A conversation with

social innovator and futurist

Jacque Fresco

- Let's start with the context
of current world events.

We live in a world of perpetual
warfare and crime and corruption.

A war ends in one location, and
it begins in another location.

The theater of war rotates,
but it never goes away.

Protest after protest,
we never stop the wars

that continue to go perpetually.

It seems that we need
a different approach

in dealing with the problem
of perpetual warfare.

How does The Venus
Project approach this?

- If you really wish to bring an end to
war, poverty, hunger, and most crimes,

what we have to do,
eventually through education,

is declare all of the
earth's resources

as the common heritage of
all the world's people.

That would be number one.
If that is attained, then we can

do away with all of the artificial
boundaries that separate people.

Before the states had joined
together into one nation,

there were territorial disputes at all the borders.
They were malicious,

but once the states had joined together,
the maliciousness disappeared.

There was no need for it.

The same process can be applied

to all the sovereign
nations of the world.

To be invited in to a
participatory democracy,

whereby all the resources are
shared by all the world's people;

I see that as the only means.

Transitionally, if you
substitute any other system,

we will have built-in
antagonisms.

So, this is what we
have to strive toward.

I don't say this can be
accomplished in one swoop.

It's a slow process
of education.

We hope to make a motion picture
depicting these changes

and showing people what the advantages
would be to each individual

throughout the world of a
resource-based economy.

- Why do you propose
such a radical change?

- Well, I would like to see
an end to war, poverty,

unnecessary human suffering,

and I can't see it within
a monetary-based system

where the richest nations control
most of the world's resources.

I can not see that happening.

I see a constant repeat of
the same series of events:

war, poverty, recession, again,

boom, bust, and war again.

I see no end to that
cycle of events

unless we declare the
earth as common heritage.

- I hear discussions of a new
paradigm and economic systems,

and you're proposing such a change
in a resource-based economy.

What is a
resource-based economy,

and how does that compare with
a monetary-based economy?

- In a monetary based economy, we
use money as a medium of exchange.

Now, money doesn't represent
our capacity to produce.

It just represents a method
designed hundreds of years ago

and established
within the system.

In the monetary-based system,
it's wealth, property and power,

and that is the main directive.

Now, today we say "How
much will it cost?"

That is not really the question.
The real question is

"Do we have the resources to build
that kind of project?" Yes, we do.

"Do we have the money?
" No, we don't.

We don't have enough money
to wipe out the slums

and build housing all over
America, and schools,

even if we taxed everybody, doubled it.
We don't have enough money,

but we have more than
enough resources available

to build anything
we want to build.

If you have difficulty
with that, consider this:

Suppose all the money in the world
disappeared tomorrow morning.

As long as there
are farms, water,

building materials, we can build
anything we want to build.

It isn't money that people need;
it's access to resources.

In other words, it was necessary,
a hundred years ago,

to use a monetary system for
the distribution of products.

Today, we have the technology
to make those things available.

What are we chiseling
off each other for?

- Exactly what is a
resource-based economy?

- A resource-based economic
system does not use money,

barter, trade, or any of the older
systems that were prevalent.

It's based on
designing a culture

that fits in with the carrying
capacity of the world's resources.

Anything else other than
that will not work.

It's like sending people to the
moon without water, without food,

operating on the assumption
that the moon will provide.

It has to be based...

All science and technology
must be based upon resources.

Without resources,
whatever planning you do,

if you don't have the
resources, is invalidated.

So, the resources must coincide
with the industrial potential.

- How does the resource-oriented
economic system,

which The Venus
Project promotes,

how does that offer a different
approach to our society?

- It would change the
basic outlook of people.

There will be no such
thing as unemployment,

no such thing as war, no police,

no prisons, no banks, no money;

but people would have access to new
housing, education, health care,

and all of the things we
don't have access to today

without putting out a
great deal of money.

- When you say "no
money, no banks,"

you mean that there will
be no debt, no credit,

no barter, no form of
monetary exchange?

