different from the universe closer to home.” http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/5-8/features/F_How_Big_is_Our_Universe.html

    Here are some more in my views about the size of our universe: https://plus.google.com/114822617931706904248/posts/eLxQdLvUkea

  • Capitalism, the essential nature of it, despite being a new term such as psychopathy (1847) is nevertheless a concept as old as scarcity. Feudalism shares the essential features of capitalism.

    Wikipedia states “Capitale emerged in the 12th to 13th centuries in the sense of referring to funds, stock of merchandise, sum of money, or money carrying interest.” You could say capitalism predates psychopathy if we are talking about mere definitions of words. Wikipedia adds “The Hollandische Mercurius uses capitalists in 1633 and 1654 to refer to owners of capital.”

    So you are wrong to say psychopathy predates capitalism.

  • SHaGGGz

    Yes, it could be that the curvature of spacetime is such that it implies a shape stretching out indefinitely. However, the amount of matter-energy, as has been deduced back to the big bang, and the relevant variable for our discussion of resource scarcity, is finite.

    I don’t follow your logic linking psychopathy to capitalism. Yes, we are talking about the definitions of words: psychopathy refers to a clinical condition, and capitalism is an economic system. What is the link?

  • Steve Black

    Ok so back to reality here on earth. For the near future we will be needing to protect the earths finely balanced systems withing the capitalist insanity exacerbated by scarcity. Promoting PS as a method to encourage combatants to give it up has to be considered. communications technology is surely going to help there in translating the ideas into all the languages equally.

    one big battle i see here is those who have interests in maintaining the imbalances. Weapons manufacturers are not going to say, ” hey technology has moved on, lets start growing /making food for everyone to share”. They are highly paid to keep war on the agenda.

    Will we all 3d print weapons of mass destruction? Or will that just be those that want power over others?

  • The connection between capitalism (or any other other scarcity-based socio-economic fighting over limited resources to survive) and mental derangement (psychopathy etc), is that any social-system based on fighting to survive, competition regarding scarce resources, it is a fundamentally socially dysfunctional civilization, thus via the inherent social dysfunction of the system, mental disturbance inevitably occurs, ranging from anxiety and depression to psychopathy or plain murder.

  • SHaGGGz

    You are again wildly misusing terms, and are now broadening the original terms used into something far more general and vague than your initial argument. At first you said that capitalism itself leads to psychopathy, which is, remember, a specific, congenital neurological deficiency. I have asked you to provide me credible (read: scientifically accepted) evidence of this specific claim. You are now saying that any system where there is competition for scarce resources in order to survive (read: every single human social system that ever existed) leads to mental “derangement” and “dysfunction” which you no longer constrain to the very specific phenomenon of psychopathy, but have now broadened to things as mundane (and sure to exist in a hypothetical PS system, sans neuroengineering) as anxiety.

    Frankly, your claim is so broad and wishy-washy as to be useless and boring.

  • The mass of the universe is not determined, in my opinion, there is no clear evidence to say there is finite mass. “The mass of the universe is a source of debate right now because there is no easy way to put the universe on a scale.” http://science.howstuffworks.com/dictionary/astronomy-terms/question221.htm

    Considering we do not know how big the universe is, we do not know where the edge is, if there is an edge, then we cannot say how much mass there is.

    “As observations keep on going and astronomers explore more of our universe, the number of galaxies detected will increase.” http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/021127a.html

    What is matter? The New Scientist explains regarding matter: “…substantial stuff is actually no more than fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.” http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html Dark Matter is also interesting.

    I strongly suspect we will be able to create more matter if we are running low on matter in our universe. The Big Bang is interesting. You wrote “…the amount of matter-energy, as has been deduced back to the big bang.” So it seems the big bang created matter-energy, therefore surely we will eventually have the technology to create another big bang, thereby creating matter-energy, thus limitless matter-energy?

    Calculating the amount of matter in the universe now would be similar to stating humans only live to whatever age you currently are. I am sure the amount of available matter will increase over time similar to how the age of a human at any given present moment is not the amount of time a human lives for. Soon humans will achieve immortality and soon the universe will achieve infinite matter-energy.

