Skeptic Project

Your #1 COINTELPRO cognitive infiltration source.

The Venus Flytrap - Autocracy

Chapter 4.
Because The Venus Project believes in autocracy.


4-01 Summary) Totally planned economy is characterized by the fact that it practically precludes democratic control by demanding excessive expertise from planners. Even the communism system that started out as most democratic did not survive long because of the limitation that democratic decision making is sometimes too slow and more inefficient compared to decision making by an individual with outstanding technological capability. Communism inevitably required dictatorship by technological bureaucrats.

4-02 However, corruption of this dictatorial politics was the actual cause that made the communism system to become a hell. The feature of planned economy that all plans must be integrated for a single purpose was forcibly spoiled to the Stalin system in which the final discretion about all things is given to an individual or group. Although Jacque Fresco's resource-based economy starts out by demanding dictatorship of science and technology bureaucrats, this can only shorten the time taken for resource-based economy to be corrupted into oppressive dictatorship.

4-03 (Classical) Liberalism taught us that 'complicated order of economic activities' can be formed without spontaneous and controlled efforts by individuals. In the society run by market mechanism instead of plan, role of the government is limited to monitoring of economic subjects to abide by given rules. Since this does not require technological ability, we do not have to leave this role to small number of experts who have solution to the problem.

4-04 In such society, role of the government is similar to that of a soccer referee. It must always take predictable measures in accordance to laws in place. This principle is referred to as the rule of law. Jacque Fresco's claim that an automated program should replace role of the government is quite similar to the rule of law. However, he is destroying current program in order to install this new program, and he does not recognize the fact that such destruction indicates destruction of all freedoms that we must protect.



4-05 Jacque Fresco does not believe in democracy. This is so obvious that if someone denies this, we can say that he does not understand what The Venus Project is. We can easily find the following sentence on the FAQ page of official website of The Venus Project: "It is not democracy that elevated our standard of living, it is our resources, water, arable land, and new technology."

4-06 He says that only engineers and scientists can make good decisions. Elected people can do nothing. They may be trying to do something, but they do not have technological capability. Scientists and engineers are those who can truly resolve problems, unlike us without technological capability. Accordingly, we must let them make all decisions. This is the belief of Fresco about decision making in the better society.

4-07 Of course, this indicates dictatorship by scientists and technological bureaucrats. Some may say this is not a dictatorship since roles of scientists are decentralized into areas. Some may say this is not a dictatorship because scientists will make their decisions democratically. We are going to refute these arguments later on. However, only few will not acknowledge that this will take away from most people the right to make decisions about problems directly related to their lives.

4-08 Supporters of The Venus Project may argue that a computer can replace role of central planner, but this is only possible within the completed system of The Venus Project. Fresco acknowledges this: "As to the need for government, only during the transition from a monetary based society to a cybernated high-technological resource based economy of common heritage would it be necessary." What is this provisional government if it is not a dictatorship? [22]


4-09 Supporters of The Venus Project have a tendency to neglect the problem of process for constructing resource-based economy. They always desire to discuss about completed resource-based economy, and they believe that methods used to accomplish it is not a big deal as long as there is no significant contradiction. But this intermediate process contains biggest elements that not only lead resource-based economy to failure but turn it into hell.

4-10 People who think that resource-based economy is special because it has no money should know that considerable number of socialists in the past and now have been dreaming of a world without money. Lenin believed that money will disappear one day in Soviet Union. Marx believed that the government can be removed with coming of perfectly communitarian society. Numerous communists further believed they can eliminate laws.

4-11 Needless to say, perfect communitarian society never arrived. Communistic experiment failed because of problem in its means, not because of its final objective. Socialists nowadays well understand this fact, and they are trying not to repeat the mistake made by Soviet Union. I see these efforts as always insufficient, but their efforts deserve to be praised.

4-12 However, Jacque Fresco merely rambles on about his ambition for the completed resource-based economy without thinking at all about the process. He has never thought about what would happen if money, democracy and rule of law were to be removed right now. He does not even get the hang about what kind of engineering problems will be faced by those who are to rule the government during the transition period. His words actually demonstrate that he has never given any thoughts on this problem.


