The Codes Of Moral Matrices

Preface
Major Law Of Matrix
What forms Matrices
Matrix And Self Identity
Beauty and Sex Protocols
Early History of Matrices
Economy and Matrix
Politics and Matrix
Conversion from Hetero to Gay
Acknowledgements

Revision of History

Colophony
Social Paradoces
Empire of Israel
View of Garry Kasparov
Investigation of the Historical Dating
Civilizing Events
Egyptian Horoscopes
Dante
Classical Texts

Resources

"Book of civilization" 
Open Ended Time
"Investigation of English history"
Available books

Take Action

About the website
Disscuss on Google+
Codes of Moral Martices:   Sex Protocols

 

 

Laws of Matrix

The Economics of Matrices

 

  In the 21st  century we are so used to the notion of ‘private property’ and to whole  culture connected to the mechanisms of ownership, so it’s axiomatically accepted as the best achievement of our civilization. This culture is huge and includes business administration, communication, economics, government, international relations and political science. The magnitude of the Gibbon Matrix is colossal, but one should  acknowledge that the self -persuasion of the sense of ‘mine’, the realization that something can belong to me only,  comes  from monogamy. Stern face of gibbon looms behind this belief. A desire of the monogamist to separate his property from anybody else’s, created a culture of ‘private property’, while other  matrices only recognize group ownership. And if, or as soon as, our family type change, this superstructure of modern civilization will change as well.
   The ideologists of monogamy created hundreds of fundamental theories, supporting superiority of capitalism, as opposed to all other systems existing in the world. Needless to say, the advantage is overwhelming.
     It suffices to compare the life of Europeans and Americans to the life of the citizens of hierarchical states, where, according to chimp-matrix ownership is group based, also called “social property”.  The example of collapsed communist countries is particularly demonstrative. The ones that have not fallen apart (North Korea), - on the brink of humanitarian disaster or forced to introduce elements of private ownership (Cuba), otherwise they will not survive. Communistic Party of China “postponed” communism, in practise developing capitalistic society- sounds like anecdote, really.
          The Hierarchical Matrix
is extremely tenacious.  Today it can be met in criminal gangs, communistic or Islamic countries, or  in poor areas of Africa and the far North of Siberia. You can own a billion dollar company in modern Uzbekistan, but this wealth is just an illusion, because the authorities  can  arrest   you on any imaginable grounds and expropriate all your property, as they did for Khodorkovsky in Russia.     
    In fact, private property exists only in monogamous societies, where money is a major ranking mechanism and wealth is ‘respected’. In all other countries or social groups, the property belongs to the owner as a permission to operate, which is given by a higher authority and can be repossessed at any time, given to other operators;  this demonstrates   the success of hierarchical values over monogamous ones. In modern times only Western Europe, North America, Australia and Japan can claim a respect for  property.
           Examining the relationships  of the Italian mafia  in the middle of 20th century, where they smuggled  drugs and managed  prostitution in New York, one can surely describe it as a typical tribal hierarchy,  in which the wives received  regular but limited contributions from their husbands, while most of the money was concentrated  on gang funds, for the members who  were in jail, or for business transactions and  male leisure. Almost all hit men were tribal relatives, trusting each other and living strictly by their code of honour.  If ‘Godfather’ was retired, in jail   or had died, the leadership usually went to eldest member of the tribe. Their pension system, property management, business relations and communications were incredibly effective, without any private property,  as 99% of the assets  were placed into group ownership. The same effectiveness is demonstrated by Chechen ethnic criminal groups, who  operate as gangs in Russia,  or Gypsy clans in modern Western Europe, whose power derives from smuggling.  There are many other  ethnic groups, where the inner moral code silently and secretly places  the tribal members above the laws of  the country, where they operate  like a parasite in nature.
          Hierarchical social groups are very effective for assault or war, but hopelessly stagnant  for peaceful production and manufacturing, disallowing business initiatives from the bottom of the pyramid and assigning strict roles for each member. This is why the private property system and capitalism have had  a tremendous success over the militarized USSR,  tribal castes in India, or primitive tribes in the Brazilian jungle,  who have never invented a wheel, while having the same brain potential as any modern European. .
           Monogamy has other interests;  it fights group ownership  for resources, tending to convert any resource to the direct monetary equivalent for easier exchange, which provides  a direct ranking mechanism for a couple of humans. The only Holy Grail for capitalism is the microscopic family itself, and the Republicans in America are being very conservative about it, trying to protect the core of the  matrix. Having  a small family size makes it easier  to move labour, meeting needs of production and distribution. However, the abilities of monetary capitalism are already exhausted, and it’s simple to understand why – the reasons to work are changing.
          The  primary stimulus for working is not the same from one moral system to another. The   hierarchical code forces people to work, combining harsh methods of compulsion with little monetary reward. By the year 1938, Germany, USSR and Japan widely used hard labour which can  only qualify as  slavery or serfdom, where  all people were strictly arranged without the ability to change profession or their living. Fantastically enough, a lot of people liked it and fully adjusted to it;  they remembered  the times of slavery as the best of their lives and cursed  modern freedoms.
