Private & Public Governance

October 19, 2010

Final Paper Assignment
Markolf von Ketelhodt

Thesis Question

What inherent flaws of governance in a monetary economic system contribute to various problems and
global challenges

Thesis Statement

The concept and role of governance within a monetary economic system has served humanity well as a
guiding platform for social, industrial and economic growth and development. However, humanity now
has the technological and intellectual resources to transcend the traditional role of governance within
economic systems, to create a more sustainable world. The role of governance within traditional
economic theory no longer serves humanity and hinders social evolution and development!

This paper explores the limiting aspects of a monetary economic environment, concerning social
development and how the role of governance and bureaucratic politics presently contributes to these
limitations. To fully comprehend the limitations that a monetary economic system has, it is vital to
understand what the relationship between bureaucratic politics, governance, and monetary economics
is. This paper also explores a possible alternative that could resolve various problematic factors that
exist and persist within our current framework of society.
Before discussing the thesis statement, it is important to point out that throughout the six-to-
seven weeks the governance class has predominantly discussed the role and concept of governance in
democratic countries. This, by no means captures and explores the entire essence of governance and
bureaucratic politics. This essay explores the role and nature of the general concept of governance and
bureaucratic-administrative politics that function within a monetary economy, and discusses the
limitations and problems associated with them.

The role of governance and political-bureaucracy in a monetary economy

To begin with discussing the thesis statement, it is vital to understand and define what governance,
bureaucratic politics and a monetary economy are, and how modern society functions in terms of the
private and public sector.
 Modern societies means of operation is largely divided between two sectors; the public sector
and the private sector. The public sector consists largely of government institutions whilst the private
sector is mainly run by private groups or individuals.1 Public services are those services that
governmental institutions provide to the general public and are largely financed through taxation. These
services include trash disposal, the sewage systems and on a larger scale health care systems and public
education. It is important to realize that the boundary between the public and private sector is not a
clear cut, defined boundary. Blurring between the sectors occurs in a number of different ways.
Privatization or etatisation, deregulation or re-regulation, marketisation or collectivization as well as
incorporation or corporatization are all factors that significantly influence the boundary between the
private and public sector.2
Governance falls under the public sector and is the act of governing in terms of decision
making, granting power, problem solving and verifying performance, preferably to enhance and
encourage positive outcomes. The act and responsibility of governing can fall under one individual or
the whole of humanity. In political terms, governing can fall under various forms; either democratically
elected, enforced dictatorships or communistic governance, Islamic governance, non-profit governance,
etcetera.3 Ideally, the role of any government can be summarized “to assist in defining the most humane
and appropriate ways to manage environmental and human affairs.”4Besides ensuring and enforcing a
safe and comfortable environment for the citizens within the nation, a government is also responsible to
safeguard and secure the nations people from external threats or enemies.
It is clear that there are various forms of governance, but traditional functions of governance
include three main concepts: hierarchy, markets and networks. Hierarchy primarily consists of a top-
down form of accountability in state bureaucracy.
The concept of networks in governance concerns the relationship between the public and private
sector, also known as PPP (Public-Private-Partnership) or with collaboration of community
organizations.5
Markets involve the role of the market mechanism where competition serves to allocate and
distribute resources, and acts as a incentive for technological and social development. The function of
the market mechanism and its operations generally fall under government regulation but predominantly