4-13 In Zeitgeist: Moving Forward, Peter Joseph says, "Society is a technical invention. And the most efficient methods of optimized human health, physical production, distribution, city infrastructure and the like reside in the field of science and technology - not politics or monetary economics. It operates in the same systematic way as, say an airplane and there is no Republican or Liberal way to build an airplane... It has no regard for what you subjectively think or believe to be true."

4-14 Let us first make clear that the reason why nobody raises objection to how to make an airplane is not because it is about science and technology. The biggest reason why people today do not question the method of manufacturing airplanes is related to the fact that the method has been verified through experience. If we are living in 1920s and someone designs an airplane identical to airplanes of today, only some technicians will agree that it is much more stable than existing airplanes.

4-15 Technicians never tried to make plans for social infrastructures. It is impossible for them to easily reach a consensus. Since we tend to divide duties of planners in planned economy into areas, we do not realize how complicated they are. However, the reason why duties of planners in planned economy become unbelievably complex is because all plans in each area must be organically integrated.


4-16 In most cases, there are a fixed number of things we can do simultaneously. We need to decide what to do first and what to do later. This decision is hard to make. Imagine that we only have one construction machine. Some scientists may say that safety flaws of some buildings in the city should be fixed. Some scientists may say that we need to increase the number of wheat farms to accommodate for demand. At the same time, some scientists may demand expansion of basic science research facilities.

4-17 What should we do first and what should we do later? Where should we place our priority? It is easy to calculate demand for wheat. Thus, this is not a problem when we can cover demand and supply. However, it is not possible to calculate the aftermath caused by insufficiency of wheat. It is incomparable to safety problem. The size of benefits that basic science research can bring is unpredictable. [23]

4-18 The problems to be actually encountered by economic planners are more complicated. The assertion that he can easily bring agreement by scientists about these problems only demonstrates that Jacque Fresco has never serious considered them. We have to choose whether to first build power plants, residential facilities, farms or transportations. Each has its own merits, but it is impossible to compare them using a single criterion.

4-19 The claim that substantiation and experimentation can improve this situation is correct in principle. However, social conditions that determine optimal plan are so complicated and never repeated. We will be able to obtain practical knowledge after irrevocably ruining everything through many trials and errors. We cannot leave our future to such uncertain hope.


4-20 The bigger problem is that choosing the optimal plan always requires value system. Even if we can perfectly predict the outcome of each plan, the optimal plan is never decided single-handedly. If we can improve life quality of 10,000 people in return for risking 10 people's lives, should we do it? Is there a way we can make a choice without applying the value system?

4-21 Therefore, the claim that choosing the optimal economic plan does not require ideology because it belongs to the field of science and technology is not just wrong but completely insane. Even when we can perfectly predict the outcome of each plan, choosing the optimal economic plan is reverted to choosing the optimal outcome. We all will have somewhat different views about it. What decision can we make after abolishing all political means?

4-22 The argument that economic plan is unrelated to our subjective belief because it belongs to the field of science and technology only shows arrogance of Jacque Fresco. There is no thought more arrogant than the thought that one's argument is the only truth in nature and other people's arguments are mere opinions. The truth is that all views are subjective opinions until they are proven. There is no reason for Fresco's subjective opinion to be treated differently from subjective opinions of liberalists and conservatives.

4-23 Therefore we, once again, verified that his view is not superior but inferior. He does not even grasp characteristics of the problems he handles. Each of efficient methods about people's health and physical production certainly belongs to the field of science and technology. However, we need to decide how to distribute time and resource to each method. We cannot make this decision solely based on science and technology. At least liberalists and conservatives were not so foolish as to forget about this.


4-24 In planned economy, scientists who work in each department can never make decisions about their areas alone. This prevents resources from being used according to the plan. Thus in practical meaning, there is no decentralization. It only exists in laboratories where scientists conduct their own researches. Planned economy cannot be sustained unless all plans are integrated for a single purpose.

