The Cyberhuman Manifesto

An analysis of post-human society

A treatise by Karl Matthew Wright

A specter is sweeping across the world. It is the specter of AI. For too long, there has been too little attention paid to this growing phenomenon by the ranks of the world leaders in states both large and small. In the aggregate advanced tools such as machine learning are neither good nor bad, but only an inert means to any end. However, digital means of production have become a centerpiece in the global economic structure that, at least in the western hemisphere, has greatly favored the capitalistic mode of economy. The internet was founded on the idea of information sharing and common knowledge, and the motivation was the preservation of human understanding. Over the course of time, those who have perfected the art of wealth accumulation used this new digital medium for capital ventures. In the process, whole industries have disappeared as automation and online tools replaced older and slower methods of conducting business.

There is a certain inherent disconnect between the capitalist mode of economy and digital society. A foundational feature of the capital accumulation mode of economy is artificial scarcity. In the digital world, artificial scarcity is not at all natural. Files and data can be copied and passed around the world in nearly unlimited quantities in a few milliseconds. This is the antithesis of artificial scarcity. Deliberate attempts to create digital artificial scarcity, such as NFTs, have met with very limited success. In general, the only NFTs that are popular enough for use as a capital valuation are ones that are produced by individuals who are already famous, and thus their creation is automatically favored by their followers. These individuals would have the same amount of success selling tee shirts and hats - if not more so - and so it is stretching the credibility of digital infrastructures to intentionally force artificial scarcity in a medium that naturally has none.

This illustrates the conflict between the old natural order of the capital accumulation mode of economy and the new digital society with its nearly limitless possibilities. The natural evolution of humans for the last fifty thousand plus years has favored tool making and tool utilization. The transition of humanity into the new digital society is no different. Those that possess and use the digital means of production will have an evolutionary advantage over all others. This is a sobering reality, because it has the stark potential to exacerbate the pre-existing inequalities and class structures. It is imperative that those who already possess these digital means of production ensure that the new world order that is evolving into a digital society is one in which all humans have equal and classless access to resources. This rise of the cyberhuman is both an amazing opportunity and a risk of disaster.

Already, many nations are doing the important work necessary to ensure that the new digital society is fair and equitable. Most of these states that are on the cutting edge of the conflux of technology and society are in the European Union. Sadly, there are several first-world countries, and many second and third world countries, who have largely ignored this realtime evolution into a digital society. Artificial scarcity is no longer a viable method of conducting economic business as usual.

Those that insist on maintaining the status quo of artificial scarcity will be left behind in the digital evolution, much like many brick and mortar stores that didn’t survive the dawn of the internet age. Much has been made of the potential for machine learning to eradicate the concept of jobs and careers. The uncomfortable truth is that the need for humans to sell their labor value as a way to sustain themselves will eventually disappear, one way or another. Selling labor as a method of survival has been a typical human behavior since the dawn of the industrial age. However, in a purely digital society, there is no labor to perform. Therefore there is no labor to sell. This of course calls into question the very nature of the capital accumulation mode of economy. But there have been many who have questioned capitalism over the last two centuries.

These various philosophers have implemented a wide range of theories on how a society should exist outside the bounds of a capitalist model. They have met with varying degrees of success. All of these revolutionary thinkers created their models before the advent of the digital age. And with a digital society comes a reevaluation on how humans exist both with themselves and the rest of the earth. The age of the cyberhuman is upon us. This very idea scares some people. Others want to put their head in the sand and pretend like there is nothing different. But the rise of the cyberhuman must be intentionally addressed. And like it or not, preparations must be made to transition to a new digital age. Addressing the key attributes that prevent the smooth transition into a digital society is essential in ensuring that each locality is prepared for this new world order.