1 Website: http://www.bized.co.uk/educators/level2/busactivity/activity/intro15.htm, sourced September 13, 2010

2 Week 2 Power Point Presentation about the Blurring of the boundaries between the Private and Public Sector, by F. van
der Meer, September 14, 2010
3
4 'The Best That Money Can't Buy', Jacque Fresco, 2002, 8
5
function within the private sector.6
Bureaucracy is the combined structure of various organizational branches of the government,
private corporations and other interest groups that aim to regulate governmental decision making and
procedures. “Max Weber describes the bureaucracy as a ''rational'' way for society to organize itself;
they are found not only in government but throughout society.”7
Various models, policies and laws are developed in an attempt to ensure that a governments
actions are desirable for the general public and do not fall victim of corruption, political infighting,
favouritism such as nepotism, among other degenerations. But laws, policies and political models are
just guidelines to preferred outcomes, and often do not resemble reality at all. Woodrow Wilson, the
28th president of the United States was aware that the political models hardly ever come close to the
conditions of reality. Wilson's political-philosophical ally, Max Weber, a famous economist, historian,
lawyer and sociologist noted that “a real bureaucracy will always be less optimal and effective than his
ideal type.”8 Both Weber and Wilson were advocates of the so called 'Formal-Legal Model'. In today's
society, the administrative relationship within bureaucratic politics, only partially resembles the
Weberian and Wilsionian models characteristics. 'Modern' models such as the Village Life Model, the
Functional-Village Life Model, the Adversarial Model and the Administrative State Model all influence
the reality. These models are frameworks that aim to control the behaviour between political office
holders and civil servants, and hence government activities in general.9
Both governance and political-administrative bureaucracy work together and act as the
controlling and regulating authority of modern society. One thing that is often missed when exploring
the nature and role of governance and bureaucracy, is in what context and what environment they exist
and function in.
All of the historic, as well as present day, governing bodies and bureaucracies function(ed)
within a economic framework that used barter or money as a mechanism to trade goods and services.
At present, the world economies use money, in form of different currencies as the generally accepted
medium of exchange. This is exactly what a monetary economy is; “a society's economy where
products and services are traded in exchange for money.”10

6 Wikipedia, Governance, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governance, last modified on 7 October 2010, sourced on October

27, 2010.
7 Pearson; Politics in America, http://wps.prenhall.com/hss_dye_politics_6/27/7114/1821356.cw/index.html, sourced
October 23, 2010
8 Wikipedia, Bureaucracy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy, sourced on October 23, 2010
9 Representative Government and Top Administrative Officers: A Comparative Historical Approach to political-
administrative relations, Caspar F. van den Berg, Frits M. van der Meer, Jos C.N. Raadschelders, page 13
10 Investor Dictionary, Monetary Economy, http://www.investordictionary.com/definition/monetary-economy, sourced on
October 27, 2010.
 The problems and limitations of governance and bureaucratic politics within a monetary
economy