          This ability to adjust is  a special phenomenon in hierarchical females.  Women can find friendship and even love with their kidnappers and rapists; they can classify a beating as a sign of affection, justifying practically anything for the sake of a continued reproduction cycle. And once they have got used to a certain lifestyle, they will protect it furiously, like women in Muslim countries, who vote  to wear a burqa to cover  their faces in public places. This protection comes from a strict logic, “if I am reproductively successful, our system is good”, regardless of poorness,  lack of human rights or, in some cases, cannibalism.
          Yes, even eating other humans has a strict logical agenda and morality. Ethnologists of  the 20th century reported some poor tribes in the jungles of Africa with   the custom of assigning to the grown son a responsibility to kill his father and suck his brain out, using a straw, to absorb his wisdom. It’s not hard to understand why - the tribes in poor places don’t have resources to feed the elders and develop traditions to get rid of them. Similar acts existed in Japan where  the son would carry  his old father to the mountain and leave him  there to die. Interestingly enough in both cases the  matrix has programmed old people to be proud of such endings and to voluntarily prepare themselves for the death.. 
          Basically people will  do anything if they believe in the cause of the action. Even hard labour can be extremely effective, if the workers have no doubts in the purpose of such arrangement. The USSR succeeded in nuclear weapons, sending crafts to outer space, building submarines and many other things, while its nation believed in communism. When the faith was gone in the 1970s, the country was doomed to dissolve. Taliban soldiers are invincible,  when they believe in the help of God in Afghanistan, bravely resisting the soviet occupation and the NATO democracy mission. To succeed over them, one needs to leave them alone for a while, because their  matrix is extremely good for  fighting and useless for the long term prosperity.
          Speaking of prosperity, one has to agree that at the very foundation of modern Western production and the financial system,  relies on a belief  principle as well, and the  system exists only because most of humanity is  convinced by it (so far). Monetary capitalism is based on the axiomatic idea that people would work for money and it was absolutely true for many centuries.
           In any moral  matrix, humans prefer a higher status person for their sexual engagements. In the hierarchical moral code, a prince or some cool gangster is very attractive  to a female. Millionaires are the dream target of monogamous females , who  fantasize  about falling in love with a rich youngster from a good family, like Kennedy, for example.
          The Bonobo Matrix in this  case is not an exception; humans also choose higher status  targets  for their sexuality, but measure the status by different methods; this comes about when power and money  start  to lose their appeal and respect is earned by gaining popularity.
          Slowly but surely new generations of the21st  century  cares  much less about being in power or owning billions; they  become  easily bored just doing their usual business. Men and women still want high status, but the accumulation of gold and being bossy has little to do with it anymore.
          Modern society is turning into  a giant battle scene for popularity, where the measurement of success is an ability to look cool, to talk cool, to act cool or otherwise - to look miserable, to talk miserable, to act miserable. It doesn’t matter if you’re cool or miserable, if you draw attention, your status is high.
          In old times,  handicapped people, or different kinds of disabled or sick people were on the bottom of society. The mark of being ‘disabled’ caused a sense of repulsiveness in carriers of the hierarchical code or those in a monogamous society.  In old times, kids called any disabled person a ‘freak’, or ‘monster’ (just 50 years ago, here in Canada). With coming attentionalism, handicapped people  have gained a higher status than  medically normal people. The  new moral code rebuilds  itself on  female instincts and considers  any disrespect towards disability  a serious misdemeanour: it’s not cool to laugh at them anymore.
          When practically all the values of society are shifting, one would be naive to think the attitude to work is remaining the same. Day after day it’s getting harder to be a manager, to find a truly motivated worker, to inspire a businessman purely by profit alone. The Bonobo Matrix is bending our ranking mechanism towards popularity, and the true motivation can be seen everywhere and is somehow connected to ‘attention’ or ‘gaming’, or some call it “creativity” naming such people “creative class”.  
          People are volunteering to help  kids to cross intersections,  working free of charge in hospitals, going to  parades to support gays, or peacefully protesting the oil sands development in Canada. There is a  huge movement of programmers and talented computer men working completely  free of charge to make core software systems available for everyone, for nothing in return. Mysteriously, all these volunteers, have   dissimilar political or religious views, but are joined in one force, because the Bonobo Matrix is  most tolerant towards various ideas (being inert to their content ),  for the reason that activity today is floating from the bottom of society to the top, which never happened in political systems before. 
          Unlike man, woman doesn’t know who wants her, radiating beauty through her active sexual channel, and the process of building  a society on female  instincts has to allocate its elite by providing  attention to popular figures, while the targets of attention may not even realize it. For example, kids have become the privileged layer of society in our time and have a similar status to the upper classes:
  -  all divorce settlements are done for the sake of kids
  -  teens are practically allowed to have sex with each other while adults are strictly excluded by law
  -  any violence against kids  is prosecuted harsher than adults