    There are admittedly attempts to measure the mass of the universe (http://www.rostra.dk/louis/quant_11.html) and it is noted everything is expanding: “The electron has been smaller when the Universe was younger. This also seems to be a logical evolution, for how could there otherwise be space enough for electrons in the very earliest and extremely much smaller Universe? If you ask: does the extension of protons and other composite particles also vary as the Universe expands? Then the reply must be Yes!”

    So the universe was the size of an atom at the beginning of the big bang, but what actually was the universe when it was such as tiny size? Was it an atom? What was it? Maybe every atom in our universe contains the potential to become a Big Bang, a new universe and then everything in that new universe has the potential to be trillions of big bangs. Where is our universe? Maybe our universe is inside another universe. I think understanding the mechanism of the Big Bang will ensure matter is limitless. We need to fully understand the mechanics of our universe. Is there are outside to our universe? Is our universe contained within something? If our universe is infinite it is interesting to imagine the size of infinity, or is there anything outside the infinity of our universe 🙂

    “A pre-Big Bang universe might have looked a lot like ours.” http://phys.org/news126955971.html

    “According to the big bang theory, one of the main contenders vying to explain how the universe came to be, all the matter in the cosmos — all of space itself — existed in a form smaller than a subatomic particle.” http://science.howstuffworks.com/dictionary/astronomy-terms/before-big-bang.htm

    To avoid argument let’s say, for the time being, Post-Scarcity is only possible up to the point where we utilized 50% of the matter in the universe. If we can measure the matter-energy of the universe I wonder how much 50% is? And how long it will take to utilize 50% of the universe?

  • SHaGGGz

    Yes, there are problems putting the universe on a particular scale, but all of the currently favored theories have the values as finite. There is no such thing as an actual infinity.

    How can we define PS as having utilized 50% of the matter in the universe if the total matter in the universe is infinite? Again I emphasize that the relevant factor is not the absolute amount of matter-energy consumed, but human perception and thus behavior.

  • I can be specific or general, regarding the specifics of capitalism leading specifically to psychopathy, or I can be general by stating capitalism causes all forms of mental illness, and I can additionally broaden, in a very logical manner, the meaning of capitalism to encompass any type of socio-economic system where capital (wealth) is acquired due to the loss of wealth by your competitors, thus feudalism is essentially, in the core essence, the same as capitalism. Very probably capitalism is a more potent instigator of mental illness than feudalism because the acquisition of wealth from competitors has been refined to a high level of potency regarding the capitalist system.

    The science of all psychology is somewhat debatable, but the relevant psychiatrists or psychologists associating capitalism or social circumstances with mental abnormality are Dr Erich Fromm, R D Laing, Thomas Szasz (note The Myth of Mental Illness (1960) and The Manufacture of Madness). However it should be note this article of mine was not a scientific treatise, I was not writing a scientific paper published in a scientific journal, I was merely writing an opinion piece. My opinions however could be scientifically corroborated but such corroborating was not and is not my purpose.

    Finally I will paraphrase Dr Erich Fromm in the Sane Society, or perhaps it is verbatim, I can’t remember: ‘Alienated psychiatrists will define mental health in terms of the alienated personality, therefore they will consider sickness to be health and vice versa.’ My point in referring to that quote by Fromm is that psychopathy could actually be a logical response to a hostile world where the purpose of our civilization is to earn more money than you competitors. The problem regarding severely psychotic people, which Eric Berne highlight s in “Games People Play: The Psychology of Human Relationships,” is not that they are deranged, it is merely that they are honest about their derangement and honesty is not a social norm in a cruel socio-economic system such as capitalist where the purpose of the system of to effectively steal, in a lawfully acceptably modality, your competitors money. Capitalism like feudalism or any other wealth acquisition-system is all about cruel greed within a scarcity environment.

  • The point is that soon our technology will ensure AVAILABLE MATTER is essentially limitless, easily accessible, due to ultra-efficient usage.

  • SHaGGGz

    Sure, you can talk about mental illnesses other than psychopathy, just don’t call them psychopathy. Psychopathy is not, nor can it be, a “logical response to a hostile world” as infants born with this affliction do not choose their genotypes, regardless of their society’s social configuration. If you are asserting that capitalism affects genotypes, provide evidence.

    We do not have great data on the prevalence of psychopathy in non-capitalist (feudal? though I’m unclear as you seem to equate and then contrast the two) systems but the kinds of things that ran rampant under such regimes do not paint a pretty picture. Furthermore, the happiest and most prosperous societies on Earth right now, the Nordic social democracies, are capitalist systems.

