A Good Presentation of the Problems

This almost-3-hour video presented some of the Problems very clearly and can definitely add perspective to the viewers. Though we do not fully agree with the solutions proposed as there are aspects that we think may end up causing some problems, effort to work out viable alternatives is our prime target now. We don't claim to have a perfect system ourselves, so we hope that discerning readers can give us feedback and work out their own ideas to contribute to efforts [with us or by themselves] in changing the current course of world development.

AVOFT is also not affiliated with the Zeitgeist Movement or the Venus Project. This video is only intended to demonstrate some of the Problems that we have similarly identified, as well as to inspire people to participate in various efforts to stop the current trend toward destruction.

[note that the video does have irritating background buzzing during certain intervals, switching on the caption and lowering the volume may make your viewing more pleasant.]

The Blame Mentality

There were several occasions that we have been accused of blaming the system to justify poverty, crime and sloth, making an article addressing this issue necessary.

Claim #1, participation in politics and various activities to call for ethical, green policies and so on are good. But they are NOT ENOUGH.

Claim #2, our socio-economic system as a whole is flawed. Working things on any lower levels, such as politics, will only address the symptoms.

Claim #3, we do not hold that criminals or lazy people are justified to be so in the current flawed system. What we are saying, is that the current system tip the balance to encouraging such people, causing a lot of damage to the health of the society.

Claim #4, by changing the system, the balance is restored, and hence people can act truer to their hearts.

Claim #5, we believe that people, in general, are great in hearts and intentions.

Claim #6, the system CAN be changed.

Very often, in discussion, people keep accusing us on blaming the system, so much so that we are beginning to question, “Are you the one holding the blame mentality, blaming the victims, criminals and sloths, so that you don't have to be held responsible at all?”

We do not believe in blaming the system nor the people. If we do, we'd be ranting on and on about injustice, without doing anything. We believe in finding out the root causes of problems and work on solving them.

For the knowledge of all, we are doing all we can, finding all cracks and crevices within our access to affecting changes, at any level possible for us. As it is, we are working on the first phase, which is to develop a coherent alternative system. Concurrently, we are also working on creating abundance in food sources. Our reach and effect may be small now but we are doing something. Other people are doing other things that we know can be very useful for society in the future too.

Let us reiterate:

We are telling you that we think the system is flawed. We want to change it. And we are working toward changing the system.

So, please, no blame mentality. We don't have time for that. The clock is ticking, the world is closing in on destruction beyond return as it is. DO SOMETHING!

Ethical Studies

“There are two wolves fighting in everyone of us, one is Good and the other Evil. The one who will win, is the one you feed.” - Editted version of a Cherokee Legend

There is always a need to remind us of the goodness in each and everyone of us. It is said in many psychological studies that whatever we put our focus on, it is that which will influence us. The mind is very malleable and hence a constant feed of healthy thoughts and actions is a very necessary ingredient for each and everyone of us to shine brightly.

There is a Chinese idiom, a man who doesn't read for three days will have a face that is hated/hateful (三日不讀書，面目可憎). This is to say that, when one is no longer receiving positive feed from the classic texts, it is easy for one to be tempted by the various evils of the world.

This is a very important factor to counteract the lack of empathy in the current society, whereby many people focus only for the benefits and well being of themselves. Also, it is worthy of note that this is the negative feed the society is giving to us as we speak.

The columnist who tells you how you need to defend yourself against the politics of your office. The drama series that show how people are greedy and would do all sorts of evil to attain wealth. The news that speak of mindless massacres happening here and there, by random mad people. The friends who tell you to go have some fun with that pretty girl you've just met. Business partners who no longer believe in creating values for the society but rather creating demands and sales for your products.

We see negative examples in the society everyday. Negative feed to our emotions and mental well being. It is paramount to realise this, as well as to realise that we can counteract this effect by ethical studies.

However, we have an awkward situation with ethical studies here. Ethics is almost always linked with religion, as it seems, to many, that human are unable to be ethical without the interference of religion. Even systems of ethics like Confucianism & Taoism have been religionised, for the lack of ability to relate with ethics without involving religion.

This is not a very healthy thing, as it will cause two major problems.
#1, people who are religious will see secular people as immoral and unethical. Such a view cannot be accepted, because people who don't have a religion can still be very ethical. Just like the criticism given by the secularists that religious people can be unethical. Ethics and religions do not correlate as much as people have made themselves to believe.

