The Human & Social Perspective

Humans as custodians/stewards, humanity in its biology & ecology, ethics & responsibility, beliefs & values, mindsets & behavior, education & consciousness, cooperation & empowerment, power & institutions, sovereignty & legitimacy.  All issues seen through this lense.

This needs some serious cleanup and reshaping… will be working on it… please comment  (H)

Compliance & law & beyond

• Go after abuses, remove the dishonest…
• Corporations need to be better controlled and compliance needs to be better done by independent bodies.
• We need corporations to solve problems. The question becomes – how to safely use those corporations for society’s best interest. One solution is the competitive market, solid contractual commitments, and government oversight with political interference.
• Let the government set the standards and have the private sector do the enforcement.
• Boards, management and intermediaries should respect the concept of managing other people’s money
• Basic principles: 1) massive education and 2) a mechanism for making the individual (and thus society) accountable and empowered for ensuring the sustainability of humanity on earth.
• Redefine and explore what freedom means?

Consciousness & behavior

• Can behaviors change if there is no “money” involved… money to make…
• Behaviors cannot be changed (i.e. engineered). Need a “change of heart”, instituting of conscience, getting closer to the “truth”, increased consciousness.
• “The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” -Alvin Toffler
• How can personal moral responsibility spread across a country and planet for influence and change?
• Currently 1/3 “gets it”, 1/3 active supporters of the status quo (willing stooges of the plutocracy), 1/3 don’t care…
• Don Beck and Chris Cowan’s spiral dynamics and the All Quadrants All Levels approach subsequently developed by Wilber. http://robertjrgraham.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/spiral_dynamics_aqal_BIG.jpg
• Ken Wilber: When 10% reach a new level of consciousness: tipping point/revolution. We are close…

Human nature, moral philosophy

• An interesting paper in French –interesting question: can you change a society that you hate? In French. Tough read, 44 pages http://www.les-renseignements-genereux.org/textes/13080
• Need a global society to support our global economy. Reinstate the other half of human nature: collaboration and solidarity. But solidarity (welfare) must not be seen as a civic right but rather a “safety net mutualized insurance”. Must not breed dependence, must be a factor for enablement and resilience.
• Foster an ethos of humanity, capitalism with a conscience, based on “qualities”, a virtuous ethic (do things right), traits and character of sustainability (Vlad), attitudes/way of doing things right.
• An “honest free-market” system is based on moral principles and it always coexists with “dishonest market system” (The Market for Lemons). If the moral principles deteriorate, the “honest system” collapses. It can be stable, though, if a “pressure” (the volume of deals in the given amount of time) on the “honest” market is high enough (see http://bit.ly/fmVmy5 , page 56 thermodynamics?). What can we do to keep the pressure on the honest market up? Which is the dishonest market when some border fraudulent behaviors have become the norm? Will securing survival of the “honest free-market” solve the problems?
• What is an honest finance/resource market, when the negative pressure is embedded in [computer] systems with loss of control and accountability (automated transaction orders, complexity of derivatives mechanisms & products, computer programs to “beat” the system; “self fulfilling” information…). How can behaviors of the finance market change under market pressure, when the “market” has very limited means of pressure other than the ones that need to be enforced: tax, regulation, restriction, law, jail…
• According to evolutionary economics it is trust that lies at the heart of every economic transaction. By definition, it is trusting in ourselves (& each other) that can propel us forward.
• In terms of (r)evolutionary thinking, one of the things that would automatically happen as a result of profound transformation is that economics would no longer continue to be over-valued in terms of our designs it would take a more natural place along with other human values, spiritual, social, political, aesthetic etc.
• The determination of ‘what is right for the individual’ must be done by the individual; it can’t be done ‘for’ us. I see the question as first, determining the (minimal) basic agreements each individual must accept for any cooperative existence, and then for the community to work towards offering the widest possible range of meaningful ways to contribute, including, and most importantly: encouraging each individual to create such opportunities, contributions, ways of being, individually and together. This leads to the task of developing alternative measures of performance for the community: I had worked on one based on the range and value of the occasion opportunities available.
• The emphasis on values is right on but values operate primarily in the influence field – they help us create our priorities but they also surface our differences so we need the appreciative level to transcend those differences. The appreciative level is driven by ideals, which are ironically purposes that, by definition, we will never achieve (Ackoff) and that is what gives them their transcendental power they are universal.
• So the revolutionary thinking the UN is asking us for entails
  • 1. Accepting that an economic model for survival has to transcend economics to include all other related human values.
  • 2. To create such models we have to reach higher to engage human ideals in our processes.
  • 3. Accepting that models are not enough we need action processes that address our most salient global issues directly.
  • 4 Designing processes that engage people at the levels of ideals, values and goals.
  • 5. Every level/unit of engagement right down to individual purpose has to be regarded as a center of organizing e.g. no hierarchy of control –the control, influence and appreciation emanates from every purpose.
• In other words we are designing pure, ideal democratic processes
• Your most successful models will include philosophies that bring a larger view and a larger good down to the scale of immediate self-interest — in the context of the larger view. The implication from your question is that change is needed, a management philosophy which may be evaluated on the macro, but successfully applied in the micro.
• All the questions are pertinent and all are subjective as they are the resultant of an individual’s perspective moderated by the culture in which they live. There is only one judger of the efficacy of anything and that is the individual. And this is why we must respect opinion because it is through the diversity of opinion that we create the fertile ground upon which epiphanies can be synergised. (A synergy of synergies, a nester of nested loops – if you like)
• “Oh, wouldn’t it be loverley” (stealing a phrase from Learner & Lowe – My Fair Lady) if we could harness all value judgments (economic,social and environmental) and render them together so that we could realise a proactive social benefit. Maybe this could provide the basis for a governance model?