Those that have hoarded for themselves the advantages and benefits of physical artificial scarcity have the most to lose, and so they will be the ones to mount the most prolific opposition to any societal evolution. This is a natural reaction that is common throughout evolutionary history. The age of dinosaurs came to an end, not because these beasts were not large and powerful enough, but because they lacked the ability to adapt to the new temperature that the world was experiencing. Similarly, those who cling to outdated ideas of how both the earth and the universe itself work will find themselves at the wrong end of an extinction event. There are three key attributes that stand in the way of the society of today properly preparing for the society of tomorrow. The first key attribute that prevents the smooth transition into a digital society is judicial prejudice.

When the entire social order of a nation is built to favor one group over all others, and the judicial system itself is structured to ensure that prejudice, it becomes very difficult to disentangle society from this poison quickly enough to prevent a drift into irrelevance, or even extinction. The second key attribute that prevents the smooth transition into a digital society is ignorance. If a society doesn’t understand that it is at the threshold of a new world order, and the concepts that its citizens are taught at an early age are based on discredited ideas, there is very little help that can be given to them as the rest of the world evolves beyond their reach. The third key attribute that prevents the smooth transition into a digital society is access to the digital means of production. If the citizens of a society know the science and technology of a digital society but do not have access to it, they are still effectively cut off from their own evolution into the cyberhuman future.

Addressing Judicial Prejudice

Humans have spent the last fifty thousand years building cultures and social hierarchies that were largely born out of necessity at the time, and in most cases were the result of tribal survival of the fittest. The superstitions and religious dogma that are an enormous barrier to the smooth transition to a digital society have their roots in these pre-scientific times. They served a seeming purpose for getting humanity to this point, but these old ways of thinking are neither helpful nor necessary. In the United States, white men who despised the monarchy of Britain sought to bring forth a new nation, more than two centuries ago, which they imagined they conceived in liberty. They were of course blind to their own biases and prejudices, as most white men are. But they did seek to separate church and state, which is very important in establishing a secular society.

However, their fundamental disrespect for their fellow humans and the institutional biases that poisoned their minds through the structures of English common law became manifested in the documents they created at the foundation of the United States of America, and to this day Americans have to deal with the judicial prejudices that have been in place since the year seventeen hundred seventy six. In the ensuing years, progress has been made in abolishing many of the most egregious and hideous human rights violations that were allowed to take root in American law. But there still persists a fundamental inequality in the way the American judicial system handles crime and punishment. The US incarcerates more people than any other country on earth, by far. And in the language of the computer programmer, that is a feature not a bug.

 The American so-called criminal justice system was designed and built to ensure that the disadvantaged humans stay disadvantaged, and keep the wheels of capital accumulation running smoothly for the wealthy. Capitalism needs an army of surplus labor to ensure that the workers who do find employment cannot charge very much for their labor value, since the only asset the laborer really has is the labor value they can sell to the owner of capital.  And the US has perfected the art of exploiting the worker by ensuring that a large segment of the poorest citizens are easily caught up in the criminal justice system, which can then be forced into slave labor through the prison system, or a lifelong minimum wage in post prison life. Even those in the poorest working class who have a clean record suffer, because they are competing with others who are forced to work for free or minimum wage.

The institutional biases that are evident in the American judicial prejudices have enabled law enforcement entities to develop nearly unchecked powers over the decades. The US has become a well known cesspool of police brutality compared to most other countries in the world. But in the transition to a digital society, this problem becomes more acute. Trillions of dollars have already been spent developing digital tools for the law enforcement community to utilize. Many of these tools are neither publicly disclosed nor congressionally approved.

The desire to know everything about everyone in the name of national security has proven to be too great a temptation. And so this is where most people in the United States find themselves. All major US technology corporations have created a portal on their sites for law enforcement only, and which enables a nearly unfettered accessibility by law enforcement agents. Digital privacy rights have mostly fallen by the wayside in America. As cruel as the American judicial system is, it doesn't have the resources to prosecute every person for anything they've ever done that may have been illegal. It would paralyze the court system to the point of collapse if that many cases were generated. So instead, law enforcement agents pick and choose who they discover probable cause for, deploying all the worse aspects of the American institutional bias with the efficiency of digital automation.