The development of the economic systems throughout history has served humanity well and evidently
resulted in the extraordinary technological progress, which excelled during the industrial revolution. It
also increased the standard of living in numerous countries, increased global awareness of other
cultures and can in essence be described as globalization. This predominantly benefited the western
nations, or so called Economically More Developed Countries (EMDC's).
However, even with all the good that economic and technological developments brought,
humanity at large, still suffers greatly from various problems that still persist; unemployment, hunger,
victims of war, victims of curable diseases, over population, environmental changes, unequal
distribution of resources, exploitation of less developed countries by stronger nations, deforestation,
poor sanitation, lack of safe drinkable water, and the list goes on. All of these problems should be the
number one priority for governments to solve on a national and international level, but where there is
no profit to be made, there is little incentive to lend a helping hand.
Besides the fundamental 'natural' problems that face humanity, many problems arise from the
monetary economic system it self. Jacque Fresco, a social engineer and industrial designer explains that
“all of the world's economic systems – socialism, communism, fascism, and even our free enterprise
capitalist system – perpetuate social stratification, elitism, nationalism, and racism, based primarily on
economic disparity.” According to him, “as long as a social systems uses money or barter, people and
nations will seek differential advantage by maintaining their economic competitive edge or by military
intervention”.11 The main problem is that in a monetary economy the main aim is always to generate
profit and the concern for the well-being of people and environment will always be second to profit.
This is true for all institutional levels, from governments to private corporations.
Furthermore, no governmental institutions of any nation consciously ask themselves how they
could improve society as a whole. No government asks: 'how do we get rid of poverty?', 'how do we
eliminate hunger world wide?', 'how do we eliminate crime altogether?', etcetera. These are technical
problems, which demand technical solutions, and the problem herein lies, that the technical solutions
that could solve these problems, often do not generate any profit. Also, governments and politicians can
not solve technical problems. They can only create laws and policies to manage them. Technicians,
engineers, sociologists, biologists, psychologists, scientists in general, are those who seek out to
identify a problem and then aim to solve it. Lawyers, politicians, business men and women, and
11 'The Best That Money Can't Buy', Jacque Fresco, 2002, 31
government officials have never been taught to solve problems and are not paid to do so. They are paid
to generate profit through managing problems. Crime, corruption and misbehaviour on commercial or
individual levels, can be managed by creating and enforcing laws, but they cannot be solved.
(Furthermore, in a monetary economic system, crime in essence is a multi-billion dollar business
industry. Privately owned prison systems, guards, private security companies, police, lawyers and
judges all function and earn a living through managing crime. Solving the problems of crime and
eliminating crime all together, would put a lot of these people out of business. Crime, as harsh as it
might sound, creates jobs and it almost seems 'unprofitable' to eliminate crime all together.) Crime not
only is a huge business industry, but is a by-product of the monetary system. Unequal distribution of
resources is the main cause for individuals to commit a crime, and laws cannot solve the problems of
(financial) inequality. If a person is hungry and has no money, no capital to trade in order to acquire
food, he or she will be forced to steal, no matter what laws are in place. The task to solve the problems
of crime and other unfavourable behaviour, is that of sociologists and psychologists, not politicians.
The first thing that behavioural biologists learn, is that the environment an organism lives in,shapes and
influences the behaviour of it.12 If there is a scarce amount of food in a chimpanzee cage in a zoo, the
animals will fight each other in order to secure enough food for them selves. The same applies to
chimpanzees in the wild. So its not the cage or the jungle that is the only factor that constitutes the
nature of the environment, but the availability of resources is an integral part of the environment. (The
zoo keeper can set up and enforce as many laws as he wants, but it will not prevent or influence the
behaviour of the chimpanzees at all). This example of how scarcity influences behaviour is not only
true for chimpanzees.
In his book “The best that Money can't buy” Jacque Fresco points out the flaws of the current
systems as follows: Governments enact various laws in an attempt to control and manage society. He
finds no evidence of deliberate planning, by any government to design a sustainable and workable
social system that would improve the lives of everyone, and not only the middle and upper class of the
first world countries. He argues that everyone is screaming for laws that would relieve hunger, poverty,
oppression, corruption, war and scarcity but the answer lies not in laws, but in removing the conditions
that are responsible for creating the problems in the first place. A law can not solve any problems, for if
it could, there'd be no more crime. Instead laws aim to manage or avoid problematic human behaviour
from nepotism to corruption. He also argues that when a nation creates laws to regulate human
behaviour, the majority of legislators are unaware of the factors responsible for the need of these laws.
12 EMBO Report, Science & Behaviour, “The biology of behaviour: scientific and ethical implications”,
http://www.nature.com/embor/journal/v8/n1s/full/7401012.html, sourced October 30, 2010
Hence, the problems can not be solved.
In a monetary economy, or one could even say, in a monetary environment, where artificial
value is assigned to natural resources, goods and services, scarcity will always be an integral part of the
environment and unfavourable behaviour of those who are less fortunate will persist and is a natural
consequence. The worst thing that occurs within a monetary economy, is that scarcity of a resource is
often encouraged and maintained, and if something cannot be sold, it is thrown away instead of given
to those who might need them. A good example of this is when many food products from Africa were
destroyed because they could not be flown into Europe,due to the volcanic eruption in Iceland.
Furthermore, if something is scarce, rare or available only in little amounts, the price or value of
the good or service rises, hence more profit can be made. This shows the economic laws of 'Supply &
Demand', and if supply can be manipulated so that profits are increased, it will occur.
This is evident in the diamond industry where there are strong regulations to prevent the supply
of diamonds flooding the market, so that prices remain high. This manipulation of supply and demand
occurs in almost all industries so that a profit can be made. This is especially dangerous if there is a
monopoly in a specific industry. These are problems commonly associated to the private sector, which
is misleading. The private sector and public sector work hand in hand, especially if it comes to the
natural resources like oil, gold, diamonds, timber, coal, platinum, etcetera. The blurring boundaries
between the private and the public sector, also contribute to the unclear nature of these problems.
If a government can make more money on oil, by holding a monopoly for it, it will do so and do
anything deemed necessary to keep its position of power. This is corruption in its most fundamental