The power of the will & cooperation

• Leverage point will come from people themselves; we need all to be actors in our world in order to deal with the big issues of the whole world. See how the “virtues” of humanity can be put to work
• Rewriting the future through changing conversations (Narratives).
• We are the change we want to see. Self-responsibility – agency in togetherness
• Have the discussions in the context of what is a society: http://tinyurl.com/3pvdslt
• Set up institutions to do just that. Let each participate in co-creating the future according to his talent and passion. Institutions that will get legitimacy from the many, the crowd.
• Those ideas with the power of the internet to connect people to the lager wholes beyond our sphere of control or influence is exactly what’s needed. Particularly those who have found their own way to conceptualize and bring into practice what I call the field of appreciation- to recall – I mean the field relative to a given purpose that lies beyond the field we can control or influence yet still has an effect on the purpose. (appreciative field: the attractor?)
• Cover off what companies and individuals can do not as a prescription but as directions for change. Actions flow out of that. The overarching aim is to move from surviving as a state of being to co-creating regardless of what you are: a human or the organism we call company, community, society, etc. We are the technology. The rest are tools for us to use at our discretion…
• Margaret Wheatley “Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world”.
• The great complexity of the problem(s) suggests to me that there is no “answer” but there are a million answers and thousands of tribal leaders (see Seth Godin’s book, Tribes) needed each with their best guess at a piece of the puzzle and a willingness to keep an open mind. The internet seems to be a great place to create a counter-culture, but hopefully, one educated enough to act without aggression and a willingness to have on-going reflection on the complexity of their intentions/action without loosing heart. Find a group that makes sense to you, join, try-it and if it roughly follows a reflective model, tell a friend and spread the word.
• Inspiration must go viral! Spread the word.
• How can we put the wonderful stuff we are discovering into packages that can help accelerate equality? I believe that transparency and access to knowledge will be the key to achieving equilibrium.
• Today was humbling for me as I realized how many fantastic things are already being implemented. If` we continue to provide access to knowledge to those who have been deprived of it, I’ll bet humanity can beat the projections by a wide margin..
• It is estimated that there are over 10 million full-time activists putting sustainability at the center of their lives.(Laszlo & Zhexembayeva). Add this number in our group to that and you have?? more. This is a viral, inspired process and does not fall victim to despair, loss of vision or fear easily. Focus and purpose will emerge. Patience is required to attain a unity consciousness… the ultimate goal.

Power – What institutions for the future?

Local/national

• Come out of the public/private goodness/badness politically polarized issue. Look at the difference within them rather than between them. Its more interesting to look instead at the force sponsoring both; we who act to make decisions on consuming (buying and trashing) and then on controlling each other (governance). If we miss it in one area the odds are that we miss it in the other. As such, the distinction begins to only help debate on ideologies, not getting us to look in a mirror. In addition, there seems to be far too much praise given to “business” approaches (regardless of whether they rely on Smith or Schumpeter to organize economic realities) and too much condemnation given to “governmental” approaches, even where successful. This seems to further bad behaviors (including incompetence) to business operations and explicit incompetence in governmental affairs.
• It is a problem of power (government/world of finance and corporations & other elite entities). Needs to be balanced with a counter power.
• Local lobbying, not international level. Little people need to learn how to pressure businesses that are more responsive (and have more diversity) than govt. Every little move goes in the right direction. Pressure on businesses more efficient as on govt.
• Redefine win-win, or applying the right “pressure”, to the right people, with the right arguments in a positive/appreciative interaction? A slightly different meaning of win-win than what the usual?
  Increased role of NGOs obtaining progress through positive interactions: This paper on “The evil NGO”. Points to positive and negative actions of NGOs
  http://www.eben.gr/site/Papers/Heiko SpitzeckThe Evil NGO – Good Intentions gone Wrong.pdf