#2, people who are secular and do not wish to be labelled as religious may do immoral or unethical things just to state their stance. This is a sad effect of several possibilities, such as religious extremism, confusion between relationship of relgious devotion and ethics.

The opposition here is the automatic assumption that a person is considered moral and ethical only if the person is religious, i.e without being religious, a person is taken automatically as immoral and unethical. So, it is hoped that the readers will realise that despite ethics is a major part of most religions, ethics need not necessarily be linked with religion.

In order for a more universal participation, it is preferable to have non-religious ethical studies. However, this will greatly limit the available sources for study. So, a simple model is proposed to overcome this problem: take theology off the topic and focus on morality and ethics.

An example:
In the book of Genesis of the Jewish and Christian bible, was recorded of two generations that will be discussed here, namely the generation of Noah and the generation of the Tower of Babel.

In the generation of Noah, it was described that "the earth was filled with violence" (Gen 6:11) and the whole generation except for the family of Noah was wiped out.

In the generation of Tower of Babel, it was described that "the whole earth was of one language and of one speech" (Gen 11:1) and "they said: 'Come, let us build us a city, and a tower, with its top in heaven, and let us make us a name; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.'" (Gen 11:4). It was being implied that the people were rebelling against God and their language was confused into many languages.

From a human standpoint, which of the generations made a worse mistake? Some will be inclined to say that it is the generation of the Tower of Babel, as these people were rebelling against God which created them.

However, from a human standpoint, which of the generations got the worse punishment? Now, most people will start to be puzzled. Why was the generation of Noah wiped out while the generation of Tower of Babel were merely confounded?

From the two stories, it can be deduced that there is the possibility that treating humans with love and kindness is much more important than trying to “please” God with what we now know as religions. So, the ethical point made here is that it is more important to treat humans with respect than to “treat” God with “respect”, as what we deem as respecting God may not be the right way at all, as seen in some religious extremists that ended up with suicide bombing in the name of God.

Following this simple story and deduction, the focus of the audience can be put into how we can treat each other with love and respect without being in direct contradiction to one's beliefs, instead of trying to convince each other to their own beliefs.

Notice also that, in the story, nothing is said about who God is and the ways God execute His actions. The focus is on the fact that we are told two stories and what we can possibly learn from the stories. One can find similar examples in other sources.

A non-religious source with similar message to treat humans with respect is that of Emmanuel Kant's 3 Maxims. The first maxim is universality. If something is acceptable if done by the whole wide world, then likely it is not unethical. For example, is it acceptable to cut queues? Imagine if everyone cuts any queues they get into. This will end up with disaster, hence it is considered unethical.

Consider a different scenario, if someone approaches the queue from the tail end, asking each of the person in front for permission to swap location because of a valid reason. Now, if everyone with valid reasons ask for permission to swap position with the person in front, is this an acceptable scenario? Given that the right of the person in front is retained, i.e. the person can decide to swap or maintain as the person deem fit, then this is acceptable and hence this act of asking for permission to swap position is an acceptable act. No one else in the queue lose or gain anything, except for the two parties who decided to swap position. This maxim puts a strong focus on respecting each other, as we will automatically reject behaviours that are unacceptable for us to be adopted by ourselves.

The second maxim is that humans should be considered as the ends and not the means to some ends. This means that we are to treat people as people, not tools to achieve our own agenda. This maxim directly puts the emphasise on humans.

The third maxim is that of duty. Each and every person should take the responsibility on the actions taken by themselves. We have to be our own ethical police and guard ourselves against unethical acts as we have the ability to think and draw conclusions. If we were to act as we wish, then we will be of no difference from any animals you can find, acting on instinct and urges.

As demonstrated above, simple lessons can come in many forms in many context. It pays for us to study and gain affinity to these lessons and examples, so that they can inculcate in us a natural positive and ethical response to challenges we face in life.

Let's reiterate the major points:

• Ethical studies keep us reminded and influence us toward positive actions
• Equating ethics with religion or religion with ethics can be disastrous
• We can make use of ethical examples from both religious and non-religious sources
• We can make the world a better place

With this, it is hoped that we have provided enough information for you all to have enough information on the importance of ethical studies and be able to focus on ethical studies without being sucked into deep religious debates.

Over standardisation

In our current system, there seem to be an obsession to standardisation. Medicine must be given in standard dose, products must be standardised so that each and every one of them has as little difference as possible, standard university entrance exam, standard crops and so on.

Admittedly, there are advantages to standardisation, such as accuracy of scientific testing, matching components in production of items (such as car parts, we don't want car parts that can be assembled) and so on.