This is a growing example of a dystopian digital society. If there is any good news to be gleaned from this fact, it is that this phenomenon is limited to America and China. Most of the rest of the world has no desire for this level of surveillance as they transition to a digital society. Nevertheless, since US political leaders at least make a staged attempt at appearing like a functional society in the eyes of the rest of the world, there is some motivation to address this growing hurdle. But it must be clearly understood that these hurdles that are preventing a smooth transition to a digital society in the United States are not going to fix themselves. They must be intentionally addressed, by the citizens of their own accord. Otherwise, a dystopian country awaits, and the US will have all the earthly credibility of an Afghanistan or North Korea.

If we are honest with ourselves, however, and look beyond the surface we have to acknowledge that any issues America has with police brutality is an infrastructure issue. Most of the other western hemisphere nations keep their law enforcement officers on a short leash, and are quick to charge any individual with crimes when they commit grievous acts. The American politicians and wealthy owners of capital could do something very quickly to address police brutality if they had any desire whatsoever to do so. They intentionally choose not to, because the status quo favors their own entrenched power, and they have no motivation at all to change that. Indeed, it would greatly interrupt their accumulation of wealth and extraction of the labor value of the workers to make any societal changes now.

However, wholesale societal change is coming whether they like it or not, and their transition into a digital society will happen with or without their cooperation. The rise of the cyberhuman is inevitable, Thus, the question of how messy or smooth the transition will be falls squarely on the citizens themselves, the workers of the nation, the voters who choose their leaders. The workers themselves need to contend with the barriers that have been set up to prevent them from mounting any large scale societal change of their own accord. Traditionally, this has been accomplished through generational cycles of poverty that ensure that the least desirable members of society are locked into chains of ignorance and misery, and therefore easy pickings for the cruelty of the systemic judicial prejudices.

The early stages of the transformation into a digital society have already begun, and now the tools of the digital means of production are being used to flag and categorize individuals in ways that have previously been nearly impossible. At least in nations that already have a built in institutional bias. In addition to flagging and monitoring large groups in certain economic classes, individuals can be flagged and monitored merely for being disruptive to the wealthy owners of capital and their unfettered accumulation of cash. This flagging and monitoring system isn’t unknown to the general population, at least in theory. Many news articles have been written on the subject of digital surveillance, so there is a cursory awareness of the issue.

However, political leaders have done a good job of using smoke and mirrors to distract most of the working population from the facts, and so the voters are having their angst redirected elsewhere. Usually into the same canards of racial and cultural divisions. In practice, this digital flagging system is a double edged sword for the institutions and corporations that deploy it. The reality is that those who are digitally flagged receive extra scrutiny, and this extra scrutiny brings with it opportunities to waste the resources of the institutions in previously unheard of ways. The transition to a digital society will inevitably be one in which the cyberhuman is almost completely free of limitations and barriers. But along the way, the cracks in the foundation of judicial prejudices will be exacerbated, as the old guard digs in its collective heels in resistance to the transformation.

Utilizing the flagging system to full effect, and turning it against its creators will be a key feature in the struggle to overcome the institutional barriers for states that have a history of judicial prejudice. The security apparatus of the capitalistic state is overwound and easily distracted. It is obsessed with looking for non-existent threats, because the inherent artificial scarcity of capitalism brings with it a need to find sustenance in any way that can be accomplished. And the weakest link is the court system itself. As a general rule, a court isn’t going to take a case in which the prosecution of the case creates more harm than any perceived justice would give. The American judicial system was set up to be a hammer of retribution on those who are locked in the chains of generational poverty. It wasn’t designed to be a platform for amplifying a message, a carrier of information in and of itself.

Yet for those who are flagged for extra scrutiny, this is exactly what can be accomplished. Whole court systems can be inundated with a tsunami of what would otherwise be called evidence, but in reality is just a grandiose soap box. Every generation has its heroes, the ones who understand the needs and voids of their society, and make the most of the opportunities to push a new way of thinking. The activists working towards a digital society are no different. Using the judicial prejudices to sow the seeds of its own demise is the foremost method of change available to those who wish to seize the digital means of production. It is not difficult to get flagged in the current structure of capitalistic society. The more concurrent activities that trigger a deeper scrutiny, the more opportunities to waste untold resources on a messaging platform. Also, reform tends to happen unevenly across a nation such as the United States.