- ...
by any individual or group,

and no inventions would
be owned by corporations.

They would be in
the public domain.

So, you can't make money
on new cancer treatments.

You can't make money on anything
that should be in the public domain,

and we think everything should
be in the public domain.

- I see how that relates
to the effectiveness

in reducing the emissions that
are destroying the ozone layer.

There is no profit motive, so there is
no reason to continue that behavior.

I can see how it would reduce the
destruction of our rain forest.

Because there is no profit motive, there
is no reason to destroy the rain forest.

We have no restraints for
finding alternatives

that don't damage the ecosystem.

Recycling, huge problem with

waste, non-recyclable waste...

Without the profit motive,

we have no reason not to
develop eco-friendly products.

- Yes, this is so.

- The decadence, the moral decay

of the pool of people that we
choose our political leaders from.

- We don't choose them, mostly the
establishment does the choosing.

- So, we would eliminate,
we would step away from

the constraints of capitalism
in a resource-based economy.

- Yes, nothing less will do.
There is no compromise, middle way.

Until you have common heritage,

you are going to have all the same
kind of problems, more or less.

Modified or enlightened
capitalism

would reduce the
problems only minimally.

- So, in a resource-based
economic system,

you are saying that territorial
strife would be diminished?

- Gone.
There is no basis for it.

To protect your property, you
have military and police.

Since you don't own anything in the
future, you live in your ideal house.

You drive very well-designed cars,
and when you get out of that car,

it goes to service
automatically; it's maintained.

You don't want to own anything.
What you really want is access to things

when you want it without waiting in line,
and that's what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about making
things available to people.

You don't want to own your golf clubs.
You want them there when you want them.

When you go to the golf course,
you want to be able to select

whatever clubs you like,
whatever you like to work with.

That's what you really want.
When you go down to the yacht basin,

you want to get in a cabin cruiser
and go out with your family.

You don't want to
fill out any forms,

and someone will tell you "Hey!
There's fifty people before you!"

We would turn out
more than enough

so that you can always go down, and there
is always a car out there for your use.

- Is monetary economics at the root
of the problem and can it be fixed?

If it can't be fixed, why not?

- Frankly, within this
system, in order to survive,

you have to submit to the
methods of this system.

A lawyer is not out there
to help you always.

There is money in it
for the law firm.

In other words, the motivation
is not what you would call

based on human concern.
It's based on the bottom line.

The motivation in most industries,
the bottom line is profit,

not the betterment of humanity;

and they would feel that that
is a by-product of this system.

I don't believe that.

It's that the rules of the game
were invented so many years ago,

they no longer fit the economic
circumstances of the times.

What we would like to do
is update our system,

so that it fits the
new technology.

Invite them in,
shorten the work day,

increase the availability
of goods and services

to all people throughout the
world without any nations

taking advantage of any
other nation's resources.

- What does The Venus
Project represent?

- One world working
in one direction,

the intelligent
management of resources,

and upgrading the standard of
living for all the world's people

with profits to none and
service to everyone.

- What about scarcity?
Can that be eliminated?

- Do we have enough resources

to satisfy the growing
population in the world?

Yes, today we have
more than enough,

and it is incontestably proven
that we have more than enough.

It's just that the ways we manage
our resources are wasteful.

We change the design of
automobiles every year,

so people will buy new cars.

We raise the hemline
on clothing.

We change the spring fashion, the
fall fashion, the winter fashion,

so you will buy things and constantly
be involved in purchasing things.

In the future we will design
cars to last ten years or more,

so you don't have
to service them.

We will engineer, innovate,
and make newer things

designed not to wear
out and break down.

- What about 'human nature'?

- I think that environment
shapes values and behavior.

Genetics, to a certain
extent, set the propensity,

but they do not give
us a value system.

Genetics is not responsible
for greed, bigotry,

racism, prejudice.
All that is learned.