Kids are repossessed  from  unfit parents by the decision of the courts or child services. In Canada parents  argue that kids  have  the right to decide what gender and sexual orientation they choose, practically founding a movement for genderless humans. Really, why can't a human be without gender and sexual orientation? It’s all just a question of current reproductive strategy.
           Meanwhile, the objective of having all liberties bestowed upon children  became axiomatic, where it is seen as natural, human, God given.  In reality, it’s just that maternal love has penetrated all moral layers of society, building a Bonobo code  that aspires to the adoration of children.  And this is easy to prove.
          Believe it or not, but all previous centuries were pretty harsh on kids, it’s a basic fact. They’ve been beaten, raped, sold as slaves by their own parents without any remorse at all. No parental instincts, no nature and no God protected them. The earlier story about ritual rape in Pakistan was very common. As one mentioned before in primitive tribal systems, despite popular opinion, children are just valuable resources  like cows and piglets. One can easy describe an average Chukchi man's dreams ; we remember this far north tribal nation,  follows  these type of aspirations: “it’s good to have a lot of cubs of reindeer and a lot of kids from women. Youngsters should work and I will be an elder.” In the times when  having  kids was hard, due to the lack of food or other resources, children were  killed at an early age – facts about murdering infants is reported in countless literature all around the globe including Europe, which demonstrates  a pure economical interest as  the basis for any kind of morality.
           The idea of having a young generation to work for the elders is fundamental for any hierarchical tribal society:  “what do I need kids for, if they don’t provide for me when I’m older? - This question is still popular today in any developing  country, and of course,  such an order of things induces  men to have as many children  as possible, which answers  the question why poor countries have such a high birth rate – the youth  are used as serfs, while being older  equals being upper class.
          Between the 1940s and 1960s , the USSR  had taken its first censuses of the Caucasus mountains region, where  poorly-educated population lived in strict hierarchical tribes for hundreds of years, mostly disconnected from the world events. Soon enough, the legends about incredible long-living men in this area, started  to flood  the soviet newspapers, telling stories about 130 year  old aqsaqals [‘white beard’] The ‘secret’ of such life expectancy was found much later, when meticulous journalists discovered many inconsistencies in birth documents, and came to conclusion that many respected elders were shamelessly lying about their birth date, where they tried  to add as many years  as possible to their age, which was strongly motivated by the tribal principle that ‘the oldest has most authority and respect’.
          Another moral example can be found in the Washington Post:
"People of the Middle East, the Muslim region and North Africa -- people of these regions -- hate America from the bottom of their heart." Khamenei said this at a gathering to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution  (Khamenei's predecessor was the Shiite Muslim country's supreme religious leader).
  Khamenei didn’t lie, the hate is real. Despite  many dissertations about the relationship with the Muslim world, our western political science is pretty hopeless at answering the simplest questions on the issue: “Why do Muslims  hate  America so much?” Despite popular opinion, and seriously trying to find a reason, one should completely disregard claims about the aggressiveness of USA or Israel and  remember  that  a similar hatred in multiple cases has been expressed towards any western nation that has any relationship with the tribal Muslim world.  British imams proclaim the imminent destruction of the United Kingdom. Tunisian and Egyptian Mullahs call on congregation in the campaign to return Spain territories. Adherents of Islam from Algeria, have living more than a dozen years in France, openly insult the French and their way of things in massive riots during 1990-2012.