World governance/government

• Do we still need a concept of nations, when we have to deal with humanitarian issues? Do we have to calculate the cost of material damages when human lives are taken? Do we still have to think about patents when an epidemic breaks up? Do we need a prior authorization of a security council when innocent people are being killed by tyrants? As I see it the old system is no longer suitable for this era of global convergence….It’s the era of the people not nations, not even politicians? – A call from the heart
  See The evolution of Mancur Olson’s views of his book, The Rise and Decline of Nations (1982),
• Alternative to US going alone is for the United States to forge an alliance with like-minded nations to establish the laws and institutions that are necessary to the preservation of peace, freedom, prosperity, and stability. Need to set in motion a cooperative, iterative process that defines the open society ideal – a process in which we openly admit the imperfections of the global capitalist system and try to learn from our mistakes.
• The possible leverage points are U.N., Regional (E.U.) and National programs that already have funding authorized for them. What they lack is a common framework (tactical plan). Similarly there are Corporations who have sponsored their own initiatives in a variety of areas that might align with a common framework (tactics) to achieve a common goal (strategy). There are also numerous grassroot organizations who would likely buy into this. So if the group could flesh something out that has systemic validity, it would be a matter more of marketing and project management, to get positive change started…
• Is it possible to move things at the UN level, where by essence everyone is a representative of a specific nation and cause? Is the UN credible enough to produce change? It needs reforms which must be initiated by its member countries. There have been things on the way, and in particular the reinforcement of cooperation with NGOs and corporations: http://www.un.org/en/strengtheningtheun/ . How does the “we the people” get some reality and traction? How can the economic and (geo)political actors be globally accountable to the whole of humanity?
• But there is always the tragedy of the commons. There is so much discrepancy among member nations. The question itself is viewed by developing nations as an example of developed nations’ exertion of unfair advantage and control, and an outcome of various forms of imperialisms. Developing countries have devoted tons of resources to rich nations, who while having the highest consumer rates of the world, now call for a plan that is sure to handicap developing nations from becoming industrialized and joining the club of the global consumer society.
• The World Economic Forum? Not much hope… (too many participants who do not speak, little participation from Asia), representative of the elite…. Concerned mainly by the financial… May be useful to work the elitist system from within…
• Davos is economic neocolonialism in the post-colonial sovereign world after the end of the Cold War? This ideology has led to every economic crisis since the European currency crises in the ’90s to the most recent and ongoing crisis in the United States. The meritocratic elites benefit enormously from cycles in money supply or because of inflating financial market bubbles and by collapsing them, that is on both sides of the cycle: upturn and downturn. Wages for all income levels below the top 5% in the G6 and elsewhere are regulated by debt instruments and credit availability (credit or money illusion) to keep up consumption through borrowing due to a phenomenon known as wealth effect or wealth on paper. This cabalistic behavior has roots in civilizational ideology and Anglo-European secret societies: to let global cultures converge on the Anglo-American, Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian cultural and behavioral attributes. And this ideology drives decisions to keep dictators in power, for example, in the Middle East because the shadow elites gathering at Davos have determined that oil cannot yet be traded for the liberation of these peoples. Elections in wealthy democracies are influenced and so are the justice system and the major global media.
  With all that baggage, even if such a plan were to be developed by a subset of like-minded nations, it would surely not be implemented until a real crisis were faced and felt by those in the US and Europe directly. I am sorry to sound pessimistic, but the human tendency is to rape the commons and not do anything until tragedy strikes. Perhaps it is a necessity of our evolution.
• World governance vs world government. An organization of the wise (this one or another), custodians of humanity’s survival and development with the support of the people, beyond national or corporate interests and a safeguard against regional or world totalitarianism? Can it be the UN or the International Collegium, who address the three great challenges – environmental, economic and ethical – confronting humanity today in a transdisciplinary manner: http://www.collegium-international.org/en/founding_texts/appeal.html

Next section: UN call – Sustainability – Summary 5 – The Infrastructure & Network Perspective