If you don't alter the
condition that generates that,

I don't see a solution.

What The Venus Project advocates
is the redesign of our culture,

so that those conditions
no longer exist.

- Who makes the decisions?

- Instead of formulating a decision as
we do today, we will arrive at them,

and that is a method similar
to that used in engineering

where you put something to
test in order to find out

or evaluate a
particular situation.

Decision making then in the
future will be based upon

actual studies on human need,

protecting the environment,

and manufacturing goods and
services with clean technology.

- Who decides who gets what?

- You do. You go to the
access center, look around,

and if there are things that
you would like to have,

you put in a request for them.
That simple.

- You are talking about,
if I read you correctly,

no money, no credit,
no borrowing, no debt,

no bartering?
Where is the incentive?

- No war, no
territorial disputes,

crime reduction by about 90%,

the end of fear of
economic deprivation

or losing your home

or illnesses which you can not
afford economically to take care of.

All that comes to an end.

If that isn't a good enough
incentive, I don't know what is.

A lot of people are brought
up to believe that money

is the driving force that
generates incentive.

It also generates incentive
for corruption, embezzlement,

taking care of your brother-in-law,
unfair practices, racial discrimination.

I'm saying that, yes, money
does produce incentive,

but it also produces all the other
factors, which are generally left out.

I would say the people
we remember in history

are not the people who made a
buck or made a lots of money.

They are people that
have given their lives

to benefit the lives of other
people without financial gain:

Mother Teresa, Christ,

Gandhi.

Martin Luther King didn't
march in the South

because there was 2000 bucks
deposited in his account.

He did it because this
was what he believed.

I would say that all the great
achievements throughout history

did not come from
monetary systems.

It came because people believed
in what they were doing.

Advocating a public library
doesn't bring money to anybody,

but it brings education to everybody
that couldn't afford books.

I'm saying, the real
people that we admire

are the people that
we build statues to,

who did public works, not because
of the monetary incentive.

I'm afraid of people that
do things for money.

I don't feel secure about it.

- Would the election of people with
higher moral content solve the problem?

- No, because even
if we succeeded

in electing people of
unquestionable moral character,

if we ran out of resources,
there would be lying, cheating,

stealing, and artificialities.

It isn't moral character
that we need.

It is the intelligent management
of the earth's resources.

The real future depends on our
ability to solve scarcity problems,

overcome those problems through
our own creative ingenuity.

- So how do you envision a
transition into this type of system?

- If you keep bringing in machines
and replacing human beings,

(we call it 'downsizing' today)

the majority of people in America
and throughout the world

will not have the purchasing
power to buy goods or services.

This will bring an end to
the old monetary system.

I would see economic collapse

as the only system that would
bring people around to say:

"Gee, I see that the people I've
elected into political office

are not competent enough to
get us out of this problem,"

and they will be looking for
other possible alternatives.

This is when The Venus
Project comes in.

The more people know about it, the
more likely that it may be installed.

The Venus Project does not say
"This is what the future will be."

All it says is "This is
what the future can be

if we accept the postulates and
proposals of The Venus Project."

What we need are seminars
on problem-solving:

how to accomplish each successive
phase of human development;

that is what The Venus
Project has to offer:

the methodology of how to achieve
a higher standard of living

for all the world's people

without the creation of the
uniformity or standardization,

or subservience to an elite
form that manages government.

We have no elitism.
We have no government.

We have no police, no
prisons, no armies.

There is no need for it in
a resource-based economy.

- What problems stand in the way

of us implementing of
this type of transition?

- Traditions, habits,
indoctrination, propaganda.

We are all propagandized to accept
our system as the best system.

We are all given stories about the
culture, our cultural history,

and which has left out
the detrimental aspects.

All societies tend to

support the dominant
values of that society.

There is no such thing as an
'objective society'. If there were,

you couldn't have German scientists
making weapons of destruction.

American scientists, British scientists,
Dutch scientists, French scientists

working in serving
their government.

