<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div style="font-size: 17px; "><br></div><div style="font-size: 17px; "><br></div><div style="font-size: 17px; "><br></div><div style="font-size: 17px; ">Dear Randy,</div><div style="font-size: 17px; "><br></div><div style="font-size: 17px; ">We need to get together for another long talk.</div><div style="font-size: 17px; "><br></div><div style="font-size: 17px; ">I want to comment on your recent comments. See CAPS below.</div><div style="font-size: 17px; "><br></div><div style="font-size: 17px; ">Gene</div><div style="font-size: 17px; "><br></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">RANDY: </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px; ">Regarding contradiction B2, I believe there is at least one partial alternative vision emerging as articulated by Jeremy Rifkin in The Third Industrial Revolution. In a nutshell, it involves a kind of energy/ecological democracy. Rifkin names 5 sources of alternative energy; solar, wind, hydro, bio-mass and geo-thermal. Every home, factory and office building has proximity to at least one of those and can therefore produce energy for its own use and to spare at its own locale. The surplus can be stored using hydrogen technology and distributed via an energy network modeled after the internet.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">GENE: YES, I AGREE THAT THIS IS PART OF THE ALTERNATIVE VISION, A THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION BEGINNING WITH ENERGY. HYDROGEN IS CLEARLY VERY IMPORTANT. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px; ">ACCORDING TO DAVID SANBORN SCOTT, </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px; ">HYDROGEN AND ELECTRICTY CAN BE AND NEED TO BECOME THE TWO MAIN MEANS (CURRENCIES) FOR DELIVERING ENERGY TO THE USER.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"> <br><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">RANDY: If you're familiar with Rifkin's work, he also insists that the "third industrial revolution" is not the final destination, but rather a stepping stone on the way to an "empathic (serving) civilization."</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">GENE: YES, I READ PART OF RIFKIN'S EMPATHY BOOK. JOYCE READ IT ALL AND REVIEWED IT IN OUR JOURNAL. IT MAY BE WE WILL NEED AN EMPHATIC POST-CIVILIZATION TO EXTRICATE OURSELVES FROM INDUSTRIAL CIVILIZATION AND COMPLETE THE NEXT INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">RANDY: Just two points from what John has said that I would highlight or expound on. One is that complexity need not be chaotic or exasperating. It can be seen as an opportunity borne of abundance. Certainly John does not say otherwise.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">GENE: YES, I THINK COMPLEXITY NEED NOT BE EXASPERATING. AND THE PLANET SURELY HAS ABUNDANCE FOR FOUR OR FIVE BILLION PEOPLE. THAT ABUNDANCE IS CURRENTLY GOING TO A FEW PEOPLE. THE EQUITY REVOLUTION BEING VOICED BY THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT IS, I BELIEVE THE PRIOR ISSUE TO FINDING THE NEW ABUNDANCE.<br> <br><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">RANDY: Second, it would be interesting if it were possible to map out all the interdependent pieces and entities within our universe and somehow depict the interactions and their influence and effects. That would perhaps help answer the question of who is the "we" that must learn to be together.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;">GENE: THE "WE," AS I SEE IT, IS WHAT WE USED TO CALL THE TRANSESTABLISHMENT AS THE INTEGRATING FORCE THAT GIVES GUIDANCE TO PART OF THE PROESTABLISHMENT AND PART OF THE DISESTABLISHMENT. I SPELL THIS OUT IN DETAIL IN CHAPTER 22 OF <i>THE ROAD FROM EMPIRE TO ECO-DEMOCRACY</i>. DAVID KORTEN CITED THIS AS ONE THE GREAT CHAPTERS OF THAT BOOK.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px;"><br></span></div></body></html>