The Mahasamatta Manifesto

The Mahasamatta Manifesto* Democracy is dead. Consensus is all. Society has only two rules. Do what you say you will and don't mess with anyone else†. Any change in society must be by unanimous decision, even the least member of society must be able to peacefully resist change if he/she would. Such consensus can be exercised through our civil institutions like corporations by specifying that all group decisions are unanimous and withholding one's consent must be justified. Such provision can in no way restrict the activities of the group for if an individual is found to be so out of kilter with the group that no consensus is possible with that person, that person maybe invited to start their own group. The limit to the size of group in which such consensus is practical will reflect the civility of society. There is scant mutuality in a safety in numbers that has gone beyond the simple protection of the local thug who became the chief of chiefs on the way to becoming the king. The bedrock of any civilization is the protection of its weak from its strong. Representative democracy is fatally flawed: promoting mob rule but serving vested interests. For some five thousand years and much longer in myth, Lanka nurtured and cherished the land by ritual worship in a traditional way of life. The first essay in the Dance of Siva‡ by Ananda K. Coomaraswamy will perhaps illuminate what is meant by: "To know the Tradition, one must live the tradition." The god Mahasamatta made a consensus with humanity that as long as the people lived in dharma the land and everything in it would be safe. In Jambudvipa§ and beyond, the sovereign embodies mahasamatta by his example and sets the standard for the kingdom. If the King was to break with dharma his life would be forfeit. However history is replete with the excesses of kings and one must accept that by definition the Portuguese could not have conquered Lanka if the institution of

Feizal Mansoor

Page 2

October 5, 2007

mahasamatta was not already in some decay. Still it is hard to see why modern technological human society requires a central authority telling everyone else what to do. We have to accept that biggest guns do tell us what to do and if we do not pay the protection** money they demand they will throw us in gaol along with the child molesters, pimps and contract killers or put us out on the street without food, clothing or shelter. The ugly truth the papers will not print in case the people find the homes of their leaders and bankers and burn them, is that since the game is rigged, every crisis of credit and resultant economic crisis is nothing but profit taking that impoverishes society and ensures it never becomes completely autonomous. The Internet makes all those forms of social interaction redundant and stifling. We are able to transact business or exchange ideas instantly from miles apart, giving cooperation a qualitative boost we are yet to properly experience. Together with this enhanced level of human interaction, technological advances make human labour increasingly redundant in a Clash of Civics and Technology not Civilisations. The only meaningful definition of freedom is individual liberty: which Major C H Douglas called being able to choose to do something or not. In a society free of the protection racket, only the parties to a transaction need know details of that transaction. The only legitimate information that society need know about any transaction is that the buyer and seller agreed a price, are both satisfied with the deal and have assigned to it a specific accounting code. How they pay each other when they pay each other, is none of our concern. Only that when they do they each acknowledge that a specific value has been exchanged. Only the buyer and seller can maker an accurate estimate of value. The means to freely exchange goods and services may be provided with a website and an exchange mechanism†† in the public domain.

The Mahasamatta Manifesto  2007, 2009 Nikang Press

Feizal Mansoor

Page 3

October 5, 2007

Only "free" money on which no one pays anything, not interest not income tax, can establishing a “fair” price between a buyer and seller. Any price set in a currency whose value is arbitrarily set by any party outside the contracting parties necessarily allocates a portion of that transaction to those who set that value. The less one has to interact with authority in one's everyday life, the less control over one's actions that authority has. We need an alternate‡‡ wealth system, a sustainable economy underlying the industrial economy based on the two rules of common law, contract and tort. This economy will not recognise monopoly§§ patents but will actively promote licensing of patents for the payment of a royalty. From an entrepreneurial point of view, a wealth system is a means of transferring goods and services to a consumer and obtaining currency*** with which you can purchase other goods and services. Which is why we need an alternate wealth system separate from a central bank run debt driven financial system, funded by income tax and interest. But they are bigger than us and no matter what guns we buy they will always have bigger and better ones. A non-violent response is a necessity as well as a philosophy, but it has to be smart and when it finally attracts the attention of the powers that be, it must have too many anonymous††† participants to be bullied. Ultimately‡‡‡ if enough people exchange enough goods and services using a mutual debit card they will be buying and selling from each other, and spending what they earn on the website and creating the alternate wealth§§§ system that belongs to no one. The website is in the public domain so there is no title to it. There is no bank, so there is no bank manager so no one other than the person updating needs to know or can know the content of each individual account. One subscribes to the sustainable economy by consensus while one submits to the status quo and renders to Caesar what he demands. The sustainable economy is by definition a return to Mahasamatta.

The Mahasamatta Manifesto  2007, 2009 Nikang Press

Feizal Mansoor

Page 4

October 5, 2007

A return to the village rule of obligation whereby one's duty to the village has priority to any perceived obligation to one's self, the anti-thesis of the relentless pursuit of an individuality that has been the muse of the present civilisation of man. We live with a sense of obligation to our support group even though with out them we will still breathe until we stop. And produce carbon dioxide every time we do. And it is this very carbon dioxide that is causing the change in the temperatures of our oceans, and will lead us headlong into the next glacial age. But while we have the science and the technology and the tools to at least start addressing this problem we rather sit back and let some infants throw gasoline on the flames.

:  May 2007, Jan 2009 Nikang Press, Kotadeniyawa. Alrights reserved but maybe freely circulated with out change. Feizal Mansoor Puwakwatte Kotadeniyawa 11232 Sri Lanka +94 33 227 2841 [email protected]

The Mahasamatta Manifesto  2007, 2009 Nikang Press

Feizal Mansoor

Page 5

October 5, 2007

Endnotes

*

To lend perspective, I heartily, and as a matter of urgency, direct you to: The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times by René Guénon. ISBN 81-215-0977-7 †

“…do all you have agreed to do and, do not encroach on other persons or their properties…” principles of English Common Law as quoted by Richard Maybury in the U.S. & WORLD EARLY WARNING REPORT, www.chaostan.com. ‡

ISBN 0-486-24817-8

§

the geographic India of the Raj

**

Taxes in their many and several forms, inflation being one of those, interest being another.

††

You have a magnetic card reader attached to your USB port and when you make a purchase you swipe your card and the other person’s account is credited and your account is debited. ‡‡

The actual updating of information will eventually be by swiping a debit card exchanging goods and services across the web individually or in participating local communities the world over. §§

From the dawn of applied science man has been doing more and more with less and less and there is not a single patent granted today that does not build from the body of human knowledge. No innovator today can do so without mathematics or physics, nor can they express their innovation without a language. All these are held in Common by humanity. How then can a monopolistic right accrue to an inventor or patent holder? Agreed an innovator should be recompensed but how much more would be added to that body of human knowledge if a patent takes a general form that can be licensed by anyone? We would have several human beings working on improving and enhancing the technology so described instead of built in obsolescence to protect infrastructure costs. ***

Anyone in society will be at liberty to create something with the capacity of obtaining currency among his or her peers. †††

The mechanism for the distribution of the debit cards will be community based discount (coupon) magazines with punch out magnetic cards that will allow anonymity in the manner of prepaid mobile telephone cards. ‡‡‡‡‡‡

Overall the first step is to get people familiar with the thinking, by manually entering their individual Cost of Breathing and prorating the Energy Delivered Index. §§§

This system accounts for the “work” or Gross Product of the system as it occurs and does not require any more systemic liquidity than the parties contracting mutually agree. There is no guessing or to be polite, guestimating of money supply.

The Mahasamatta Manifesto  2007, 2009 Nikang Press