form. Not only is a monopoly over resources dangerous, but a monopoly over a currency is just as, if
not more dangerous as it perpetuates corruptive behaviour, encourages scarcity, financially cripples
already weak nations and can even lead to international conflict.
The US Dollar is a good example of exactly this, and shows how unfavourable behaviour of
governments and large corporations is motivated by keeping a competitive edge over other nations on
the international market. In the article “Macroeconomic and Geostrategic Analysis of the unspoken
truth”, William R. Clark discusses the implications that the petrodollar has on global trade and
international relations.
The petrodollar is a term that was coined in 1973, by Ibrahim Oweiss, a professor of economics
at Georgetown University, and describes US-dollars that are used to buy or sell petroleum from OPEC
nations (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries), which include Iraq, Angola, Iran,
Ecuador, Nigeria and many others.13
13 Wikipedia, petrodollar, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar, sourced October 28, 2010
 It is common knowledge that whenever one buys oil, gold, platinum or any other natural
resources on the international market, the exchange is always done using the US dollar. To explain how
this came about requires a book in itself, but what it implies is that the US dollar essentially
monopolizes global trade.
To illustrate the petrodollar cycle it is a good idea to use a simplified example: When a country
like Japan wants to buy petroleum from a OPEC nation, they need to pay them in US dollars. Since
Japan does not use the US$ as its own currency, they have to exchange goods and services with
America in order to acquire US$. So they send products like Mitsubishi, Yamaha, Hello Kitty and other
Japanese goods and services to the US in exchange for US$. (This in fact is flooding the US market
with more goods and services than what the people can purchase, especially when one takes into
account that Japan is not the only country acquiring US$ in this manner, is also another problem that
requires a book in itself for explanation). Now that Japan has US$ it can buy petroleum from an OPEC
nation. After the transaction, these dollars are in the possession of that OPEC nation, which
undoubtedly also has it's own currency and needs to get rid of these dollars. It does not need to buy
petroleum itself, since it's a producer, but can use those dollars to buy gold, platinum or other resources,
or it can choose to save the money in respective banks, such as the Federal Reserve Bank.
According to John Perkins, author of the international best seller “Confessions of an Economic
Hitman”, in the case of Ecuador, most of the dollars it earns from petroleum export flows directly back
to the US to pay off its foreign debt14. Not to mention that most companies that pump oil in Ecuador,
such as Texaco, are US based companies. The petrodollars earned through oil export flow through the
institutions such as the IMF or other international banking systems, but eventually end up back in the
US. Essentially, Ecuador is getting nothing in return for its oil. The headlines of a BBC article from
December 13, 2008, substantiates Ecuador's debt problem and reads: “Ecuador is to default officially
on billions of dollars of foreign debt it considers ''illegitimate'', says President Rafael Correa”15.
What a OPEC nation can also do with the earned petrodollars, is to buy US goods and services,
like Nike and McDonnalds. This is more or less how the petrodollar cycle works; essentially all the US
needs to do is print money, and goods and services flow in from all corners of the world, which
saturates the US market.
William R. Clark goes so far to say that this petrodollar cycle was the reason for the war in Iraq,
since Saddam Hussein was the first of the OPEC nations to switch from selling oil in dollars to Euros,
and this switch, if replicated by other OPEC nations would have an immense impact on global trade. If
14 “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”, John Perins,
15 BBC, “Ecuador defaults on foreign debt”, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7780984.stm, Page last updated at 00:49 GMT,
Saturday, 13 December 2008, and sourced October 30, 2010
this theory holds any merit, one can see how governments behaviour is directly influenced by
macroeconomic conditions and influences geopolitical relations and stability.
These problems of global trade do not only concern oil and natural resources, but everything
from clothing production – sweat shops in China, to the agriculture sector. Organizations and policies
like “Fair Trade” aim to manage these problems, but again, they cannot solve them.
Another example where problems arise in therms of government activities involves the blurring
factor between the boundaries of the private and public sector. This blurring between the two sectors is
especially relevant and problematic in the relationship between Dick Cheney, defence secretary under
the Bush administration and two times running Vice President of the United States, and Haliburton, a
private construction company that was employed in the Iraq war. During the Clinton administration,
Cheney was out of the white house office, but acted as the CEO of Haliburton, in which he still holds a
majority of the shares. One can question whether Haliburton's involvement in the Iraq war, was
influenced by the position held by Cheney. The fact that private companies are involved in military
conflict in the first place is tantamount to question if they are aiming to resolve the conflict or prolong
it. Prolonging it, in fact would mean a longer business contracts and hence a bigger pay checks for
these companies. Haliburton is not the only company that is involved in conflict situations. Blackwater,
the largest privately owned 'security' company, Typhoon and other companies also benefit when armed
conflict occurs. The biggest problem that these companies pose, is that they do not fall under military
or governmental accountability. They are private companies, and hence, their violations of law, must be
dealt within the legal system of the country in which the crime was committed. This is especially
problematic, if the country in question does not have a functioning legal system, and hence atrocities
such as those that occurred in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, can almost go unpunished.
In a monetary economy the well-being of the people within any nation is rarely on any
governmental or private organizations list of priorities. The distribution of wealth and resources is and
always will be unequal and poorly managed, simply because of greed and personalistic interest in
accumulating wealth.
Another important thing that Jacque Fresco points out to, is that “at present there are no plans in
government or industry to make economic adjustments to deal with the displacement of people by
automated technology”16 He coins the term 'technological unemployment' and foresees a future where
unemployment will sky-rocket.
He also argues that many people have so much 'good faith' in their governments and authority
figures, that they believe “that in the event of social breakdown, the government will ensure their
16 “The best that Money can't buy”, by Jacque Fresco, 2002, page: 14
survival”. He argues that this, although in the job description and responsibility of a government, is
highly improbable, because in such an event, “the government would likely declare a state of
emergency”17. The term 'state of emergency', or 'Ausnahmezustand' was first coined and described by
Carl Schmitt, a German political theorist of Nazi Germany. According to Schmitt 'the state of
emergency' “frees the executive from any legal restraints to its power that would normally apply”.18
Throughout history, in the event of a social collapse, most governments primary concern was to
preserve existing institutions and power structures, even if they were the chief causes for the collapse to
begin with.
The role of money and banking systems