  • You are missing the point. Yes psychopathy does have a genetic component but that genetic component could easily be innocuous if the world was peaceful. In my opinion it is purely the social circumstances of capitalism which causes the genetic competent of psychopathy to be deemed a problem. It is only via social circumstances that the genes of psychos operate in a malignant way.

    My point is that the lovelessness of our world tallies with, resonates strongly with and nurtures the mind a psychopath, thus psychos act in a specifically destructive way due to the destructiveness of capitalism.

  • SHaGGGz

    I can agree that social systems characterized by a greater sense of community and equality tend to see psychopathically-predisposed genotypes expressed less malignantly, though this is not a direct result of capitalism per se, and I remain skeptical of your utopic PS kumbayafest.

  • OK, LOL, well at least we have both expressed our views.

  • I too have often highlighted how…. IF the purpose of politicians is to prevent death then why is such a massive amount of money spent on anti-terror measures when on average only an handful of people are killed each year by terrorists in the West, whereas cancer kills around half a million yearly in the US and cancer research receives a competitively tiny amount of funding.

    The reason for this apparently illogical investment regarding the major causes of death is because politicians are not actually trying to protect people, politicians are trying to protect their wealth, or the wealth of other rich people, thus the rebellion against authority, seen in terrorism, is far more worrying to politicians then the large amount of deaths due to cancer or heart attacks.

  • CM Stewart

    “politicians are not actually trying to protect people, politicians are trying to protect their wealth”

    Exactly. And I would go further to say “terrorism” is a commodity. That is why many powerful governments, including the USA, have funded, and continue to fund terrorist organizations. Keep the masses fearful, and they will vote for you. The most successful politicians are masters at tapping into the fearful “reptilian brain.”

  • CM Stewart

    Just to be clear, are you suggesting that the expression of psychopathy (irrational murder, etc) must be nonexistent in a post-scarcity environment?

  • Yes I an convinced all murder, any other type of violence, or any anti-social behaviour will be obsolete due to PS. I think scarcity causes all mental derangement-abnormality. Additional to removing the mentally deranging pressures regarding basic survival (food, shelter, and other general necessities), technology with also increase intelligence thus increased intelligence is another reason why destructive behaviours will be obsolete.

  • Steve you raise a point many people raise. People often worry high-ranking capitalists will be reluctant to encourage PS because they will want to maintain their profits, but this worry is unfounded, it is a worry based on a misunderstanding of PS.

    For example the richest member of a scarcity-based civilization will nevertheless possesses limited wealth, their vast wealth is scarce, whereas when we achieve PS the wealth of billionaires (circa 2012) will be a laughably tiny amount of riches.

    When the rich controllers of civilization are properly educated about PS, they will deem PS to be profitable. PS is a way for everyone to live a life utterly unlimited by monetary constraints. In a PS situation everyone will have access to such immense wealth that money will be obsolete, money will be irrelevant because when resources are superabundant there is no need for monetary constraints to control supplies of goods or services.

    So, it is profitably for everyone to invest in PS. Rich people are already comfortable but they usually recognise the precariousness of their scarcity-based wealth thus it will be appealing for them to embrace the utterly unshakable financial security of limitless riches in a PS situation where everything is free.

    Weapons manufacturers and all other manufactures should now be starting to see how 3D-printng will eventually abolish their markets. Every individual will soon be become a manufacturer thus all centralized products and services controlled by rich capitalists are doomed. While the profits of rich capitalists mean something they should be investing in awareness programmes, and investment in the appropriate technologies, to ensure a smooth transition into the world of freedom.

  • Terrorism is a Red Herring but rather than call political dishonesty an exploitation of reptilian brain desires, I would say it is a utilization of amoeba-brain desires, which if you can forgive the flawed biological metaphor, it is a point regarding how basic desires to survive are an evolutionary trait dating back to the earliest life within the scarcity-based environment of Earth.

    “N. gruberi slurps around in mud as an amoeba but when food runs low it sprouts two whip-like tails, or flagellae, and swims rapidly away. It can also transform into a hard, resistant cyst to wait out bad conditions.” http://phys.org/news189181779.html

  • CM Stewart

    I don’t see a relevant difference between reptilian brain desires and amoeba brain desires in this context.