However, when standardisation is applied across the board in all aspects and in all industry, it can mean problem. One size doesn't fit all. This is the reality. So, let us take a look at where over standardisation may be an issue.

Medicine/Health
It may be good to standardised synthetic or extracted medicine, this will be helpful for the doctors and pharmacists in deciding dosage. However, it will become problematic if there is a view of standardised patient, i.e. all patients are taken as same and equal in all aspect. Prescription given without taking into account of the history of the patients can be disastrous.

Another possible issue is the lost of the art of herbalism. With the need to standardise all dosage and active ingredient, herbalists who use non-standard dosage/application are discredited as "unprofessional". But unbeknownst to the some of the critics, to the herbalists a synergistic and holistic approach is more important, i.e. observing the patient as a person and customising the dosage according to the the person and condition of the disease.

Agriculture
The standardisation of crops have led to the extinction of many varieties of wheat, corn, potatoes and so on. This is an excerpt from National Geographic:

Food varieties extinction is happening all over the world—and it’s happening fast. In the United States an estimated 90 percent of our historic fruit and vegetable varieties have vanished. Of the 7,000 apple varieties that were grown in the 1800s, fewer than a hundred remain. In the Philippines thousands of varieties of rice once thrived; now only up to a hundred are grown there. In China 90 percent of the wheat varieties cultivated just a century ago have disappeared. Experts estimate that we have lost more than half of the world’s food varieties over the past century. As for the 8,000 known livestock breeds, 1,600 are endangered or already extinct.

Why is this an issue? Nature made all species in many varieties because this is an insurance against species-wide extinction. By having varieties, a species can have varieties that can stand drought better or more able to withstand pest. These different qualities help keep the species as a whole alive.

By culling off many varieties, we run the risk of having one crop species being wiped out if we are faced with some environmental or biological threat.

Dull Life
Imagine, how much do fashion, tech hype and so on force some sort of standardisation onto us? If someone is not following the current trend, they become an outcast! We are expected by the society to be the same, from the way we dress to the way we behave. This is not the way life is supposed to be.

We need to be more accepting of differences. Each of us have different social and education backgrounds, as well as genetic make ups, giving rise to very different perceptions and behaviours. We have to be learn to respect the differences, if we want to live in peace together without sacrificing our individuality.

There are many other areas where over standardisation can become an issue. We need to learn to take the middle path, knowing when it is good to have standardisation and when not to have it.

Important Areas to Work On

Having done some thinking, this is a sketch of the important areas necessary in the creation of abundance, as well as for the AVOFT system to be implemented.

We will need various leaders to work on various areas. If you have any ideas or passions in working in any of these areas, we welcome you to join us in this effort.

Why charities, green efforts and various attempts to make the world a better place is futile?

The system is inherently flawed. Consider this, if you are allowed to use only integers, such as using the number of cars, you will definitely be unable to process some fractions accurately. You can't split 3 cars to 4 people fairly. This is an inherent flaw in the system (integer) used and problems can arise from it (error in fraction processing).

Similarly, our economic model is flawed, in several ways, that charity, green efforts and attempts to improve on the current model will not be successful. There may be some degree of success but nothing near being able to remove the problems. It is like having some genetic disorders, you can only control and possibly alleviate the problems but nothing seems to be able to cure it.

Some of the most common suggested solutions are to vote for a better government, to pass better policies, to promote more green movements and to pull in more people in doing charity work. All of these are merely reactions toward the symptoms and will not remove the causes of problems from the society. As long as the current system is intact, it will be subjected to many abuses by many parties, just so each may have a chance of getting an edge in survival and preservation of one's benefits.

In order for actual improvement to happen, things must change at the very fundamental level, i.e. the assumptions and basic framework. The capitalist, consumerist and selfish assumptions and framework that we are all in now are the biggest hurdle for us to jump across. Many people do not even dare to imagine challenging these because they have became the holy guide to riches, set forth by example by many of the richest people around the globe.

People are so used to either playing by the rules or breaking the rules within another set of rules that they no longer realise that the greater background rules must be re-written, in order for the world to be a better, greener and friendlier place.

What exactly is wrong with the current system, some might ask. The answer is, almost everything. So much of what we are so used to is problematic that we accept that this is the way life is. The problems are so interconnected that there isn't a place that can make a coherent introduction to the problem. However, it will not be fit if some attempts of clarifying the problems are not made.