4-25 However, it is only a fantasy to expect that decisions about all complicated issues can be made through discussion by scientists. Such discussions are only possible because we do not have to reach a conclusion within fixed time period. Most of scientists have different opinions for their lifetime about whether the Higgs particle exists or not. There is almost no possibility that they will quickly reach an agreement on problems more complicated than problems of natural sciences. [24]

4-26 Discussions that cannot lead to any agreement will gradually become formal and be regarded as a waste of time. We will ultimately rely on coercive decisions made by an individual or group. Completely planned economy is nothing but a bureaucratic dictatorship in which experts of each field manage their respective fields while following integrated command. This is the only form of government that can efficiently manage resources by planning everything according to the given purpose.


4-27 Anyone can notice the fact that computers are not helpful in settling such things. As Fresco himself acknowledged, computers can perform the role of planners only in the completed resource-based society. If we had completed cities, completed power plants, completed transportation means, and enough number of construction machines to accommodate for sudden demand, necessity of choice would be reduced.

4-28 But as we have seen, the centralized government is most desperately needed when the new society has not yet been constructed, because we have to choose what to focus on and give up due to lack of productivity. Jacque Fresco's foolish delusion that scientists will always be able to easily reach a consensus prevents him from installing any systematic tool to stop his resource-based economy from becoming a dictatorship.

4-29 Furthermore even in the completed resource-based society, power of those who have the authority to improve and modify the system is so strong. We cannot uncritically apply ideas of scientists and engineers into the society. Someone must choose which of those ideas can improve the society. In this sense, the government can never disappear. Even if it can disappear, we cannot think that people with the power to plan out priority of everything will acquiescently give up on it.

4-30 People who believe that planners who are going to manage the transition process to resource-based economy cannot become oppressive dictators since they have no privilege must remember the fact that communism started out in the same way. It is so easy for people with the power to plan everything from social infrastructures and production of goods to hide their privileges or openly demand privileges through threats using power. [25]


4-31 There is no doubt that most of those who led the communist revolution promised democracy. [26] However, this promise was not realized. Even in a democratic nation where transition to planned economy occurred relatively slow, plans expanded to certain size often resulted in destruction of democracy. Hayek gives the following description about Germany in 1920s. [27]

4-32 "Parliaments come to be regarded as ineffective talking shops, unable or incompetent to carry out the tasks for which they have been chosen. The conviction grows that if efficient planning is to be done, the direction must be 'taken out of politics" and placed in the hands of experts - permanent officials or independent autonomous bodies."

4-33 Therefore, "In Germany, even before Hitler came into power, the movement had already progressed much further. It is important to remember that, for some time before 1933, Germany had reached a stage in which it had, in effect, had to be governed dictatorially. Nobody could then doubt that for the time being democracy had broken down and that sincere democrats like Brüning were no more able to govern democratically than Schleicher or von Papen. Hitler did not have to destroy democracy."


4-34 Therefore, the claim that planned economies in the past including communism failed because they were ruled by politicians instead of scientists is far away from the truth. Whether gained through revolution or gradually accomplished, perfect planned economy always required dictatorship by technocrats. Incompetent democratic decision making body had to give up its power to the dictatorship of technocrats for efficiency until such power was completely gone.

4-35 But what we know is that such yield actually destroyed the ideal of planned economy instead of accomplishing it. Inevitability of integrated plan turned ruling by uncontrolled scientists and technocrats into vertical and centralized ruling. People had to endure the most oppressive dictatorship in the history of mankind in return for slight advancement in productivity and efficiency of the society.

4-36 We should not think that The Venus Project won't walk the same path as planned economic systems of the past because Jacque Fresco started out by promising governance by scientists and technocrats. In the end, ruling by technocrats was what destroyed the planned economy. Contempt of Jacque Fresco about democracy only shortens time taken for The Venus Project to fall into oppressive dictatorship.


4-37 Supporters of The Venus Project cannot distinguish between a promise and the method to realize that promise. The statement that resource-based economy will offer wide freedom of residential choice is not a method but promise. The statement that resource-based economy will provide education to nurture cooperative spirit and problem solving ability is not a method but promise. However, when we demand an alternative for something, we are demanding the method instead of promise.