Besides understanding how money is used on a micro-and-macroeconomic scale and how it influences
international relations, it is essential to understand how money is created in the first place and how
governments are involved in this process. Almost all monetary policy is carried out through national or
international central banking systems. In Europe its the European Central Bank which implements
monetary policy, in Britain its the Bank of England and in the United States its the Federal Reserve
Bank. It is important to realize that these banks are not government owned nor controlled.
The problem with the banking systems is that they work in the 'Grey area', the 'blurred
boundary' between the public and private sector. The Federal Reserve Bank, for example is the central
banking system in the U.S. and it's “official duties today, according to the official Federal Reserve
documentation, are to conduct the nation's monetary policy, supervise and regulate banking institutions,
maintain the stability of the financial system and provide financial services to depository institutions,
the U.S. Government, and foreign official institutions.” The Federal Reserve is a privately owned
institution, where its chairmen are not elected, but selected and do not have a limited time in office.
Alan Greenspan, served as the chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, longer than any
President in office. Being a private organization it is more likely to make use of “personalistic” rather
than “rational” criteria in decision making.
Besides being privately owned, mostly by a group of individuals or group organizations like
smaller banks, central banks are capable of in-debting a governments through money creation. In the
case of America; if the US government needs money, it prints and assigns value to government bonds,
which it exchanges with hard cash that the Federal Reserve then prints. The money that the 'Fed' prints
and gives to the government or other smaller banks, is just a loan and eventually needs to be repaid
17 “The best that Money can't buy”, by Jacque Fresco, 2002, page: 14
18 Wikipedia, Carl Schmitt, On Dictatorship, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Schmitt, last modified on 23 October 2010,
sourced on October 30, 2010.
with interest to the Federal Reserve Bank.
It is note worthy to mention that the procedure of money creation differs from bank to bank and
country to country, but the overall principle remains the same; that it's the banks that
predominantly/perhaps indirectly control governments through how much money they lend and at
which level they set the interest rates. A good question to ask oneself is where does the interest come
from that needs to be paid when repaying a loan? From someone else's pocket is the answer!
Most modern banks create money out of thin air by using a loaning system called 'Fractional
Reserve Banking'. This allows banks to essentially loan up to 90% more than they have in reserves.
This splits the perception of how much money there is into two categories; the perceived amount and
the actual amount. Explaining and understanding the entire process of money creation and distribution,
requires much more research and time that is not feasible in the scope of this paper.
So to keep things short, governments, like any other institutions rely on money to achieve their
political agenda. Without money, a government is powerless. The question of who controls the money
of a nation and hence the nation, is simple to answer: the banks.
Interest and debt are modern tools or non-invasive weapons that are used to control populations,
nations and trade. So money has evolved from a medium of exchange, to a means of control. The latest
financial crisis showed the world just how powerful the misuse of money can be, and how powerless
governments are concerning this. Bruce Wiseman, a financial adviser, market research executive and
author, put it this way: “The purpose of this financial crisis is to take down the U.S. dollar as the stable
datum of planetary finance and, in the midst of the resulting confusion, put in its place a Global
Monetary Authority [GMA - run directly by international bankers freed of any government control] -a
planetary financial control organization”19.
One thing is very important to understand, and that is that the behaviour of these international
bankers, of corrupt government officials and CEO's is a bi-product of the environment they function in.
To get rid of this unfavourable behaviour, one has to get rid of the environment that encourages and
allows such behaviour to begin with.