Guarantee and security. Most people will only do charity when they deem they have sufficient excess in resources or that the risks they are taking are small enough, such as committing to a few days of charity work. This is because in the current socio-economic system, there is no guarantee for anyone at all. Everyone has to look after themselves. If one man dedicate his life to charity work and things aren't doing well, there is no guarantee that anyone will give him help. If one woman who has donated much of her time and money to various charities suddenly finds herself with a business crisis and on the verge of bankruptcy, there is no guarantee that people will help her based on the virtues she has done. In fact, it is quite common in the current situation for people to blame this man and woman for being stupid and not look after their own well being properly!

This leads us to the second problem, related to the first one, blaming the victims. It is all too easy to blame the victims. You got raped? That's because you wore too little. You are poor? That's because you didn't work hard enough. You are sick? Why didn't you take care of your health?

This syndrome of blaming the victims stem partially from the selfish standpoint that we are all too used to. The lack of security and guarantee by the society have led us to be selfish, looking only after ourselves. And so, it is getting harder for us to relate objectively to the plight of the other parties. This syndrome impedes the progress of a lot of charities and green efforts.

This lack of security and guarantee also lead to another problem, it's all about the money. Everyone's focus is on money that many forgot that money is just perceived value. Big corporations and rich people usually do charity or participate in green efforts for certain gains, such as reputation, branding, tax deduction and so on. So, the actual cause of helping people become secondary and resources can easily get wasted or for corruption to happen in the process.

It is also very easy to perceive 10 dollars as being of similar value for everyone. However, for some, 10 dollars can potentially help them toward breaking the vicious cycle of getting poorer/sicker and hence be able to contribute more back to the society. For many others, the 10 dollars may end up as part of the cost to purchase luxuries. The perceived values are the same, 10 dollars, but the actual values are very different.

Money basically clouds the whole picture, because most people have to look after themselves in the current system. There are, undeniably, many who go into charity and green efforts truly for such causes. However, the fact that money is required for all aspects slows down the whole process. Grants need to be sought, proper distribution mechanisms must be applied to avoid corruptions by people who care more for their own profits. If grants are to be sought, the proposal must then bring forth enough perceived values to justify the grants. This will limit the efforts to be focused on smaller chunks of the causes to ensure that results can be delivered. No one can ask for grants to solve poverty on a global level, not even on a national level, but most can make it by helping a few families or even neighbourhoods.

Bureaucracy. How much time, money and effort is wasted on bureaucracy? Many efforts ended up being small scale because they can't get through the bureaucratic wall. There are also those who took strong stance in their effort that ended up being called criminals as they are being pushed to the edge by various issues.

One last reason that we have to discuss is conflict of interest. It is to the interest of countries with oil and gas, as well as those corporations involved in the oil and gas industry, to ensure that no green energy can replace oil and gas before they squeeze out the very last cent from this free natural resource. It is also to the interest of banks to have people poor enough to take loans but not so poor as to be unable to pay back the loans. It is to the interest of the government that the citizens are not so well educated that the people can realise and escape the control of the government. There are also various other conspiracies, so many that it is hard to tell which makes sense and which does not. However, it can be accepted that there are various major and minor conflicts of interest blocking the ways of charity and green efforts.

This is especially visible when we talk about making changes that will cause people who have unrightfully gained to lose this “power”. Consider one of the biggest changes: the release of slaves. How many have died because of this cause? How many have been maimed? Why were there so much resistance? The “owners” of slaves have unrightfully gained from holding these slaves hostage. Releasing the slaves will mean losing their power over these slaves. It took a lot of effort, a lot of fighting and dying, for such a change to happen. There are still many causes in this world worthy of supporting but most dare not push this far. Is the price well worth it?

If we use the current system, trying to improve it, then likely a similar price of deaths, fights and turmoil needs to be paid. At Another Version of Familiar Truth (AVOFT), what we suggest is we work on creating a pathway to make fundamental changes to the system, from the current capitalist & selfish system to that of a goodwill & charity system. The fundamental thing is to ensure that basic living is guaranteed for free. This will then free up many people and resources to do more to create abundance for the society and to create green systems that will ensure the survival of all. It is the hope of AVOFT that this can then create a positive cycle, with excess to further build up a better world. The vision is that at one point, people will be able to pursue their various passions and creating values for the society at the same time, without the constraint of money and basic survival.

More on Problems

Greed. Greed happens because no one's well being is guaranteed. In the current system, the moment anything happens to you, be it an accident or a terminal disease, you will become a liability and no one will be interested to take care of you. When one feels no security in life, one will have to buckle up, and create security for oneself. The most obvious way in the current system: greed, hoarding of money, by either legal or illegal means, ethical or unethical means.