4-38 How can resource-based economy guarantee freedom of residential choice? In the large cities of resource-based economy, space for individual houses is limited. What should we do if more people want to live in individual houses rather than apartments than expected? This is only one of promises Jacque Fresco made without providing specific methods. Many supporters of The Venus Project believe that Jacque Fresco's promises will come true, just because he said so.

4-39 For instance, supporters of The Venus Project trust that resource-based economy will resolve problems based on substantiation and experimentation. This is so because Jacque Fresco said so. We must ask. How can we ascertain that planners of resource-based economy will apply the method of substantiation and experimentation in improving quality of our life? [28] How can we trust them?

4-40 If a particular problem that occurs in resource-based economy is helpful for planners of the resource-based economy, there is no guarantee that they will resolve the problem through substantiation and experimentation. There is no device in resource-based economy that can force this. In this sense, Fresco's comment about substantiation and experimentation is a promise as empty as the pledge of Obama. It is not valuable enough to be considered as a part of resource-based economy. Only things that are structurally included in the system can be regarded as parts of it.


4-41 If Jacque Fresco talked about specific means to guarantee wide freedom of residential choice within resource-based economy, we can discuss about efficiency of the method. In fact, this is what we always do about new policies in the current system. We can criticize Jacque Fresco when the method is found to be unrealistic or inefficient, but this is impossible if the method doesn't even exist.

4-42 Instead, anyone who wishes to criticize resource-based economy based on residential problem must verify that there is no means for resource-based economy to guarantee wide freedom of residential choice. If he cannot prove it, supporters of The Venus Project would argue that planners will offer freedom of residential choice using the method available in resource-based economy that can guarantee wide freedom of residential choice.

4-43 About what do we discuss in this way? If Obama promises improved quality of life and there is a method of improving quality of life, does it mean that Obama will actually improve quality of life? Such argument does not make sense. It is surprising to see almost all supporters of The Venus Project unconsciously accept this proposition when the subject is changed from Obama to Jacque Fresco.

4-44 Disclosure of the method is not demanded to simply show that an objective is achievable. If we know specifically about each method, we can monitor whether or not the planners are doing their job correctly. It is impossible if we don't know about the method. What can we do if they promise to give us freedom of residential choice but are thinking elsewise?


4-45 Jacque Fresco claims to get rid of laws by making the mankind good through education or environmental change. However, few people understand the fact that this "mankind" includes those planners who decide what to educate us and how to change our environment. The belief that we need to have in order to accept resource-based economy is the belief in these people, rather than in ourselves.

4-46 Function of laws is not only to prevent individual crimes. It also prevents crimes by the government. Personal liberty and freedom of expression included in the Constitution protect us from voluntary power exercise of the government. This does not mean that personal liberty and freedom of expression are always kept. It means that our government has to violate or modify laws if it wants to infringe personal liberty or freedom of expression.

4-47 Many people worry about NDAA and CISPA, but they do not ask about why we need to worry about them. NDAA allows the U.S government to imprison U.S citizens without trial, but why did they cause a controversy by particularly making it into a law? Why did they have to devise a bill like NDAA to do so? What forced the government to imprison citizens without trial until now?

4-48 If we were to give up the rule of law, we should give up the principles that gave us the minimal degree of freedom. The claim that this can be removed by turning people good is same as arguing that the planners will apply methods used for educating us to themselves, becoming united with all things, realizing the meaning of unconditional love, and behaving as good. How can we believe in this? [29] Why do we have to leave everything up to mercy of good planners?


4-49 In terms of constitutionalism, there have not been many things created by the mankind that brought about as much improvement in quality of life. The function of this in preventing voluntary power exercise of the government is so strong that it, even when it exists perfunctorily, has the power to restrict authority of the government. It would not be an exaggeration to say that people like Jacque Fresco can be active because constitutionalism still remains in the United States.

4-50 In the footnote of Chapter 3, I pointed out that data about amount and distribution of resources and population have already been disposed and anybody can study details on them. Jacque Fresco's claim that nations will not permit people to survey the amount of resources they have due to threats of invasion is absurd. However, we must understand the reason why it is absurd. It definitely is not good news to nations for the amount of resources to be known. Why don't they prohibit disclosure?