Real science has no
allegiance to government.

It only has allegiance
to methodology.

We are using our finest minds
on weapons of destruction

and methods of maintaining
control and dominance.

This is not a loyalty
to the Fresco system,

or loyalty to The Venus Project.
I'd be against that.

You have loyalty to the Earth and
all the people that live on it.

- How will we overcome the fear
of losing our jobs to machines?

- In the money system, it means you
can't pay your rent, and you can't eat,

and you can't buy a car, and you
can't buy anything you need.

In a non-monetary system, in
a resource based economy,

when the new machines come in,
we lengthen your vacation time.

We...shorten the workday,

make more goods and
services available to you.

Many more options
to choose from.

So, there is no threat.

It's only in the monetary system

that machines can threaten your
survival or purchasing power.

- Who will do the manual labor?

- During the transition, it will
be done in a manner similar

to the way it is done today,
humans working with machines.

After the transition,

most machines will be designed to
intelligently carry out a given project.

- But I have trouble imagining a system
without some form of government.

- At a time in a future when
computers will replace government,

they will arrive at decisions
by being interconnected

with production, agriculture,
transportation, and human needs.

Therefore their decisions,
instead of being arbitrary,

are based upon real
physical needs.

- In such an advanced
technological world

where automobiles
operate themselves

and buildings are self-erected

and the computer controls just about
everything else, what will people do?

- The options that
would be put forth

on your video sets and
computers are so many.

You can go back to school, study
anything you want to study,

get into marine science, and
practice any hobby you want to.

You are the one that will select
how you want to use your time.

- Based on the projections
of The Venus Project,

how do you envision
the world tomorrow?

- The appearance of the
world of the future

will be based upon the newer
technologies that evolve.

The shape of the cities
will be based upon

the kind of environment
people would like to live in,

and the machines of the future will
be based upon energy determinants.

That is, the energy available and
the kind of energy we can tap into

to make more things
available to people,

not only materially,
but spiritually,

and also with concern for one
another and the environment.

To an individual not familiar
with The Venus Project,

it seems like high-tech, all kinds
of new technologies installed,

and they want to know where
the people fit into this.

What does that got to do with people, all
the bridges and designs of buildings

are very interesting,
but what about people?

All these bridges and all
these buildings are designed

so that they are self-maintaining.
They do not need constant repair,

and all of the machines are
designed to free people

to go back to school, study
what you want to study

and do what you want to do,

and fulfill the needs that you
have that need to be fulfilled,

so that you can become what
is called an individual;

a creative individual

that doesn't need to fall in line
with any particular point-of-view.

We welcome your criticism
of The Venus Project.

We welcome the participation of
everybody and the contributions.

We have no idea of what the
ideal society would be,

nor do we entertain
such views as Utopia.

We feel that all systems
will constantly change

to whatever conditions are necessary
to fit the needs of the times.

We have no fixed blueprints,
so we invite participation,

and we invite
recommended changes

because the history of civilization
is the story of change.

That's why The Venus Project
has no fixed blueprint.

- Who decides what
the future will be?

- I don't think anyone ought to
decide what the future will be,

but we ought to decide
where we wish to go

and what kind of world
we wish to live in,

and do we have the facilities and
resources to build such a world?

The answer to that
is "Yes, we do have

the ability and resources
to build such a world."

There is no way for you
to make it on your own.

Either we think globally
or we perish individually.

When I speak about globalization,
I'm not talking about

the global concept of corporations
running everything on earth

where all human beings would
be subject to their wishes.

I'm talking about common heritage
of all the Earth's resources

by all the world's people;

and therefore, all
decisions being made

would be based upon that which
benefits every living being.

For more information:
www.TheVenusProject.com

Designs: Jacque Fresco;
Models: Jacque Fresco, Roxanne Meadows

Model Photographer:
Jacque Fresco

Computer Animation: Doug Drexler;
Music: Kat Epple

Presented by: Future by Design