Greed is a natural response to the current system. We cannot blame people for loving money because it is the only way people can gain some form of security in the current system.

Cost externalisation. If we can keep the cost out of our hands, then we keep the cost out. This is why it is good for some parties to promote things that aren't really good for us as if they are good for us. The cost is not theirs to pay! Imagine a piece of bread with a label stating “colouring” before “salt”, meaning that the piece of bread has more colouring in it than salt. Read your labels carefully and you might see this. Consider this too, a pack of chips with colourings and flavourings. These are companies externalising their costs to us, the consumers. Colourings and flavourings, to them, mean lower raw ingredient cost and higher presentability for higher sales volume. However, colourings and flavourings, to us, mean potential health hazard!

This is a problem with several possible causes. Among them is greed. Another one is because the current system of accounting does not record externalised costs. The shareholders/directors only see the numbers on the financial reports. As long as the reports show lower expenses and/or higher revenues, they are happy. The fact that the processes involved in converting expenses into revenues are causing harm to others may escape the scrutiny of these people. Hence, they may not feel any guilt.

Corruption. Many of the people in power, be it in the highest or the middle positions of power, have grown used to the ease of using the loopholes in the current system in accumulating wealth. Some have even got so addicted to it that they are willing to do very immoral and unethical things to keep themselves in power or gain more power. This has been going on for so many years that any effort at any level to make changes against corruption will be met with resistance at all other levels. The more levels that are involved in making changes, the more likely improvement can be achieved. However, as long as there are benefits to be taken, there will be risk takers who will go for corruption in order to gain an upper hand.

The way money flows. Capitalism dictates that those with assets will be able to grow more assets and the primary asset is money. The banks have money and they charge interest for any forms of loan they can think of. Credit card, business loan, car loan, house mortgage and so on. Whenever we take out a loan, we need to use the loan to produce value, in order to be able to pay back the loan. If the loan produces an excess of value for us after we pay back the loan, then all is good with us. However, if the loan produces a deficit, then we will be personally in toruble.

Let's take a look at the greater system. The government and/or the bank decide on the interest rates of loans. Now, some loans do not create apparent values, such as house mortgage (for people who do actually live in the houses and not for “investment” purpose) and car loans. Given that these values aren't apparent, the borrowers can easily get trapped into deficits without knowing it. And being in such a situation, it is easy for one to lower moral standards for survival. This can, of course, easily be “solved” with financial education on the side of the borrowers. However, it is the banks' best interest to “enslave” as many borrowers as they can, so that they can make more profits! And so, the race to expose and hide this money flow problem takes place. The technical aspects of loans and other financial tools become more and more sophisticate to hide and distort the ability to gauge accurately.

Also, not everyone has the sophistication and time to understand the details of financial literacy. Hence, the problem cannot be solved as easily as initially suggested.

There are also aspects of the financial system that can be categorised as zero-sum game. A zero-sum game is a situation whereby the total amount earned by certain parties is equal with the total amount losed by other parties. Gambling is the classic example for a zero-sum game. The amount won by one player is the loss of another.

Some examples of the financial sectors that can become zero-sum games are the secondary stock markets and derivative markets. There are many people who get sucked into making profits [or attempting to make profit] in these zero-sum games that they are actually leeching money off people who may have earned their money honestly.

The way things are traded, will cause money to flow wherever there are perceived values. Actual values get obscured in the process.

The problems are very inherent in the system and are often interlinked. There is no easy way to solve these problems and all efforts up till now seem to be quite futile, providing only minor symptomatic reliefs to small areas here and there. So, AVOFT is proposing a total replacement of the current system, in hope of eliminating the inherent flaws. There is no guarantee that there will be no more inherent flaws in the new system that we will all be developing. But there is a hope that the inherent problems may be more manageable and less threatening.

The Problems - Story of Stuff

There are many points in this video, some you may agree, others you may not. But the video definitely raised up a few points that we must look into if we want to continue living in this planet. So, we'll discuss some of the points raised in the video and see the bigger picture of the Current System.

These are the points that are worthy of note but not directly related to the core problems we need to discuss:
1. Linear system with limited resources.
In the Current System, profit and "survival" are the only important things. People involved in production, especially the bosses, do not really care if they are trashing the world. They need the profit to "survive". Survival used to be about having food on the table, a place for shelter when the weather is bad. However, in the Current System, the definition of survival has mutated. One has to have a smartphone, the latest fashion and so on to "survive". And hence, we mine the world more and more, just to keep us "alive".