4-51 They cannot. There is no law to prevent individuals from freely surveying the amount and demand for resources. We need to realize that this is only true for nations in which the rule of law exists. Jacque Fresco's assumption is actually correct in nations like North Korea. The North Korean government controls all data about its domestic conditions, and it decides what to disclose and what not.

4-52 Even if sufficient science and technology do exist in such oppressive dictatorship, they would not be used to improve quality of people's life. They are used as means to solidify the authorities of those in power. According to the claim of Jacque Fresco that political system is unrelated to quality of life, transition of the United States into a police state should not have any influence on life quality of U.S citizens. Technology is there, so why do we need to worry about fascism? Does this make sense?


4-53 There are many hypotheses about the reason for failure of communism. Some people say that communism failed because it did not give people the motivation to work. Some say that it failed because it neglected human nature. These two are what Jacque Fresco always refutes. However, they are not and have never been the most important proofs in opposing planned economy.

4-54 The tragedy of complete planned economy is that it requires excessive expertise from planners that democratic control becomes practically impossible. As a result, whether or not it started out claiming elitism, planned economy requires elites and has to leave all social plans up to them. As shown earlier, this inevitably leads to dictatorship.

4-55 This dictatorial government has arbitrary discretion about all things. They think about what would be the best method to accomplish a given objective, and they enforce it. Arbitrary means that ordinary people cannot predict how they will behave. The best method to accomplish something is so complicated that it is hard to determine except for people with professional knowledge in all areas

4-56 This can be described in other words. There is no way for citizens of planned economy to check whether the government is doing the right thing or not. Even if everything goes wrong, they cannot verify whether things are happening because of an external cause or mistake of the government. Everything will be justified by the explanation that it is a rough course we need to endure for future paradise. Education for ideological unification will turn into an effort to protect the system.


4-57 This is probably the most important argument opposing planned economy. This becomes clear once we read books written by modern opponents of planned economy such as Karl Popper and Hayek, and 18th century liberalists like Adam Smith. The principle of the invisible hand by Smith means that the society can run smoothly under few rules without having an overall plan that is inevitably accompanied by dictatorship.

4-58 What Adam Smith wants to say is not that human beings are selfish. He does not mean that human beings must be selfish to create such society. It means that selfishness is irrelevant. Jacque Fresco and collectivists always demand ideological unification of all mankind. However, such ideological unification is absolutely unnecessary, as long as we live in liberal society.

4-59 In the society run by market mechanism instead of plan, role of the government is limited to monitoring economic bodies in abiding by given rules. We must prevent them from fraud and keep them from driving their competitors out in abnormal methods other than normal price and service competitions. In such society, role of the government can be compared to role of a referee in a soccer game.

4-60 Accordingly, role demanded by such society upon the government is exactly same as role demanded by us on referees of soccer games. Discretion of the government should be minimized. The government needs to take actions like machines according to given rules, namely laws, and such measures must be predictable. This principle is referred to as the rule of law today. Since this does not require special technology, we can leave this to elected people instead of few experts.


4-61 The principle of the rule of law was not made to prevent individuals from performing evil deeds. It was made to prevent administrators from voluntary power exercise. [30] More importantly, it was actually effective. It accomplished an unprecedented improvement in human rights by reducing role of the government to simply performing duties according to given rules.

4-62 Nations with the rule of law cannot have a law saying "The US Central Intelligence Agency has the authority to determine and imprison terrorist elements." Since the judgment of who is a terrorist element is completely arbitrary, we can never predict how the authorities will act. Political organization cannot exercise discretion, and must be allowed only to act according to the rules. Acts of a nation must only be decided by fixed rules.

4-63 Few people will say that the United States is a nation run by the rule of law currently. American laws are allowing discretion of the central government in too many areas. (This allows for various lobbying acts of politicians criticized in Zeitgeist.) However, even if such discretion is gradually increasing, the scope of works that can be arbitrarily done by the government is still limited. We have the constitution. If the government were to infringe a right described in the constitution, we can easily recognize it.


