People don’t care for the written word so much anymore, and maybe they never did. Maybe for a while, as children, we were taught with written words because those spoken by individuals could not be trusted to mold us. As adults, we seem to have convinced ourselves that the spoken words spoken by trusted individuals can be trusted. It does seem like each of us have our preferences for who we deem to be trusted and whose words we do trust. We also appear to feel like our time is too precious to spend it reading words from people who we don’t know if we can trust. This is the reason why newspaper subscriptions are dead, not because of the accessibility of the internet. Most mainstream online publications get about as many likes and comments as my own posts do. It’s just that we all see ourselves as possessing time that is too valuable to waste on something new and unproven by the herd.
John Wyndham wrote a book called The Chrysalids, which I believe that everyone in my generation has read. For those of you who haven’t, the plot is not important, just that I want to discuss the differences between projecting details vs projecting ideas.
I’ve been told that I should make videos. No one wants to read anymore because there is no time! Elon Musk has plans to become a bionic man so that he can imbibe mass amounts of data at the speed of our ever evolving super computers.
On the flip side, 20 million people are projected to starve in the next 6 months due to extreme weather conditions in four separate regions of Africa.
“Truth can be stated in a thousand different ways, yet each one can be true.”
– Swami Vivekananda
Personally, I don’t really care for when writers bog their readers down with details – too many specifics, like names and dates and references, confuse the receivers of information, not knowing which details to latch on to, or pursue further. But when we work harder to project ideas, rather than details, we allow for a potentially broader reception and hopefully find more connection to our work based on personal experiences with similar ideas. Details are more difficult to find analogies for, like figures and names. Imagine trying to project a number telepathically (this is where the Wyndham reference comes handy…)
Corporatism is something that I keep referring to, so I’d like to better define it, and I will use some ideas from visionary American scientist Peter Senge to help me out.
Corporatism is the global amalgam of capitalism, financial markets, capital ownership, and corporate management. It is the development of, guidance of, and reward system for our corporate executives, who in turn work to manage our labor markets, consumer demand patterns, and government legislation and regulation for the benefit of the players in the world market. This is the system of the world, as Neal Stephenson (one of my favourite modern authors) calls it, and it is that which we do not control, but that which controls us.
The pioneering environmental scientist Donna Meadows said, “No one wants or works to generate hunger, poverty, pollution, or the elimination of the species. Very few people favor arms races or terrorism or alcoholism… Yet these results are consistently produced by the system-as-a-whole, despite many policies and much effort directed against them.” I’m not sure how much I agree with this statement; however, since I do not claim to possess anywhere near the whole truth, I am happy to welcome this idea as a part of the truth, too. Nevertheless, it is my experience that there are people who work to generate hunger, poverty, pollution and the elimination of the species. Prince Philip, now deceased husband of the Queen Mum, has said that he wants to be reincarnated as a deadly virus to wipe out a significant portion of the population. Bill Gates is a supporter of eugenics and is on record saying that it would be best if our human population was diminished. Don’t even get me started on Monsanto and their contribution to global eugenics research.
And there are businesses which make money off of arms races (they’re called weapons manufacturers for a reason) and terrorism and alcoholism. And interesting statistic I just found is that alcohol increase hit a peak in the United States in the years leading up to 2008, dropping to almost half the volume sold in 2009. Funny that, because the recession happened in 2008. I wonder who was trying to incite the distraction tactic circus, keeping people partying it up in the bubble before all of it burst. Hmmm….
But fine, if Donna Meadows wants to put these evils down to the system of the world, I can agree with her. Somehow we keep re-adopting our favourite top down position, being led by the elitist, corporatist interests that don’t seem to mind adopting the business practices that lead to the aforementioned results, which the rest of us seem to want to avoid.
From 1750 to 1820, labour productivity in England increased by 200-fold, with the advent of the assembly line. These were machines created for the express purpose of making money by increasing productivity and decreasing labor costs. Now, Elon Musk is proposing a future increase in productivity by 2 Trillion-fold, perhaps? I’m not really good at estimation, but that sounds about right to me.
How subject am I to my ego? I, too, have times where I am obsessively checking my ‘like’ status. This doesn’t happen all too often, only when one of my posts is gaining traction (haha, so not often at all). I can’t imagine what people who post a lot of selfies feel like on a daily basis. How much of their self-worth do they generate from the validation of others? Are you autopoetic or alopoetic – self-created, or other created? I know that for me, I have the drive to express myself, which is independent of the gratification of likes, whether within the matrix or in the desert of the real. Thank goodness, because I have posted so many things that have generated zero likes. But scrolling through my profile, I am impressed with my projections of self, kind of like I’m crushing on myself. I suppose that it’s this kind of confidence that is generated from having a strong relationship to self, and it is how I am sustaining myself, even when feeling unsupported by those around me.
The future is either: based in the past; a “negative” impression of the present; or an awareness based on reflectiveness. It is a part of our human nature to be nature’s agents, so let’s be like the North American natives and throw away our separate word for ‘nature’. It is a part of our human journey to be agents of change. Let’s stop relying on those above us, who have proven over and over again that they cannot be trusted to make decisions for the common good, and let us make the choices that will lead to positive change. Let us work with the life that we have, and mitigate the bad choices already made with good choices, made creatively in conjunction with all those around us. As Peter Senge says, “we produce what we do not intend because we enact systems we no not see. And, learning to see is a life’s work.”
Time to strap on our boots and get to work. It doesn’t matter who says they like what we do, because often times they are too busy to notice that something good is going on until it gains some traction. Be patient, because there is long, hard work to be done. We have not yet built a fully functional human integrity assembly line, and it’s probably better that we spend the time doing it individually, creating our new systems from the ground up.
“In searching for your self, look for it in the world; in searching for the world, look for it in your self.”
– Rudolf Steiner