The Abacus Equation

by Peter Stremus

  * * *

  Just like Pieter, Ian remembered vividly their first encounter. At that time Pieter had arranged for an interview with Ian who had presented his plans for a dramatic change in the way development aid was organised, during a guest lecture at Trinity College in Cambridge. The low attendance had not disappointed Ian, on the contrary. The few professors who sat in the room had showed up because Ian's company was their major financial supporter. But this lecture was necessary to ensure their proper support when they were called for advice.

  It was a freezing December evening when Pieter carefully inched over the iced worn cobblestones after the lecture, back to the hotel on the Cam, looking forward to take a warm bath. In front of him, Ian tried to keep his balance when he turned into Mill Lane and clumsily swayed his arms when his slippery Italian shoes lost their grip on a mean icy spot. Pieter had just in time been able to grab his arm and kept him up.

  “Shouldn't we stay at home in front of the fireplace in stead of risking our lives?” both had laughed from beneath their thick woollen caps, holding each other's arms as if they were ready to waltz.

  Ian had suggested: “around the corner there is one of the oldest pubs in Cambridge, The Mill, next to the university's Alma. If we make it, we'll be halfway to the hotel. And they have an open fire. With some warming and strengthening liquor we can than continue the rest of our journey without breaking arms or legs. And if we break them, the booze will ensure we don't feel it.”

  They entered the warm and cosy pub. Apart from some local regulars it was empty. The holiday period had started and most of the students had left Cambridge days ago to celebrate Christmas with their families.

  “Two Glühwein,” shouted Ian. They stooped under the low arched ceiling towards one of the small rooms where, in all privacy, they could continue their encounter.

  “So, you want to throw up a complete city away from all obstacles to experiment with and apply new technologies and techniques?” Pieter asked.

  “Please, not a city. That is so pre twenty-first century. Cities are a form of community life that is passé. They date from the times that it was required to live close together for social, economical and communication purposes. I prefer to talk about a society or civilization. Ever since time immemorial, people fantasize about a better world. They called it Eden, Atlantis, Utopia, Cockaigne, Schlaraffenland, Shangri-La or Oleanna. And especially in the twentieth century people started to experiment, I must say with no or very limited success. They tried to re-invent cities by building them more controlled, more uniform, symmetrical. Depending on your function you were given a determined amount of square meters. Those city planners failed and the result are the gloomy sky rises in the suburbs where drugs, insecurity, noise and dirt are thriving. Other eccentrics tried to escape in smaller dwellings based on renewable energy, ecological agriculture, houses built from waste, an island floating on pet-bottles and so on. Anecdotal experiments that are too small to extrapolate the results into a production environment. In contrast, my idea starts from the creation of a civilisation. And that should not be so weird or over-ambitious. There are sufficient historical cases where complete civilisations were picked up and rebuilt somewhere else. For instance in South America. I am convinced that a civilisation, the kind of civilisation, is determining the form of cohabitation and not vice versa. Take a look at the Mayas. Their buildings were targeted towards astronomy. Cohabitation is the result of religious, economic and environmental factors. I don't like too much the word civilisation. When I look around me I think we are not that civil in this world. But that is another discussion.”

  “The question is which form of coexistence you take as your starting point, as your base,” Pieter argued, “will it be socialism, communism, capitalism? And how long will it take before your coexistence has turned into all the rest what we have today.”

  “Old fashioned thinking again, Pieter. Of course we will need to make choices, I admit that. And it is utopian to believe that one form is the one and only ideal. This kind of thinking has killed many noteworthy initiatives. You need to stop believing that one superhuman architect is capable of orchestrating what is right and wrong. That is why many of our cities are not worth living in these days. What one needs to try is to eliminate those disturbing factors that ruin a civilisation or culture. In the end that should not even be so difficult. However, today all has become too complex. Let me rephrase that more precisely. Today many things have become unnecessary complex. We need to go back to the basics. Many things are complex because they need to be complex. Our science for example. As our in depth knowledge grows, the detail becomes so vast that an individual is no longer capable of knowing everything. Not even from his or her field of expertise. Knowledge has become a collective, supported by technology. Artificial Intelligence, databases, neuro-networks are all helping us to expand our knowledge.”

  He took a long draught from his glass and let the warm wine circulate in his mouth.

  “You know, Pieter, the majority of the people just want to be left alone and live their lives unhampered here on earth without too much hassle. It would already help a lot if we could avoid those individuals who are continuously trying to grasp the power. And yes I am referring to the traditional political and religious leaders and their dogmas. They basically are after everyone's freedom.”

  “You want a simple atheistic environment?”