          As one might guess, the problem is created when  democratic values are imposed on everyone round the world. The USA, NATO and the whole of the western world  don’t care if the target country is economically ready for such a  Bonobo ideology. In practice, Hollywood movies and the Internet destroy the hierarchical values of respect toward elders and embrace disobedience between women. This moral invasion, ruins the very core of well being for the whole generation of men, destroying  their families without providing any immediate economical alternative, and initiating a tremendous defensive reaction of hostility. As USSR did, Muslims, North Korea or similar societies are building ‘iron curtains’, trying to cut off these disturbing communications and accusing the USA and NATO  of all possible sins.
           But not only Muslims have these problems.  The Bonobo Matrix is preparing radical changes inside the western world as well; slowly but surely changing the very definition of social justice. Each movie, each book, each moral event by 2012,  promotes more and more lessons about the values that are higher than money. At  a time  when wealth  is most important for our society, books and movies   depict successful individualist who dig for fortune and risk their lives for some beautiful princess. The era of individualism has finished in the 1980s where  the mainstream of the moral code has switched to ‘team work’ and ‘family values’.
          Since then, money as a value and individualism as a lifestyle  has been  under tremendous attack. Multiple new priorities are introduced to western civilization, satisfying the demands of a unionized working class and ruining some businesses on the way, like General Motors, for example, which couldn’t withstand the gigantic payments to the pension fund anymore. The same difficulties are experienced by practically any large enterprise in the USA or Canada, giving us a hint of deep changes in the system.
          The  rising movement of volunteers and the obvious stagnation in public or private business indicates a restructuring in the motivation of the working class, bringing our civilization to a surprising outcome – people don’t want to work for money anymore, and classical capitalism suffers an unexpected defeat, practically while celebrating victory over monstrous USSR.
          So what has  changed in motivation?  To answer this question, let’s admit that  fear was the most important factor of a workers desire to do a job  (in the history of civilization, it was motivated by a different kind of fear) but the principle  has always been the same. People were  afraid of poverty, hunger and oppression, working quietly and  were scared to lose their jobs. The military power of fascistic Germany, Japan and communistic USSR, was based on the hard labour of millions people.
          But as soon as the western world became rich, the  fear of being hungry disappeared, the anxiety about losing dwellings decreased proportionally to the number of owned households, where grown kids  can often live with parents, while losing their job or failing to pay their rent. Modern workers don’t want to tolerate the rudeness of the boss or these tyrannical working relationships anymore,; they prefer  to look  for something interesting or exciting to do, even for t a smaller monetary reward. They are not so desperate anymore, and without the fear, money  doesn’t provide the needed motivation. 
          I addressed the question  of extra work time to 20 people  with a relatively good income of 60K or more, and found the following results:
    -  5 would agree to work extra hours, meeting the management’s demand
    -  2 would work  for 50% more per hour, meeting the management’s demand
    -  2  were working extra hours ,because their job is very exiting
    -  10 denied that they would work extra hours at all, saying family is more important

          While not pretending this is an exact statistical study, one should admit its a sufficient approximation showing  a picture where only 10% of the labour force  reacts on money stimulus over a certain point of income. So formulating it properly, one can say:
 The motivation to work for money is inversely proportional to the wealth of society, gaining the parabolic quality of falling to practical zero after reaching a culminating point of income. Yahoo financial tells: ”Barry Eichengreen of the University of California and a group of co-authors constructed a dataset of rapidly growing countries since 1957. They find these countries slow down by at least 2 percentage points when their per capita incomes reach around $17,000 (in 2005 constant international prices).

          Simply speaking, desperate and poor people  respond  to money stimulation well, and otherwise, satisfied with a certain lifestyle, a person is barely reacting on the prospect of earning more money, like overfed dog denies additional serving of food.  The whole concept of consumerism is based on the idea of the free market, which provides satisfaction for the endlessly growing appetites of consumers and, as we see, such order of things works up to  a critical point, converting itself to completely different dimension after that.  

          At the same time, one should pay attention to non-profit organizations, where the amount of donations to different  causes is increasing; for example, in the USA it  reached 700 billion in 2007, employing 13 million people. It grows faster than the economy, adding 5% yearly, while at least 40% of all donations are made by individuals, which has never been seen before in history.

           Summarizing the economical situation in the beginning of the 21st century, one should underline the following tendencies:

-      We are losing our monetary motivation

-      The price of labour is skyrocketing

-      Voluntary work is gaining momentum

-      A  larger amount of people are valuing other things higher than money (family, friends, kids and honesty  etc.)

-      There’s a  huge increase in voluntary donations

 

       On September 2011, the workers at General Motors  ratified  a new labour contract which obligating the company to not only supply  a pension plan, medical care and insurance, but profit sharing bonuses, where they practically become co-owners of the business (if we look at it in the old way). But from the point of view of a new matrix, there is no private ownership per se. Similarly, as hierarchical systems don’t exactly care about private property,  replacing it with a system based on the power of authority, and modern attentionalism tries to redistribute accumulated wealth equally, based on a maternal moral code, which exactly copies   Bonobo behaviour in nature.
          The new social mind works like a careful mother, giving more to one who  cries the most who’s drawing more attention. One can argue it might produce a parasitism, when certain layers of society would imitate poverty, disability or any other kind of deliberate misfortune; as it happened in USSR where limited working salaries were combined with high social benefits.
          It might seem an  historical paradox, but what was absolutely right in 1970 became completely wrong in 2012. The  hungry and poor soviet population were forced to live in idealistic communism that was clearly divided  between true believers, equal to religious fanatics, and the rest of the population who pretended  to believe in a promised bright future. The Communists exploited the idea of equality, in reality they built  a typical hierarchical society of strictly monogamous families, where the art of pretending reached unbelievable levels, giving birth to whole classes of moral parasitism. The same story repeated itself in Iran, only with background of Islam, but in reality, the society is again divided  between religious fanatics and the majority of pretending believers.
          Unlike hierarchical communism, modern matriarchal socialism grows by itself from inside  the human mind, where it is starting to use a Bonobo distribution system to  spread equality between social layers, where  not donating money is considered as greed, not volunteering as being lame, and not saving energy as barbaric. In such a society the pretension for social benefits turns against the pretender, since the children are ashamed of their parents, unavoidably denying double standards. The control system of the Bonobo Matrix functions from the bottom, from the lowest layers of society, which is incredibly active, unlike the passive underside of hierarchical systems, like tribal Muslims, Christians or Communists.
          The funny  thing is, that for hierarchical people such a new reality is impossible even to imagine. When Bill Gates or Warren Buffet were donating most of their fortune to non-profit purposes, most of the anti-American websites published hundreds of theories about money laundering, or the CIA ‘long hands’, demonstrating a fantastic imagination. One should understand their inability to absorb such altruism; in the hierarchical  matrix people don’t donate most of the property. Having real life experience in their own societies, conspiracy writers  simply suggest ‘all people are the same’, making reasonable conclusions, but people in the Chimp and Bonobo Matrix are literally from different planets, due to the radically dissimilar values loaded in their heads.

          In the last  speeches before his death, Steve Jobs [3] described himself as lucky, because he really loved his job. What does it mean to love the job? People who are say this  are just using  well known clichés to describe their feeling of involvement and passion about the results of their actions. Significantly, only around 20% of our population are people like Steve Jobs, and they work regardless of monetary compensation - musicians, inventors, artists, teachers, dancers and many others.  Modern industrial and organizational psychology has speculated  about their motives, writing  hundreds of books about it, and developing at least five, diverse theories of work motivation. While having no time or space for arguing with all these concepts, I should only mention the impossibility of applying one model to humans from different  matrices, and will shortly describe working behaviour for each moral code.
          Workers programmed with the hierarchical matrix, a tribal code or a similar morality,  need to feel a sense of power above them and can be very good workers, who try  to reach a higher position. At the same time, they will do anything possible to fight a competitor and can only pretend to work  as a team, and are always  extreme careerists, even against company interests. They can secretly sabotage the job, in  an effort to underline their significance, and they carefully plan a scheme  against the manager trying to grab their position from  them.
          Monogamists like money, benefits and vacations. The  matrix makes them jealous on their own territory, but they usually  perform normally  if paid  at the time. Rarely  having any initiative, these workers are perfectly suited  to tedious jobs with little skill  changes.
          Attentionalists can work overtime for free, can sleep at the workplace and can forget about the paycheck, but as you might guess, they don’t work per se.   People like Steve Jobs play on the job, having a typical game fervour, being a workaholic and forgetting about  everything else for the sake of the process. Many different thinkers before me, came to a similar conclusion, that the reason of “job loving” is formed  by seeing your own achievements in results of the work, and adoring them as a part of oneself.  Practically all self-loving people obey this simple rule, but   apply a different meaning to the   ‘results of the work’.
          For hierarchical people,  the  outcomes of any activity don’t have a meaning without promoting  their own position  in the pyramid of commanders; while for monogamists, the results can be accepted only as ownership of something. An attentionalist adores  their own achievements in any work,  hoping  to draw attention to them and to the author.
          So basically, the first type needs authority, the second type wants money, and the third,  adores great  fame.  In the cult movie “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” (1966) the good  Bonobo, the ruthless hierarchical  chimp and greedy gibbon are wonderfully described in one  timeless story, where each moral type does their best in the given circumstances, following different patterns of motivation. In fact, all moral types are motivated by the same principle  that relates  to the results of the work, it’s just the definition of   relating’  and  results’  are tremendously different per  matrix.
    In a new informational society, both  the chimp  and  gibbon  matrices are slowly dissolving,  making Bonobo game rules the most interesting for us,  where hierarchy is transferred to ‘matriarchy’. I  should explain why I used the  word ‘matriarchy’.
   The very notion of ‘matriarchy’ is a bad dream  for patriarchal men, associating  this with a form of self-castration or voluntary conversion to gay behaviour. Indeed, from a hierarchical point of view, any man who accepts the authority of women is gay; it  comes  from the very core of chimp  forceful sexuality.
          In  the Gibbon ’ Matrix, monogamy dislikes both terms - ‘matriarchy’ and ‘patriarchy’, because it needs to  promote  the myth about the equality of genders to support  the legend that   we should love ‘one to one’ forever”. As one mentioned before, gender is just a role invented a long time ago for economical reasons; so how can two distinct social roles be equal?    
          And, of course, ‘matriarchy’ is  drivel from the Bonobo point of view; this moral system doesn’t differentiate between the genders and the notion doesn’t make any sense at all. At some point in our future civilization, men and women will look and behave completely similar, just because the  matrix has such logic  for reproduction.  Each loaded code in the human  head operates the perception of words, manipulating the meanings strictly depending on our general reproductive strategy, and it’s important to understand how.
          For instance, why today do we fight for animal rights? Really, at first glance it looks like we’re going against any survival logic. But looking at the subject from the  matrix  perspective, it makes perfect sense and relies a 100%  on the inside  Bonobo behaviour pattern.
           First of all, symbiosis [long-term interaction between different biological species] is a widespread natural phenomenon. Literally hundreds of biological types cooperate with each other for the need of survival; bird clean crocodile’s teeth or bacteria lives  in a cow’s intestines. And having  pets is a banal symbiosis with a clear survival purpose in it; people used to use pets and other domesticated animals for the simple purposes of attacking, defending, working as shepherds, or controlling a population of mice. Now their role in the symbiosis  has changed.
          The  Bonobo moral  matrix, unlike previous moralities, defines children as one of the most privileged classes in society, requiring a lot of responsibility and a certain social status for having them. And many of the low- ranked, young or old population cannot afford or  risk this responsibility, preferring to have the replacement of ‘toy-kids’, which are the pets. So the new form of symbiosis  uses  pets as a training model  for the upbringing of new levels of parenthood, allowing the lower classes of unsuitable  parents to have ‘fake kids’, as a game,  which forms  a maternal attitude to  animals.  While the upper classes that have kids, don’t mind  eating meat. It creates extreme vegetarianism and animal rights movements, as a direct contradiction between the low and high ranked population – of course, in this case, the ranking has nothing to do with money.