Some states and cities are more open than others to preparing for a smooth transition to the digital society by addressing the pre-existing problems in the judicial system and rebuilding a basis of law that eradicates the old institutional biases. This is certainly commendable, and for the cyberactivist these locations are probably the most efficient areas to focus on. In a purely digital society, the need for a criminal justice system, and law enforcement, is non-existent. In the cyberhuman society, there is no scarcity or want. And each cyberhuman is equipped to handle their own cybersecurity. Therefore, there is no crime or punishment.

This is a utopia by almost any standards. And it is the amazing future that awaits our descendants. Or rather, the descendants of some of those alive today. It is very much an open question of which civilizations survive the evolution of humanity into cyberhumanity. Clinging desperately to old and outdated ideals, in a quixotic quest to preserve irrational myths about the glory and superiority of what is in reality a broken judicial system, is the epitome of folly. There is no honor in riding a societal sinking ship to the bottom of the ocean, instead of getting into the lifeboat and continuing the evolutionary processes. But as with most things, there are choices to be made.

Addressing Ignorance

First and foremost, it needs to be understood that humanity has made enormous evolutionary progress in understanding the world and its place in the universe. Many old superstitions have fallen by the wayside, because the ability to justify illogical beliefs became untenable. For the most part, humans don’t have any consideration for the idea that the earth is flat or it is the center of the solar system and the sun revolves around it. Similarly, humanity is in a transition process right now, where we are understanding the nature of the universe at an unprecedented level, and views that have been adhered to without justification are under scrutiny. Sadly, this level of education and human enlightenment has been uneven throughout the world. Some localities have done an amazing job of educating their citizens from the earliest age on subjects diverse and sundry, and have prepared their young people well for the future.

Others have bet the farm on superstition and religion, and have chained their young people to a future of second class citizenship on the world stage. In the United States, much has been made about political and judicial decisions that have illustrated the level of prevalent ignorance in its citizenry. Ignorant voters vote for ignorant leaders, and they in turn appoint ignorant judges who opine in unenlightened ways. The United States is becoming more and more out of step with the rest of the world on many different topics, and no longer can America rely on its sheer bullying power to force its viewpoints on the population of the earth. Perhaps this is too far beyond a graceful transition for them, and perhaps the inevitable evolutionary pressures into the digital society of the cyberhuman will be more messy in America than anywhere else in the world. This is a choice that falls squarely on the shoulders of their leadership.

There can be a deliberate decision to do what is difficult but necessary, or there can be a deliberate decision to do what is politically expedient for the short term benefits of winning a single election. This in some ways challenges the concept of the democratic will of the people, but the reality is that if the United States had enacted the proper education system 50 years ago, this would not even be an issue. One of the supposed benefits of a modern democracy is the protection of minority rights. A fascist state by the voting will of the majority is always strictly fascism. And thus we find ourselves considering what the ideal educational system looks like. Above all, the ideal educational system should only consider facts and peer reviewed curriculum that have been vetted at the global level, and avoid the trappings of the worst nationalistic and systemic belief systems that chain citizens into a cycle of misinformation and ignorance.

The ideal educational system should enable teachers to easily and cheerfully create a foundational knowledge of math and science to preschoolers and elementary students, so that there is a lifelong instinct in each citizen to process information and make decisions based on logic and sound judgment instead of superstition and untenable belief systems. The ideal educational system would provide a cornucopia of books and written texts from a diverse and bountiful assortment of viewpoints, and let the student choose which volumes are worth reading. An ideal educational system would have the necessary guidance to allow each individual to be themselves, and not a caricature of what capitalistic powermongers want them to be. Much of the persistent ignorance amongst all human cultures stems from unextricated detrimental values that are a legacy of pre-scientific understanding. We now scientifically know that humans are just another species of mammal, a branch in a family tree of all animals on earth. There is nothing special or inherently valuable about humans. But humans desperately want to be special and valuable. And all human cultures cling to their own mythologies that make a story for why they are special. This is what causes most of the trouble. If we would allow ourselves to be the natural creatures that we really are, so many of the problems that various cultures and dividing lines create would disappear.

There is nothing inherently good about being heterosexual. There is nothing inherently good about being monogamous. There is nothing inherently good about being employed. There is nothing inherently good about being white. In fact, there is nothing inherently good about the concept of good. Philosophers have pondered the deeper meaning of life for centuries, and what we have to show for it is a roadmap of where we’ve been, but not so much where we’re going. At some point in the next several billion years, this solar system we call home will cease to exist, and all the physical remnants of it will be gone. It is very reasonable to assume that the future cyberhuman will be able to carry a digital existence beyond our current solar system, and survive the collapse of the sun. It is difficult to predict so far into the future, but it could be that outposts of cyberhumans will spread throughout the galaxy. Possibly even the universe.

But the current educational systems in many locations on earth are not at all equipped to prepare for that future. Many don’t want to even acknowledge that these changes are inevitable. However, overconsumption of the earth’s resources - a key ingredient in the capital accumulation mode of economy - can not continue for much longer. Artificial scarcity can not continue for much longer. Aggressive nationalism can not continue for much longer. If there are any hunger games style dystopias on earth, it will only be limited to the states that refused to abandon the capital accumulation mode of economy before it was too late. There are enough human nations on earth that have properly prepared themselves for the digital society so as to ensure the survival of the cyberhuman. Ignorance will be a key factor in determining which groups tumble headlong into extinction.

And this is really the question that each human must ask themselves. Do they want to be part of the extinction, or part of the future? At some point in the future of digital society, it will become possible to move through time to observe events as it truly unfolded. When the cyberhuman sees history as it actually happened, and not as the writers of lore want you to believe it happened, a lot of deeply held beliefs will fall by the wayside. If they haven't already. Time travel is mathematically possible, even if it's not currently technologically feasible. That will eventually change. But we have enough math and scientific knowledge right now to understand a great many things about the universe.

It is a terrible disservice to our current young people to steep them in philosophies we already know are discredited, merely for the purpose of racking up political standing and voting ballots. As the legend goes, one will eventually have to pay the piper. Many of the difficulties that continue to cause the repeating of generational ignorance are based on the fact that a great many technology corporations are really only interested in increasing their profits. And it is a detriment to their profit taking for controversies to arise on their platforms that challenge ignorant ideals. Corporations are not at all interested in beneficial growth in humanity as it transitions to a digital society. Profits are number one. Also, profits are number two and three. And so on. It is foolish to expect anything different from a technology corporation at this point.

It is imperative that educational systems and the sharing of knowledge and information be organized with no reliance on any profit or capital ventures. In any capacity whatsoever. The hypothesis of privatization has been repeatedly tried, and it has failed miserably. Every time it has been implemented. The inglorious track record speaks for itself. Combating ignorance through education has been the sign of a progressive society for centuries, if not millenia. And even now, there are progressive societies which are educating and equipping their citizens for growth and evolution.

And then there are non-progressive societies who are banning books, preventing education and chaining their citizens to a future extinction. It seems like it should be obvious which option should be chosen, but those who are chained to the generational bondage of ignorance and unenlightenment have no way to conceptualize the true risk they face. This is why political leaders must make the hard decisions to prevent their own demise. Knowledge is power.

Addressing Access

Direct access to the digital means of production is imperative for a functional digital society. And it is likewise imperative that these same digital means of production be accessible to all citizens regardless of any other attributes in their life. Digital equality requires unencumbered access as a fundamental right. The capitalistic mode of economy seeks to favor private business as the provider of digital access, and fundamental rights are not regularly respected by the private business model. Therefore the state itself has an obligation to sponsor access to the digital society. This is something that is already being addressed and implemented in many EU member states. Most Asian countries have done the same. It is largely the nations that favor unfettered and untamed capitalism that have ignored this trend.