  • Wholewitt

    There is a fairly simple solution, at least to slowing the scarcity, that animals don’t have. Its called birth control. For example, why on earth don’t the people in Gaza use it? I.7 million people in a small area shows the need. It should be preferable over war and its simple, unless the idea is to grow more fighters, in which case civilians are part of the war machine. Of course they need to use it in a number of places like Pakistan, Africa, India and China.

  • The idea of a reptilian brain separate from our higher brain functions is misleading because if you removed the basic survival urges from the brain you would have a brain unable to survive. I suppose I am merely wary when people use the term “reptilian” because it has links to David Icke’s shape-shifting intergalactic lizards, the Freemasons, the NWO, global domination etc. From time to time I receive mail-comments-etc from conspiracy theorists, but to my mind there is no real conspiracy and there is no distrustful or overly fearful part of the human brain called the “reptilian brain” – the problem is really a lack of intelligence to mediate or direct effectively the core survival desires of our brains.

  • All wars are about over-population but people fight instead of significantly controlling their reproductive urges because the desire to breed is a powerful desire.

  • I should point out that 3D printing is already threatening to turn the weapons industry on its ear. Even if it devolves into a field of expensive, dangerous toys and not tools of violence, I expect they won’t go away entirely. At the very least, there will be people who tailor weapons with custom ergonomics, make “art-guns” out of nonprintable materials like solid hardwood, things like that.

    First, we had this development, printing custom furniture: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011/10/21/prototyping-a-45-smg/

    Then we had this one, with the goal of building a prototype for an entirely printable firearm: http://defensedistributed.com

  • Pingback: Utopia?! Get real!()

  • There’s no scarcity of silly and dangerous ideas on this page.

  • This is just absurd.

  • Pingback: Utopia is Inevitable!()

  • Pingback: Utopia is Inevitable!()

  • It logical debate fails you can always dismiss the ideas you dislike by stating they are silly and dangerous.

  • Yeah. I love that technique! It’s so easy, too!

  • No it isn’t absurd, there is a clear logic underpinned the abolition of all violence.

  • “Adam Lanza’s aunt said Nancy Lanza had a survivalist mentality and was
    worried about protecting her home if the US economy nosedived.”


  • Pingback: The Very Best of Singularity Weblog in 2012()

  • Pingback: The Very Best of Singularity Weblog in 2012()

  • Mr. Huff

    You are essentially correct in your hypothesis, S.U. The underlying cause of all wars is due to a conflict over resources. Ideologies, whether political or religious, are simply the justification for such violence.

    We should also remember that monetary-market “economics” promotes the incentive for corruption and to create conditions of false scarcity. We currently have the technology and scientific tools to create conditions of abundance for all peoples, yet we are conditioned to believe, from the womb to the grave, that money or some form of trade currency is still necessary to survival.

    Finally, the contention below that the universe is possibly finite is rather irrelevant to this whole discussion. You’re talking millions or billions of years from now, if ever, that this would even be a possible cause for concern. Besides, the incentives for hording, for inefficient global distribution, for unhealthy competition, to destroy the environment, and to overly-deplete available resources – as well as the conditions which promote most societal ills – are eliminated in the kind of society S.U. is attempting to describe – a sustainable, technology-driven economy.

  • Pingback: Is The Singularity Happening Now?()

  • mitaky

    Our economics is scarcity based and the economic problem is to allocate scarce resources among competing demands or that’s what we are taught amid increasing prosperity, resource use and increasing variety of production. consumption and services. all resources, labor and skills are exchangeable through the medium of currency, which was designed to be debt-based and scarcity based.

    All kinds of economic theories and finacial concepts and products were created because we accepted a definition of currency before industrial revolution based on poor understanding of currency (coin, credit and circulation). Psychopathy is a sign of overextended ego and egoic ambition, when it (egoic self) separated itself through accute survival fears (physical, social, psychological) from trusting interdependence of all life and flow of all energy. If curious google for the ‘Millennium Koan’.

  • Pingback: AI Risk Analysts are the Biggest Risk()

  • Pingback: What causes war? | Blog Blogger Bloggest()

Over 3,000 super smart people have subscribed to my newsletter: