Mythopoeic thought is wired into the human brain itself. We cannot escape it, we can only deny it–and in denying it, allow it far more power over us and the way we think. The issue is not whether or not a given argument shares a mythological frame with some other movement, but whether that argument gathered its facts and then framed it, or started with a frame and tried to fill it with “facts.”

The reason I suggested that communistrobot site is because that is the type I would consider a creative thinker, Richard Anders the author there.
To me he seems very brilliant because he has a creative response to the coming problem of cultural collapse and Mr. Kunstler does not.
James Kunstler has made a pretty fair amount of money selling books. People respond to fear in the status quo of thinking in the box by picking up a book by him.
Another person that has done that also is Thomas Friedman of Flat earth fame. He is another person that I would consider a backward character with only recycled and poorly recycled concepts at best.
Why should we compete with the rest of the world.? We don`t need to. Why not just create a good society here, and perhaps we can help others in the future , when we have a little more credibility.?
Another person that I would consider a creative idea person is Gore Vidal. Of all the professional smart people out there , he may be one of the smartest. Compare him with Chomsky or James Kunstler.? They don`t come close.

Someone I know tried to tell Kunstler about the technocracy movement and some of our ideas to avoid this big future problem. He did not seem to understand it.

Well, did he not understand it or not agree with it?

Kunstler is not a creative thinker at all.

On what are you basing such a statement? I’ve never read the man’s work myself, so I have no criteria to judge. Who would you define as a “creative thinker”?

But that doesn’t mean that the oppossing viewpoints are wrong.

Absolutely! That’s a really important point to make. Thanks!

People like Kunstler have seized on the Peak oil concept because it will change our world.
M.King Hubbert , the oil geologist and technocracy advocate is much more famous for the Hubbert Curve , just one of his many contributions to science, than he is for being mostly the author of the 1934 Technocracy Study Course.

Someone I know tried to tell Kunstler about the technocracy movement and some of our ideas to avoid this big future problem. He did not seem to understand it.

I would like to suggest a website to give a bigger picture of this problem of technology and our Price System. That would be http://www.communistrobot.com It is run by a young techhead. It is state of the art commentary on technology and culture. He is not a communist. He is a technocrat, and warns of the real reality of the future if we do not change out of the current system. He is warning about a type of future Communism. Any way check out Communistrobot.com run by Richard Anders, a really brilliant young person.

But that doesn’t mean that the oppossing viewpoints are wrong. With the example of Peak Oil as described above, you can look at that and see suburban collapse, AND a ‘green’ post-oil world, AND an exploration and drilling bonanza, AND soaring energy prices, AND inflation, AND a life closer to nature, AND an increase in Marxism and Fascism, AND a dieoff, AND supply-and-demand economics kicking in. I’m not a great fan of the ‘Either/Or’ concept (outside of programming). It’s never Either/Or, it’s always Both and More.

Apart from the bit about the Rapture, or course, thats blatantly nuts

And now recently, I think my viewpoint on the matter has shifted poles entirely. Upon death and “seeing the Light,” perhaps everyone will see/experience exactly what they want or expect to experience. Fundamentalist Christians may meet Jesus, suicide bombers might get their 72 virgins, Pagans may rejoin with the earth mother spirit, and atheists may find their bliss in nothingness. Who am I to say otherwise?