A post for sapiens sapiens' survival

• What would a New Societal Contract look like? 

There are country specific aspects and there are global aspects. For the global aspects certain powers have to be at a global level to have meaning. A new societal contract would have to be made by world citizens (with the capacity to think, plan and act globally). This means planning and implementing not for a country, not for a religion, not for an elite, etc. but for earth citizens. Does it really take the arrival of aliens for us to feel earthlings and save our home?  A value-based system where the culture of an area has an important role to play but where cronyism, wealth, and violence are not the drivers. The weight put on knowledge, passion, courage, knowledge, empathy, hard work, etc. would be culture specific.
 

• How can we prepare for Digitalisation and the Future of Work? 

(i) Exploring and implementing true transparency, (ii) Creating a level playing field, globally to allow for the best solutions to be used, (iii) Giving the chance for and valuing individuals who can create and implement a human digitalisation, that is individuals with the abilities of a global citizen. This of course will need to be define and redefined and reredefined and that's not only OK but needed.
 

• Why is International co-operation important for our time?

 (i) Several critical issues of our time are at an earth level, although implementation may be local, tackling them at a country level creates an un-level playing field which is the main barrier to sustainability (including attaining the SDGs) and a humane world, (ii) Globalization is more than ever like gravity (Annan), that is, it is a loss of energy to fight it, therefore we ought to prepare ourselves to manage a humane globalization and that asks for cooperation, where the goal is not anymore to achieve a compromise between A and B, but a cooperation where we create C together where all get 100% of what they want as oppose to the crude notion of compromise, (iii) all this needs two things to work a) a better wealth distribution which will lower the chance for a people/country to choose violent/socio-pathological leaders (See the no asshole rule by Sutton), teach in schools the abilities needed to nurture diversity, ethics, empathy,etc., teaching aspects we have eliminated 30 years ago from our school systems, worldwide, thinking that this would give us a focused workforce. How wrong we were is shown by where we are. And a few other aspects that would be beyond the scope of this comment :-)

​

-->

The choice between nationalism and diversity, a choice toward making it as a species or....not

Dictatorship (Turkey Russia, China,, etc.) are good at managing uniformity while democracies (Europe, NAFTA, Japan Australia, etc.) are good at managing diversity. Unfortunately, the unbridled capitalism of the last 20 years is unsustainable for mankind and the environment and worldwide discontent is growing. But the actual path forward is one backward: return to oligarchy and dictatorship, including nationalism.

Life history is a development from a survival focused on the individual to  a survival focused on the many. Bee colonies for example, although evolutionary speaking an extraordinary achievement in terms of evolution, fall short in many aspects, not the least because of its low value for the individual., which at the end spells  extinction for many hives. Without entering further into the value of creativity and value (which is an individual characteristics before it can be summed for a society), in spite of the fact that managing uniformity has demonstrated its evolutionary and social disadvantages when compared to the management of diversity, we are tempted to go back to dictatorship when confronted with the damage done by asocial capitalism. As a note asocial capitalism is in every dictatorship, just well hidden.

The point is that for Europe and other democracies now to go back to dictatorship and nationalism (uniformity) is to go away from the only advantage won over the years, the only advantage we have over dictatorship, and the only tool to manage a sustainable just, thriving society. The existing dictatorships have a much longer experience and are at better at it than any democracy can ever be if they try to go back. It should be clear that in a global setting there is nothing for democracies to get from such a backward movement.   Additionally, democracies have a great base to further develop managing diversity in a more human way. Evolutionary speaking, it is clear that managing diversity is the path,  if we are to make it as a species.  Just as a reminder, dictatorship (being ruled by a few) was a natural first step of our early socialization (whatever the rule, i.e. tribal or religious leaders), but now societies around the word are beyond this: communism, tribalism, Patriarchalism, and value-less capitalism are imploding.

More than ever, we need to have the courage to move forward (managing diversity) instead of the “known” backward  (dictatorship/nationalism). Tools like Swarmship are being used with enormous success where they are developed and used. They ask for a value-based system, as oppose to a power/richness based-system and the few profiting from the present force/violence system are not really willing to let go.  The point is that even for them there is no future. Nevertheless, Swarmship has a gentle force (true strength , since violence is only the illusion of strength) through which we progressively  as a society (as  a whole ) can move toward a more humane social state. This will allow for the use of the talent/education/experience/dedication/courage/creativity of the group as oppose to the power of the few. 

What is needed for this to occur more rapidly as earth and conflicts have that forward timelessness? Each and every one of us needs to move from our inner fear of change and diversity to the capacity to look and engage with diversity (without fear nor violence). Without these abilities, which are part of global citizen abilities, it is not possible for an individual the engage diversity authentically. Contrary to math and languages we have not been trained to be good at these but the training format is known for about 30 years as it has been developed by a few development aid institutions who wanted their development workers to work at eye to eye level with the partners in the country where they were sent  in order to create the beginning of a level playing field (which is also so dearly needed in the trade area).

