(Editor’s Note: Minor corrections for incorrect words during transcription. 12:22 AM 1/30/15)
We made contact with a member of the famous web collective, Anonymous. What she had to say about her ideas on changing the world are both new and interesting. Whether or not these ideas ever come to pass or hold value is up to the people of the world. Lets dive in shall we?
Sirius Science News- Thank you for taking the time out to do this, we definitely appreciate it.
Amaterasu Solar- Absolutely! My goal is to get the information out there.
SSN- So you’re a member of Anonymous. What made you join their cyber ranks? What motivated you?
AS- Well, when I first encountered the concept of Anonymous and realised that anyone could offer ideas up… I thought to myself. Hey! Ok! The ideas are what I’m out to bring attention to, not me. So I said to myself, ‘that works too,’ because I don’t want it to be about me. I want people to think about the ideas. So Anonymous is awesome for that type of thing.
SSN- We have seen a lot of their work, leaks, and cyber vigilantism in the press lately. Obviously being a global collective, with no leader, everyone has their own ideas, where do you draw the line on their operations? What do you feel is going too far? Like DDoS? Or DoXing?
AS- Well, I’m going to say that I have problems when there is action taken that is unethical. And then the question becomes each situation; where do the ethic lie here? And if there is somebody that has been caught red handed and people are putting out information about them. I don’t think there’s a problem ethically there because what I’m trying to work towards is getting people able to input into the problems they care about. As opposed to watching while the elected people deal with it. I can’t say that overall there is one answer to any of those. As each problem arises, the ethics should be examined.
SSN- So I’ve been reading though your web forum and noticed a lot of interesting information. You have a different take on economics that I haven’t really heard before. Can you explain that a little bit?
AS- Foundational Economics. Throughout my life I understood the concept of money very readily and I have been kind of fascinated by it. I’ve worked in banking for about 14 years and done other things. So everybody that goes into economics starts with the assumption that we have to use money. They don’t look at why they use it in the first place. I spent many years pursuing the reasons why we feel it’s necessary to account for how much energy we’re putting in and whether we’re worthy enough of being allowed to survive on this vastly abundant planet. That’s where I came from. I said, ‘I want to know why we’re doing this in the first place.’ After looking it and studying it, reading a lot of works, and contemplating it, and trying to figure out why things are so messed up in this world when I was told that the real goals were one thing; it isn’t even going close to that. Putting it all together, when I got to the ground level I realised that’s what we’re doing. We’re saying, “Ok you’ve put X amount of time-energy in and looking at the product we value it this much. So we are going to throw a few accounting tokens at you, which you previously consented to, contracted to. Except for that amount of time-energy you have expended.”
It’s the very basic foundation of why we exchange to survive because we feel the need to account for these things. The reason we had to account for these things had everything to do with… it took energy to acquire things, create things, work things. So what we are really accounting for is our energy. This planet sits here, abundant. We could support easily 100 times the number of people on this planet if we got rid of planned obsolescence for example. So we have this blockade between the abundance of the planet and us, which is creating an artificial scarcity on this planet. Which creates what we see when we look at pictures of children starving with buzzards over head waiting for them to die.
It’s like what a minute, this is wrong. We shouldn’t have this. As far as I’m concerned, Pope’s not withstanding, everyone who’s born to this planet is an owner if you will. I don’t really like that term own, but it’s here for all of us. It’s like we have this buffet and if we worked it right we could make it so we can all take what we liked out of the buffet.
SSN- If I understood correctly your basically saying that we shouldn’t or don’t need to use money. Is that correct?
AS- As far as shouldn’t… I never say shouldn’t. But I would say that we would be best to do away with it. All money systems give control of some to others. They really promote the ones that really like to control others. The psychopaths, in society, are the ones that will do ANYTHING to get and keep power and control over others. So all money systems allow for this very readily. When you get the money and you can pay people to do the things you want them to do, you don’t have to convince them on a logical or caring basis. You just have to convince them on a money basis.
You have a very psychopathic system that emerges from that. It will be a psychopathic thing if we have to justify our existence by pumping our energy in to somebody else’s enrichment. Even if you start with a flat system and let it run, because of the fact that there is psychopathy on this planet, you will wind up with them in control. If you use this system of money or any system of money.
If we add an abundant source or effectively an infinite source of energy, why would we want to account for it then?
SSN- There would really be no point.
AS- Exactly, it would be like, “well we better start accounting for every grain of sand we see here.” We have an abundant planet. A psychopathic system that keeps us from it and we have the means to solve for this. So my whole goal is to ensure that we do indeed solve for this since now we can, we have the tech.