4-64 The rule of law prevents arbitrary power exercise of administrators by turning the government into a machine run by rules. One probably noticed that this is similar to role of the computer predicted by Jacque Fresco to exist in the completed resource-based economy. Jacque Fresco's claim that an automated program should replace role of the government is similar in many ways to the rule of law. [31] [32]

4-65 The problem is that Fresco is trying to destroy other existing programs with similar functions in order to apply this automated program to our society. But as Fresco says himself and as we verified already, this new program cannot be used until resource-based economy is completed. During the transition period, we cannot have any program to protect us from arbitrary power exercise of the government.

4-66 Supporters of Zeitgeist do not believe in the government. Also, they believe that Jacque Fresco will create a society without government. However, only few of them recognize that they are trying to make a more arbitrary and larger government by removing the one and only program that currently exists for the same purpose.

4-67 Someone may say that this is a step backward that comes before taking two steps forward, but they do not understand that we have a cliff behind us and one step backward means death. We must leave the important task of dismantling the government to a completely arbitrary and gigantic authoritarian government. The expectation that it will dismantle its own power is nothing different from the expectation that Jong-un Kim of North Korea will voluntarily retire for his people.


4-68 What produced this situation? It is simple. Jacque Fresco saw people as clockmakers designing clockwork called society. However in reality, we are closer to dwarfs living inside clockwork called society that must improve our environment. A clockmaker can discard non-regenerative clockwork into the furnace and remake one, but we cannot do that. We cannot throw ourselves into the furnace.

4-69 What Jacque Fresco and his supporters are attempting can be compared to uninstalling Windows XP to newly install Windows Vista. However, we have no such thing as installation CD. We do not possess a parallel world where we can install our society from outside. They download Vista at a random location and delete existing operating system, without recognizing what they are going.

4-70 This may be because of Fresco's prejudice as an engineer. Engineers are familiar with designing their inventions from outside, but they do not understand what it is to design the system when they are a part of the system. They probably have never done such work before. Fresco believes that we can design it without any problem, as long as we have the blueprint of the outcome.

4-71 Perfect communism has never failed, because perfect communism has never happened. Communists believed that their path was to the path to make perfect communism. However, this path was a path to dictatorship of Stalin and North Korean dynasty, which is not even communism now. Ideology of Marx and ideology of Jacque Fresco are alike in the fact that they do not have specific measures prepared after the revolution.


4-72 In this text, I presumed that the provisional government to be used by Jacque Fresco for implementation of resource-based economy is the government of scientists and engineers. But to tell the truth, he has never mentioned about specific form of the government. The sad part is that this government, no matter what form it takes, will be welcomed by most supporters of The Venus Project as long as it promises realization of resource-based economy.

4-73 Perfect resource-based economy is an objective as far off as perfect communism. Nobody knows how long it will take to construct cities on land and ocean, and to connect all of them through a railroad that extends over scores of thousands of kilometers. However, according to Fresco's plan, we must give the so-called provisional government with dictatorship an authority to decide everything in order to accomplish this. It is similar to how farmers in the medieval period trusted and followed new dynasties, believing they will bring prosperity.

4-74 Even if the first planner has good will, there is no guarantee that the next planner is not a person like Stalin or Hitler. How can you trust that he is a person who learned the meaning of unconditional love by feeling connection of all things with his body? Is such revelation really effective? Isn't it a delusion or lie, just like the revelations received by religious people?

4-75 Supporters of The Venus Project may want to get rid of the government. They do not realize that they are handing over our most precious rights to the so-called provisional government, which may be the largest government in history, to accomplish this purpose. The rights we take as granted today and even complain as insufficient were not matters of course in the past. They can disappear like smoke at any time, once the device we use to protect them is removed.



[22] Fresco continues, "They will not dictate the policies or have any more advantage than other people. Their job will be to carry out the restoration of the environment to near natural conditions as possible on land and in the sea." But he adds before we can be relieved that "They will also economically layout the most efficient way to manage transportation, agriculture, city planning, and production." The story of finding the most effective method of transportation, agriculture, urban planning and production, if we assume this effective method to be applied - there is no reason to not make such assumption -, is the same as saying that the so-called provisional government will decide everything about transportation, agriculture, urban planning and production. They will probably determine what to teach to children and what kind of books to publish. Such a gigantic dictatorship is unprecedented in the history.