          The progressing attentionalism swiftly converts all existing human authority structures, production systems and personal relationships into one interconnected ‘creative gaming’ reality.  It includes the justice system, enforcement, the whole political  spectrum, sex and most amazingly, even the power of distribution.  At this point, one should make crystal clear what  ‘creative gaming’  is.
          The word “game” is incredibly poly-semantic, having  in mind a general  set of rules for engaging  participants in some activity – it can be poker, Russian roulette,  ‘World of War Craft’ ” or “ ‘Bottle Spin’  (when players kiss each other, spinning empty bottle to point the selection). And as one can guess, the reward  system in each game is tremendously different.
          In the game of chess, a lot of various strategies are named after famous masters, who introduced them first. But when a child is just learning to play chess, it’s not immediately obvious what is an ‘Italian Game’, or a ‘Sicilian Defence’. So frankly speaking, chess is pretty poor in showing the achievements of previous generations, compared  to modern electronic games, where participants can see the score, weaponry, relations and life counts.  The easiness of getting certain results drives millions of kids to video games, because they have easy and immediate feedback on their actions. In the same way as Steve Jobs loved his job, rewarding himself by inventing good products and seeing his own reflection in them, the children can see their own victories, logging  up in the computer generated reality.
          The motivational mechanism for creativity of an artist and the reward  system of a good video game  are absolutely the same – for this reason one’s  uses the term  ‘creative gaming’ , joining the people who love their jobs and the kids playing internet role games in one notion; because technically they are doing the same. 
          Creative gaming is mostly adored by people with a good developed active sexual channel[‘c-activists’], and it’s the only way for them to earn a higher rank by drawing attention. Such people have  existed  through the history of humanity. Poets, writers, artists, inventors, scientists - all these professions don’t work per se, they play to see themselves reflected in the results of their activities, producing multiple passive identities.
          Fantastically enough, in the 21st century society, most c-activists view any job boring that  does not function  as creative gaming.   This leaves  old business structures for the new lures of attentionalism, making the most popular dream job for boys, games development. The  existing management of hierarchical formation fails on all levels, when being the manager stops to attract any real competition. With monogamy falling short, men are losing serious interest in money, where they vacate  old carrier paths, and the monogamous women can’t find any ‘committed  men’ - it's the Bonobo Matrix, preparing a new family type.
          As a result, the management and authority structures in North America are becoming filled with people  who have a developed passive sexual channel [women, gays]. The government and large businesses are trying to give more money to the workers with little results, in practise they are becoming the redistribution organs of a new society, where real invention and work happen  for different reasons.
          Inside the old hierarchical society, the idea of creative gaming is already born in the form of video games, reality shows, internet communities and interactive TV. And its only a matter of time  before politic opinions will be collected using immediate voting  on the internet, taxes will be distributed by the will of taxpayer, police will be required to wear mini video cameras, men will be castrated for sexual crimes, separate genders jails will be united as one, and  to have  a baby, one will need a license, similar to a driving document.
          Any major  matrix change comes with colossal collateral damage, and wars, and our case is not exceptional. The Bonobo Matrix doesn’t tolerate any child abuse and most likely will invoke new colonization wars, widely repossessing children and prohibiting the lower layers of society to have them, or limit  their reproduction. Actually the process  has been actively happening since the end of the 20th century, where  in the poor areas of Africa, humanitarian missions are spreading condoms and adopting children.
          Hierarchical businesses will be replaced by group family structures, where sexuality, sooner or later, will  reward each worker, creating a new family environment for endless creative gaming.
          And finally,  how  about money? To understand this phenomena, one needs to provide the short and extremely simplified explanation of the modern economic doctrine from the matrix point of view.
           It all begun in the 19th century, when the doctrine of  ‘real bills’  was introduced, stating that the bank can lend $500 paper dollars, (having in reserves only $100 of silver or gold) if the borrower offers adequate collateral, meaning something that is worth the same price on the market. So basically it allows the bank to lend the money it doesn’t own. At the time, it was a tremendous achievement  for economical science, because credit provides society the needed amount of exchange currency, while worshipping gold is just barbaric – as why should we measure things by a yellow metal?
          Modern economical practice transformed this idea into a slightly different shape – the bank can have 0 real reserves, but each day, overnight, should have on its balance 1% of all loans  issued, usually borrowing money from each other and the central bank, using a ‘primate rate’[‘prime’?] as defined by the central banking authority. This primate rate [‘prime’?] was a major way to regulate inflation, when major currencies in the world discontinued the gold standard.
          Gold is useless for supporting the human economy because with a growing society, one needs more and more gold to support an efficient exchange, while its production is hard and the product is not used per se, needing  to be protected and stored.  At the same time, the sh
ortage of gold causes deflation, meaning the price of products decreases  and production shortens , followed  by job losses . 