  “No, there should, actually must be place for religion or spiritual life. However, the competition between religions must disappear. The multi religious acceptance is key and the emphasis should lie on the equality of religions. The true enemy is the urge to convert. Faith is for many people something to hold onto. A way to give meaning to their own small being as part of something larger. The hope that this world and this life is not the end, but the beginning or a step between. Personally, I also believe there is something bigger, that there is more. But that this is manifested in the form of a godlike figure or entity, that is doubtful.”

  “So what is it that you don't doubt?”

  “The laws of our cosmos. In so far we even know them. Gravity. Conservation of energy. Time. Our lives are energy. When we die that energy is released and is assimilated by the environment. The earth, the air, the universe. With this reasoning you can explain why there are, proven and documented, people who suddenly remember a previous life. And have you noticed that mostly it is linked to a violent death? Someone who remembers that in a previous life he has been a Roman soldier killed on the battlefield with a spear through his chest. Ghosts are mostly based on murder. Except for Caspar of course. It is energy that is suddenly released and hence cannot be absorbed by the surrounding elements. Because it is a shock, the energy stays as a cluster and can therefore hold a memory. That is what I believe. But it is not my religion. And I am not going to convert you, not even after a second glass of wine.”

  Ian turned and showed the bartender the empty glass and put up two fingers. “Two of the same please.”

  “We cannot understand the everything nor the nothing. Just like our ancestors who did not understand the world around them, we don't understand everything. And as I said, the world is spinning faster and faster, and that is a good thing. But many are still substituting their inability to follow what is happening around them with a strict religion. What they don't understand or can follow, makes them scared. And a religion gives them that mental shelter. In itself a very noble causes, unfortunately one that has been abused throughout the centuries. And that in all religions. It was yet another form of getting power over people.”

  “So Ian believes he is one of the last humanists?” Pieter asked.

  “Or maybe one of the first ones again?” Ian answered. He took a sip from the fresh glass that the waiter had brought.

  “Humanism never had a break-through as a philosophy and it is inherently not a religion. But even as a belief very few people have followed it. It was not the intention of the first humanists like Erasmus or Morus to c
ome up with a new religion. On the contrary, most of them were very Catholic civil servants. Take someone like Thomas More. He has even become a Catholic saint because he resisted Henry the Eighth. No, it was their purpose to be critical against the dogmas and imposed ideas regardless what kind. They were intellectuals. Intellectuals in search of the truth, trying to understand and unravel the world around them. They never stopped doubting and always kept on asking why? The most important question to achieve progress: why? As a small boy I dismantled my toys in no time because I was curious to find out how it functioned inside. And when my parents refused to buy me toys anymore, I started to open up my sister's dolls. I have been punished a lot.”

  For a moment Ian got stuck in his own thoughts and stared at the old wooden table. Pieter wondered how many generations of students had rolled underneath it in drunken stupor after a punting party on the river.

  “Humanism is an ideology that has never been organised nor conceptualized to convince the others that they are wrong and the humanists are right. It is so encompassing and it contains so many elements, that it is the all and nothing. The difference between an ideology and a religion is that the first guides your interaction with your environment and your fellow people. A religion should do the same, but unfortunately that is seldom the case. Only if the religion is also the ideology, than there is again a match. The neat businessman who goes to church each Sunday with his family has no issue to treat himself on a lap-dance during one of his trips abroad. Listen to my words, but don't look at my deeds. And that is the origin of the fanaticism in religion. The religion has become the goal. Not the ideology that once was the foundation of that religion. Because that is the thing. Each religion wants to be guidance for people, showing them a path to follow. Fanatics are rarely interested in the ideology behind the religion that guides their interaction with other people. It is about their self proclaimed pact that they have with an idol, a God. Their energy is wasted on convincing others, whether these others want it or not. Convert or die. Giving a purpose to their life is not something to think about. Those are the ones only focused on an afterlife because they have nothing to fill their real life.

  “So you are an atheist? Isn't that what most people blame humanism. That they don't accept a god?”

  “A God. We don't even know the etymology of that most used word in our modern world. So I really wonder how I have to answer your question. What is a God and its definition? If it is a simple image like an Allah, a Brahma, a Jesus, a Buddha or a holy trinity. No, I don't believe in that. That would be nice, a real idol game. Do I believe that there is something that we, humans of today, cannot, yet, understand... yes, most certainly. Today I am not calling it anything; maybe tomorrow I call it God. But I am convinced that we are all part of something bigger, interconnected with each other and with our environment. And we need to live in harmony with it. That is it in a nutshell. I want to initiate a harmonic society of which the driving forces work towards balance, progressive change and not decay.”

  “And how do you envisage building up that perfect harmonic world? And where? We are already steaming full power towards an enormous over-population and available land space becomes a real issue. Woodstock with its peace and harmony is a bit outdated.”