A Resource Based World Economy

A proposed alternative to the current systems in place, that aims to eradicate negative degenerations, is the
concept of a Resource Based World Economy. Promoted and developed by industrial designer and social
engineer, Jacque Fresco, 94 years of age, a resource based economy is a concept that proposes a “system in
19 Bruce Wiseman, http://www.themoneymasters.com/, sourced October 31, 2010
which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of
debt or servitude.”20 On first glance it may sound quite idealistic, but on the contrary, this system works
by abiding to natural law and using the scientific method to solve problems. Solutions are arived at
through calculations, evidence and data, as opposed to personal opinion, political and economical
agenda and motivations, or emotional decision making. The unifying imperative of a resource based
world economy is that it regards the world's resources and technical information as the common
heritage of all nations and people, to be used for the benefit of all and not only the fortunate few. A
resource based economy requires a large change in human and interpersonal relations so that laws are
no longer necessary to control or regulate human affairs.21 This can be achieved through devoted and
rigorous collaboration of psychologists, sociologists and various scientific disciplines to work together
in setting up and consciously designing a social living environment that has the human need and
necessities at its highest priority. As opposed to political leaders personal agenda, and private
corporations concern for generating profit.
Instead of making and enforcing laws that would manage certain problems, social engineers and
scientists would work towards solving the root of the problems regardless of and unhindered by the
desire to generate profit. Consider the law against drinking and driving as an example: Today, it is
illegal to drink and drive because of the obvious dangers these actions pose, not only on the perpetrator
of the crime, but also to innocent by-standers. The laws against drinking under the influence do not
solve the problem, since people still get behind the wheel after one to many beers. Instead of making it
illegal with laws, enforcement and punishment, make it impossible to do so in the first place. The
problem is technical, which requires a technical solution. Instead of using a key to ignite the engine of a
car, design a start mechanism that involves a breathalyser. Another example is, instead of placing a sign
next to a road that reads : “Caution, slippery when wet!”, put abrasives in the road, so that it is not
slippery when wet!
People will understand that their personal well-being is directly linked to the well-being of the
community. If one consciously designs a environment with the intent to eliminate unfavourable
behaviour, and that motivates humans compassion, empathy and respect towards nature and each other,
a lot of the problems of today could be solved.
The role of governance in a resource based world economy will not be in the responsibility of
individuals who only temporarily serve their country, but would fall under the responsibility of the
entire human race. This is where education comes in. A new social design would require a redesign in

20 http://www.thevenusproject.com/a-new-social-design/resource-based-economy
21 “The best that Money can't buy” Jacque Fresco, 2002, pages: 6, 71-74
our education system.
The entire concept is a “post-modern model”, which can be used as a guideline to help solve
many of the problems we face today. This is not something that can be achieved over night nor does
Fresco imply that his model is the solution to all problems. The whole concept of a resource based
economy also needs far more in-depth analysis, research and development before it can be applied in
reality. It is but a blueprint for a possible alternative to our current systems of control. Einstein, who
was a personal friend of Fresco, said that one can only solve a problem with a different kind of
consciousness that created it.22 Law, governance and the bureaucratic administrations of today can
never fully solve the problems of today simply because many problems that exist today are a result of
law, governance or economic conditions.
Fresco rhetorically asks whether we can grow beyond thinking that “someone” has to make
decisions for us, and he aims to help creating a society that has a symbiotic relationship and
understanding of nature as opposed to a relationship of exploitation and destruction.

Conclusion and Evaluation

In this part I shall discuss what may be the most influential factors that hinder humanities development
and social evolution and how governance should move beyond trying to 'keep things as they are'. The
role of governance should encourage and incorporate change and progress in all fields of the political
agenda and social progress. Preaching about change, as Obama does is pointless because while most
agree that change is important, “many limit change if it threatens their advantage, just as on a personal
basis they seek change in others, but not in themselves.” - jacque fresco

22 http://quotations.about.com/cs/inspirationquotes/a/ProblemSolvi2.htm
Appednix:

William R. Clark is manager of performance improvement at Johns Hopkins University School of

Medicine. His research on oil depletion, oil currency issues and US geo-strategy received a 2003
Project Censored Award and was published in Censored 2004.