-->

Acknowledging our own diversity as a foundation to the one beyond

As foetus, my “Heimat” was my mother’s womb. At birth, my father and sister were strangers and threatening. I had to grow and learn that diversity is life and a need. Once I got over the fact that father and family were a plus, I then was confronted to the extended family, then school, then a working place, then a country, then a marriage, then my own kids, then a different profession,  etc. etc. 

The concept of Heimat/home (where I feel good, productive and giving/creative is constantly evolving and changing as I grow and develop my own identity, my own mosaic.

Some stay stuck at one step, always because of a trauma and that is tragic enough, but supporting this blockage at any step is detrimental for the individual and for society.

It is clear for most of us that a child who do not want to meet his family will be supported to do so. Yes there is always somewhere a bad uncle but we have a chance to succeed in our life because we get support to engage and because the good side of the family will put limits/educate/punish the bad uncle. 

It is the same with the rest of the steps of our growth.

To have a government stopping us from embracing our own individual diversity for capitalizing on our fears is as detrimental as parents who keep her/his child home because the world can be a bad place, sacrificing the life of his/her child.

Governments may have different motives to stop you from growing your own mosaic, like using your fear to gain power, but each of us, therefore society is paying the price. 

Extended across cultures, we have a ground for fear, misunderstanding, fight, anger, dishonesty, suspicion, paralysis, and yes war. 

Since this may not be a positive path , we need to practice the art of engaging with diversity (ex. with creativity, patience, and compassion). Yes, there are bad uncles in every culture but communicating constructively with the majority who are not "bad uncles" is the path to liberty that brings out our best, and that is at the end what counts. 

Staying home and letting the "abusers" take over should not be an option, and yes it takes practice but isn't it part of the meaning of life?

The fundamental reason for our failure at saving life on earth

-->

The fundamental reason why we are not successful with stopping global warming (support alternative energy, change the car industry), ensuring food safety, saving the bees, render agriculture sustainable, stop tax evasion, etc. etc. is what no politician is allowed to talk about publicly but what is carried internally as the  corner stone that can not be mentioned  by name, and it is the need for the so-called level playing field. 

Argument being, if the others are not doing it, we will loose our competitive advantage and loose our significance with the economical backlash that comes with it.

So, we can save the world from itself with the technology that we have and will have but we do not because the others are not. And with this ball we bounce ourselves into oblivion.

The structure of a solution to ensure a level playing field already exists. It is the UN. All we have to do is to give it decisional power. First in the areas where the world is as a whole under short term threat of annihilation or great sufferings (global warming, military industry, etc), then progressively phase less threatening areas where worldwide collaboration is critical like commerce, tax, etc.

The 21st Century politic of entitlement

More:
http://paulpiff.wix.com/paulpiff#!publications/c240r
http://matrix.berkeley.edu/research/are-wealthy-more-narcissistic
http://media.wix.com/ugd/80ea24_69eafdc5d036419e93600d80c6d5be33.pdf
http://media.wix.com/ugd/80ea24_edd136e3b72b07c93775906aee3dfa35.pdf
http://media.wix.com/ugd/80ea24_f1f3156bf15b3d57922cd9f146ed5897.pdf
http://www.psychologytoday.com/files/attachments/4330/npitimeupdatespps.pdf
http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_piff_does_money_make_you_mean
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuqGrz-Y_Lc
http://www.amazon.com/The-Spirit-Level-Equality-Societies/dp/1608193411
http://www.politico.com/story/2012/06/vicious-cycle-of-economic-inequality-077280
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/inequality-is-not-inevitable/?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Aw
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business-jan-june13-makingsense_06-21/

The little book that...

 

 

(R)EVOLUTION

-->

 REVOLUTION

I would argue that one human characteristic is at the basis of most sufferings we inflict to each of us and to each other. This characteristic is our unaware obsession for  “Easy and quick gratification”.

It drives us to false entitlement, eating damaging food, feed our lust for glamour, our need to surround ourselves with carbon copies of ourself, our greed for money and power, our disregard of environmental sustainability, justify violence, and the use of pretension and lies. This in return, makes us unable to perceive lies and deceit coming from others (the fish is unaware of the nature of water), as we are ourselves a source of lies and deception.

This is unfortunately our recent actual worldly trend, and as a mass phenomenon, with our actual technical means, it is a recipe for more global suffering or crudely put, for the eradication of humanity as we know it.

Enabling evolution instead of revolution is an individual and collective work of patience and determination, it is a labor of love and of true strength (strength nowadays need to be defined because of the false appropriation of the word by pro-authoritarians who see violence as strength while it is a disguised weakness), and involves the continuous exploration of the meaning of our own responsibilities and intended legacy.