Another thing is that people are almost always involved in only a small chunk of the whole system. How can one perceive and contribute to a circular system if all one is involved in is only a small part of the whole system? Imagine a very big circle and if you focus on 1% of the circle and that is the region where you are involved in the whole system. Do you see the circle? No, you won't. All you can see is just a curved linear line. This is a problem we call over specialisation (We hope to come out with an article on this soon in the future). And one cannot see the whole ecological impact without being more involved with all the aspects of the whole system.

2. They don't own the resources, they don't own the means of production and they are not buying a lot of the stuffs. You don't have value if you don't buy/produce a lot.
The current economic model dictates that we need to produce and purchase in order to keep the economy healthy. But then, the more we produce and buy, the more we are trashing the planet and the more unstable the economy seems to be!

This trend of taking over and exploiting external resources isn't new. It started with nations taking over nations in order to secure resources. At one point, the nations realised that war is not the most efficient way of gaining resources. Hence, they used trade and economic techniques. And with the use of trade, the suffering and exploitation of another place's resources are no longer visible and hence easily got out of hand.

3. Toxin in, toxin out.
In order to cut cost and retain profit, cheap toxic materials are preferred over expensive safe materials.

4. People have no choice but to work with toxins.
This relates to the commodification of humans. In the capitalism system, a person is considered a business entity, able to exchange its products and services for money. And a person can own businesses (read as businesses and humans). Soon, people learn to capitalise on this that they begin to treat other people as assets to generate income. Whoever has more power, capital, status and so on get to capitalise on other people.

On a side note, the commodification of animals is one of the core factor that there are incidences of animal cruelty happening in farms and slaughterhouses. People accept the animals as commodities and people expect commodities to do what they want them to do.

5. Planned & perceived obsolescence.
By getting things obsolete as fast as possible, one gets to sell more and earn more. It's all about the profit.

6. Recycling is not enough.
We can't agree more. This is a cure to one of the many symptoms, the root problem is still causing a whole lot of havoc.

Now, let's get into the main point of the Current System.
The Golden Arrow - Consumerism
The main flaw in the Current System is the assumption that we need to spend, buy & consume in order to keep the economy going & growing. Of course, without consuming, the big corporations won't survive for long. One major question is, do we need these giant corporations around? Are they truly doing us good? If yes, how? If not, why are we working so hard to keep them alive? It is this relationship between giant corporations, their interests & economy that is driving us to the direction of destruction.

Let us take a look back at this assumption.

Are we producing enough things for all the people in the whole world? We'd say yes.

Are all the people in the whole world getting these things? We'd say no.

Are all the things produced fully utilised? No, a lot are being wasted, thrown away daily.

Do we still need to consume more and produce more? Likely not. For a healthier society, we need a better way of redistributing these products & services. While in some nations, a lot of food is wasted, there are other nations with not enough food to go around with.

Why food and other necessities do not go to these people? Well, in the Current System, they are commodities to be exploited for production, hence they don't deserve high pay and hence they can't afford to buy food and hence food do not get distributed to these places. Wonderful system we have, right? (Sarcasm intended)

How is AVOFT system relevant here? In AVOFT system, we no longer have the burden to feed giant corporations that are increasingly lowering the ethical boundaries in order to profit more. In AVOFT system, no money is involved, everyone deserves food, resources, services and so on. In AVOFT system, people can work into fields they are truly passionate about, contributing in various ways they truly believe in and hence more productive. In AVOFT system, no people is exploited. The full concept and implementation of AVOFT system still require a lot of scrutinising and research. As more information and concepts become available, we will post them up.

Let us take a look at the last part of the video, saying that there are many points of intervention & that the people can take back the government of the country.

We do agree that there are many points of intervention but as long as we are running in the Current System model, none of these interventions will be effective. The corporations, the politicians & the corrupted people will still keep abusing the loopholes and the system to earn "their share of the profit". The interventions will only work on the individual symptoms but the root problems will remain strong.

In the Current System, every man is for himself. Everyone has to look after their own interests. This is how people started throwing morality and ethics away. They have  to "survive". By eliminating this idea of every man for himself using the AVOFT system, we can open up to a new world of sharing and abundance.

It will take time for us to eliminate the poison injected by the giant corporations, called consumerism, but it can be done.

Last but not least. The point on idealistic. Indeed it is worth considering, is AVOFT system idealistic? Or is the hope of going on indefinitely the way we are now idealistic?

That is all for now... more soon.