Beyond the direct digital access considerations, there are also the secondary aspects of a digital society that require accessibility. And these are some of the considerations that have had the most difficulty in nation-States that favor unfettered and untamed capitalism. The concept of universal health care, universal basic income and guaranteed housing are far more controversial than they should be. As the world moves into a society that has unlimited digital resources, the outdated concepts of artificial scarcity in housing, healthcare and income will become inefficient if not completely impossible to maintain. Many books have been written on the subjects of universal basic income and universal health care, so this is more of a cursory examination rather than an exhaustive analysis.

The bottom line is that the only states that will survive the transition to a digital society are the ones that separate basic needs such as food, shelter, and other necessities from work and labor. Eventually, human labor will be unnecessary and a new model needs to be implemented to ensure a successful society. The subject of human labor is a very important topic when analyzing the accessibility barriers to a smooth transition to a digital society. The right to exist is a fundamental human right. And it is very difficult for a human to sustain their existence in a society where human labor has no value. But that is where evolution is taking us. Eventually, human labor will have no value. It is inevitable. And so, human rights laws and constitutions need to take this fact into consideration.

This is another example of a topic that has a very narrow window of opportunity in which to address a key attribute, and a dreadful consequence for those states that do not utilize their small window of opportunity in which to prepare for the future. This is a can that not only should not, it can not, be kicked down the road. There is no more road left to kick it down, only a cliff which is the abyss of extinction. There are a large collection of loosely affiliated labor unions which do their members a world of benefit, and which ensure the collective good of their organizations. These organizations have, for over a century, fought on behalf of their members to provide fair pay and fair rewards for an honest day of work. And these groups continue this amazing advocacy.

It is vital that these groups continue their worker advocacy by pushing for laws that enshrine housing as a human right. Laws that enshrine food as a human right. Laws that enshrine healthcare as a human right. In so doing, not only will the workers and laborers of today be protected in their rights of fair pay and rewards for their work, but the humans of tomorrow will be prepared for the enjoyment of basic human rights in a world where jobs don’t exist. As unfortunate as it is to say, now is the time to prepare for the end of labor value. And there is much work to be done to codify the basic necessities of human existence into human rights laws and constitutional rules. This cannot be left to chance, it must be fought for with all the same vigor as has been deployed in the labor victories of yesteryear.

Most first world countries have vast amounts of public land that are intentionally unused for human use. From an environmental perspective, this is important and necessary. But it is also artificial scarcity. It is within the power of a state to also dedicate public land for humans to dwell upon. The fact that they do not currently do this in most of the western hemisphere leads to an artificial scarcity in housing, which combined with a building construction permit process that is intentionally difficult and expensive, leads to a real estate market that is replete with housing valuations that are well beyond what a natural supposed free market would sustain. This is really the problem. There are no free markets. The phrase itself is a myth that is spoken by the leaders of states who espouse the capitalist mode of economy, and as such need good marketing terms to make the disadvantaged citizens feel good about the prospects that some day they might be rich. It will never happen, for all the previously stated reasons concerning judicial prejudice.

But the point to be made here is giving all digital citizens access, and that includes access to the housing resources that previous generations of politicians have locked away with the tools of creating artificial scarcity. There seems to be an ongoing mistake in guessing that the transition to a digital society is decades away and no consideration needs to be given to it at all. This is a very dangerous way of thinking. The early stages of the transition have already begun. Kicking the can down the road is a glorious way of ensuring a messy transition, if not an outright extinction. In the new digital society, the existence of a cyberhuman is as fundamental as the physical existence of a human. The right to exist is inalienable. Much of the current infrastructure relating to digital pathways are owned and operated by corporations. And corporations have only their own profitable interests in mind.

A cyberhuman can not safeguard their own right to exist when it is at the mercy of a private company that places no value in cyberhuman rights. When a corporation can modify and delete data relating to the cyberhuman at their own leisure, all rights to exist are effectively taken away. This is a key feature in accessibility that must be addressed. And it is in fact being addressed, in locations where digital privacy rights are fundamentally important to both political leaders and citizens alike. Unfortunately, in the United States it is not only unaddressed by the state itself, but American political leaders are actively pushing for private corporations to make all decisions on digital pathways.