          So how much dollars should be printed without inflation?  The modern economy practice lets the banking system take care of it by lending paper dollars to the customers, which it doesn’t have, but has the  appropriate collateral backing the loan. When the loan achieves  its maturity date, when it finishes , the bank writes off the printed part, leaving the interest rate for itself as profit, and because this profit is accumulated on  ‘paper money’ , it’s the  new amount of dollars in the system which actually cause  light inflation.

     In western economy practice the central banks manipulate the ‘prime rate’   raising it to control inflation or  lower it to ignite borrowing and production. The  prime rate also reflects the level of risk in particular countries (2011):

 

     Rich nations                                             Poor nations

Japan                        0.10

Sweden                     0.25

Hong Kong               0.50

United Kingdom       0.50

United States            0.50

Canada                      1.00

European Union       1.00

Denmark                             1.25

Norway                     1.50

 

Costa Rica                         17.00

Angola                               19.57

Paraguay                                      20.00

Guinea                                22.25   

Sao Tome and Principe      28.00

Venezuela                            28.50   

Zimbabwe                          975.00

 


          One can differ easily a low risk environment in the developed countries with low inflation, and a high risk in the developing world, where inflation is sky high.  
           Generally, borrowing money for business is a major risk and, as we know already, risk takers always belong to the Chimp Matrix exclusively, no monogamy or  Bonobo matrices  are  embarking on risky enterprises. In poor countries , where hierarchical men are risky, the demand for money is huge and the risks are enormous. In countries where men are playful and immature, nobody wants to take the risk because the risk leads to success in power and money, but nowadays men are not really into these games, preferring completely different patterns.
          How many people wrote about the stagnation of large corporations organized as a hierarchical structure? Literally hundreds of authors, but oddly enough, when the flow of ideas in attentionalism starts from the bottom and goes to the top, the maternal domain of attention converts inefficient , bureaucratized corporations into perfectly functioning businesses.   

   This chapter is limited. For full edition please click here