  “There are two aspects. Where are you going to build it and with whom do you fill it? And than of course the question what after that, what is the final purpose. Let me start with the where. No doubt, Africa. With the exception of the minor historical, but generally accepted, blip that you and I originate from the first humanoids that developed around central Africa, that continent has been step motherly treated. There is not one Western nor Eastern company that even considers moving its production to Angola or Gambia. Although that might change the next years when companies in their search for cheaper labour arrive to the conclusion that China and Indonesia have also become too expensive now that salaries become global. But that is another matter. No, Africa is still untouched as untouched can be in this world. Because of the far reaching desertification of the continent there is little interest from the other countries. Despite the fact that the Chinese have proven that they can fertilize the Gobi. Obviously there is just above and under the equator still the tropical jungle playing an important part in our climate, being one of the few lungs left. There have been different attempts to regain fertile soil from the desert, but as usual they were under funded or prematurely stopped because the result took too long to show. The only industrial activity that got sufficient funds is the energy industry with their solar panel fields. Anyway, there are a couple of forgotten places and my preference goes to the point where Kenya, Somalia and Ethiopia come together.“

  “Somalia? Not exactly the safest place on earth. Is political stability not a prerequisite either?”

  “Oh, but it's like with god ... what are politics? What today is considered to be stable is overthrown tomorrow. Remember what I told you about harmony? The current global political climate is one of destabilisation, too much duality. Like two equal magnetic poles pushing each other away in stead of opposite poles attracting each other to form again a unity. No Pieter, I am just returning from Somalia where I am working with the new government on the rebuilding of the country. The current leaders have realized that their country is rapidly silting away if it is only known for piracy or homicide by wandering gangs. I have also visited the governments of Kenya and Ethiopia for further economical development. Look at it as an African Liechtenstein. With some small advantages for the current leaders of those countries to ensure their corporation. So, I have good hopes that I will be able to redirect funds to the project. The lecture today was the first and probably the most important step to convince those old men to agree with my viewpoints. You might not notice, but they are the ones with the highest political influence, chairing a plethora of parliamentary commissions and workgroups.

  “And what about the next part? The people? Are you going to place classifieds in The Guardian, Le Figaro, USA Today?”

  Ian looked shrewdly at Pieter: “maybe not a bad idea. But in fact I aim at a combination of sheer coincidence and selection. Both scenario's have their issues because we are dealing with people, human individuals. If individuals are already quite predictable, in a group they become completely predictable. Of course there is the need to fill the hard skills. All sciences need to be represented by the proper specialists. Those can be identified because they are located at universities like this one or work in large R&D driven companies. Some of them, probably a lot of them, are quite frustrated that they cannot execute on their ideas. Because others mock them, work against them or because they have to make a living by trying to pass on knowledge to a bunch of teenagers who are utterly disinterested. The list is long, but not impossible. By filtering out the unnecessary you end up with a large but manageable team. But it is not all scientists. You need people who build and rebuild, maintain, replace and improve.”

  Pieter interrupted doubtfully: “that really sounds like a futuristic state with alpha, beta and gamma humanoids. Where have I read that before?”

  “Only if that is your starting point. Your premise. But it is not. The equality principle remains intact. And, before you claim that Lenin tried this before coming up with a socialistic or communistic Unitarian society, I will say that the individual is the key. The person, the individual prevails and not the form of government or constitution. Again, it is the ideology that defines the people's attitude. And that attitude should be present from the beginning, especially with the ones who are going to be the first to populate the project. Than the normal group dynamics will take over.”

  “Sure we can discuss this for hours. But I still have my doubts about the basic ideas. What will you introduce as law? What if there are conflicts and you know that there will be trouble, as you said, we are dealing with people. What's the economical behaviour of the group?”

  “You're thinking too static. Like everyone else you believe that all needs to be perfectl
y arranged. That you need to plan for the smallest detail, try to predict that a course of action will follow predetermined channels. That is not the way it works. That's how you create a planning straight-jacket that prematurely suffocates projects like this. Don't forget there is something like evolution. As long as the overall structure stands, the framework sketched. That is all it needs.”

  “And no big brother who controls whether everything is evolving along your pre sketched lines?”

  “My dear Pieter, you are really a child of your time. First see all the problems and no time left to even arrive at the possibilities. No, there is no need for a big brother. From that moment on common sense will take over. People who have freedom also display a high degree of common sense. In their planning and control frenzy, people have lost their most important asset: common sense. I want to re-establish that as a cornerstone of our project."”

  He stood up and invited Pieter to join him: “let's continue the discussion in the lounge of the hotel. It's a nice place and they have an excellent Brunello. Better than the fuel we have just tanked. But it has done what fuel is supposed to do, warm us up.”

  Ian paid the bill and both men slid, arm in arm, the last meters to the hotel.