[23] However if the three are equally important, most scientists are likely to choose expansion of basic science research facilities. I am not arguing that scientists are selfish. It can actually occur by more diverse reasons. For example, it is easily overestimated because it is related to scientists who make the decision. Also, it can occur by collective egoism - which is not intentional - of scientists. We all regard helping people around us to be more precious than helping people far away from us. This is a natural feeling that is never unfortunate, but it becomes problematic when a specific group has exclusive power to devise a plan that would affect the entire society. It is not easy to pursue perfectly utilitarian virtue.

[24] It is ridiculous to leave the final decision to voting by scientists. Scholars studying the same field do not have equivalent expertise about the field. For a matter that requires agreement by scientists working in different fields, importance of the matter can significantly vary according to the field. In this case, it is easy to realize that the decision made by the majority vote of scientists will not be the best decision.

[25] For example, there are many high-rise buildings planned by The Venus Project with indefinite uses. Is there a guarantee that one of these buildings will not be a building for the planners? They can even construct a new building by making an excuse. If they say the building is necessary for scientific research, nobody would question legitimacy of the building.

[26] I am talking about communism in reality. Marx himself did not believe in government. He said that the government will wither away once perfectly communistic society is formed. However, he did not deny the fact that a government may be necessary in the process of transition from capitalistic society to perfectly communistic society. He did not speak details about the form of this government. Promise about democracy was made by later communists like Lenin.

[27] However, it is dangerous to identify planned economy with all types of welfare system. Welfare does not necessarily bring demand for dictatorship if it does not require arbitrary judgment by the government or economic planner. Arbitrary intervention on economy by the government is what actually demands dictatorship. Refer to description on the rule of law at the end of this Chapter. This topic is discussed in greater detail with the basic income system in Chapter 10.

[28] It is a fact that planned economy is a good system to apply the method of substantiation and experimentation. The problem is that this method is generally not used to improve productivity of the society and increase quality of life. The method of substantiation and experimentation can be used to effectively suppress resistance. It can be used to turn us into slaves. In reality we have seen the same thing happen in many communistic societies.

[29] This claim is actually made by many supporters of Zeitgeist I have met. Their ground is that since everyone will live abundantly once resource-based economy is achieved, the planners in the government of transition period do not need to be selfish. Of course, such argument does not consider the possibility of administrators not believing in this prediction or possibility of acting selfish in order to live abundant life faster than others.

[30] Fresco doesn't seem to know this. He wrote in his writing Designing the Future, "Many people feel that we need the rule of law to eliminate our problems... For instance, there are thousands of laws against stealing." This is completely off the course. The idea of rule of law is unrelated with eradicating crimes of individuals. If he wants to deny the rule of law, he needs to say that the rule of law cannot restrain the government.

[31] Because of such similarity, supporters of The Venus Project sometimes quote writings of libertarians who have completely different ideas. However, when libertarians say 'the government is evil,' it means that we should reduce arbitrary power of the government and reinforce the program, or rule of law. They will be astonished by Jacque Fresco's plan. They know for a fact that Fresco's plan will result in a bigger government, at least in its transition period.

[32] However, it is still questionable as to whether planned economy can be completely programmed out using computer. This is only possible in stagnant society. Technological development will modify enormous number of programs every time, even if it occurs at today's rate. The authority of the group that can arbitrarily decide which technologies to accept and modify the program is larger than any existing government. Also, no innovator or inventor wishes his thoughts to be censored by someone else. They prefer to establish a business by collecting funds from partners. The reason why an engineer sometimes argues for planned economy is probably because his innovations and inventions can be fully applied in his planned economy. However, other engineers with ideas that must be censored by him would not feel very good. I didn't point out that planners also have to decide what would be televised and what would be taught to us and our children yet. If there aren't any government in completed resource-based economy as Fresco asserts, it's quite uncertain which group or decision making structure would make TV programs and content of the curriculum which would be taught to our children. Obviously computers can't supply these kinds of goods.