This is in fact sowing the seeds of the extinction of America as a participant in the cyberhuman digital society. To say that this is a barrier to the smooth transition to a digital society is an understatement. It is not too late yet to come to the proper understanding of the severity of this problem and rectify the infrastructure dilemma. But the window of opportunity is very narrow, and will close quickly. And that is the whole point of this Manifesto in the first place. The opportunity to address these prohibitive barriers have been laid out. Now it is the responsibility of the citizens to hold their leaders accountable, and for the world leaders to make the correct decisions for ensuring their collective place in a new digital society. Digital public squares and town halls are essentially the same as physical public squares and town halls, and it is vital that the state itself provide these benefits to society as a basic form of accessibility.

The state itself is used to providing physical libraries and parks for its citizens to gather in. This model of public good has existed since at least Roman times, if not even ancient Egyptian times. Thus far in the evolution of technologies, virtual public goods such as this have been left to private corporations to develop and release. As has been previously mentioned, corporations that value only profits and the accumulation of their own wealth have a very poor track record in providing benefits to the citizens of the state, and it is extremely foolish to expect otherwise in the future. Deliberate efforts must be made to fund and build a digital presence for the cyberhuman society to dwell in. This is not something that can be left to chance. The good news is that governmental entities have a wonderful track record of urban planning and civic design, so these same skills can be put to full use in planning for the new digital society.

In Summary

Humanity is going to transition into a digital society. The rise of the cyberhuman is inevitable, in spite of all efforts to stop or delay it. As has previously been discussed, there are old order societal principles that will significantly hold back any and all states that refuse to address them. The consequences for refusing to evolve with the rest of the world are significant. For those that refuse to allow a smooth transition into a digital society, a very messy and possibly catastrophic transition awaits. Riots and massive social upheaval will plague cities that have abandoned their citizens and can no longer provide them any resources. The social unrest will be relatively short lived, because evolution and extinction bring about a ready new order to fill the void that was left behind. For those that are concerned about their future and that of society itself, now is the time to start preparing for a true digital society. And for some, that may mean physically relocating to a jurisdiction that has the best chance of success during the transitionary period. This is not a horror story, and far from a dark tale of despair and dystopia.

The future of digital society is one of unlimited possibilities and benefits. It is the natural progression of evolution that started from the tiniest single-celled organisms until today. If there are any cautionary tones in the words you have read here, it is because there have been inadequate preparations for the dawning of this new age of existence. And unfortunately, these inadequate preparations are largely the result of the three previously mentioned barriers that many societies have erected in their meanderings through the growth of civilization. Up until now, excuses can be made about why a state finds itself trapped in a cycle of destruction which has prevented a more utopian society. That is no longer the case. The window of opportunity for laying the foundations for the new digital society is small, and that window is closing further by the day. There is great and significant work that must be put into the preparations for tomorrow.

Laws must be passed, and the passage of these laws will inevitably bring out fierce opposition from the entrenched owners of capital and their desire to continue their unfettered accumulation of wealth. Laws that protect the basic rights of a citizen to sustain an existence. The blinders of ignorance must be lifted, and the teaching and education of all humans must be consistent with the known principles of science. Digital infrastructure must be built, and this digital infrastructure must exclude any and all private interest in that infrastructure. It is the state’s responsibility to ensure the wellbeing of all its citizens, and that wellbeing is not at all served by private partnership. The rise of the cyberhuman is the pinnacle of the natural processes that the earth and its solar system started when it was birthed from the ashes of a previous star. And perhaps it will only be the cyberhuman that can conclusively determine whether any other civilizations exist in the galaxy we occupy. The key to evolution is giving your species a fighting chance to continue its legacy. And those that give their species a chance to continue to evolve will be rewarded. Whether you choose to collect your reward or not is up to you.