James Bovard once said: “As long as enough people can be frightened, then all people can be ruled. That is how it works in a democratic system and mass fear becomes the ticket to destroy rights across the board.” He must have known how fear can work to suppress the masses. This is still day-to-day practice in many countries of the world. It is rooted deep in patriarchy and has become an auto-pilot culture that many people not even tend to debate. We act as if this is the normal way to go. Just because we got used to it during many eons of time.
But if we could transition towards a new ‘ruling’ concept based on the opposite of fear, which is Love, would we also do it? Or would we fear that such a transition is impossible or too complex? Well, it is not complex at all. All it requires it that you change your mindset. Change your focus. Stop with the ego-centric competing with each other for a small piece of a very large abundant cake. Start having compassion for each other and instead compete on how good you can help your fellow Earth inhabitants. Accept that mass-fear is nothing more than a personal perception for each of us allowing the perception. Is there an antidote? Yes there is. Let’s call it a Loveacracy: a kind of democracy where compassion and Love for each other rule the development of our beautiful planet. Good luck with your personal quest for institutionalizing your own Loveacracy!
David Orr has a great vision. His famous words “The planet does not need more successful people. The planet desperately needs more peacemakers, healers, restorers, storytellers and lovers of all kinds” guides us into a direction that could solve many of our current tough problems and crises. But what is it that keeps us running after each other, joining the never-ending rat race to (illusionary) success? What is the killer app that could drag us out of this self-enforcing, planet destroying negativity amplifying cycle? Is it as simple as just a mindset? Focus? Love? Care for each other? Or do we first need to redesign or re-architect some of our self-enforcing societal governance systems like Taylor’s scientific management approach, often leading to separation of thinkers and doers, or the free market principle often leading to separation of winners and losers or governmental structures often leading to separation of inhabitants and those who were originally intended to serve those inhabitants?
I personally believe it’s those major, fundamental governance systems that need to be changed. It’s not the people. We are not to blame. Not me, not you, not anybody. It’s our current fundamental governance systems that tend to attract people who are willing to enforce that governance. The universal law of attraction is at work, enabling the self enforcing. But if we would redesign these governance systems those people can and will automatically find new challenges. Because the focus would shift towards a more positive self-enforcing spiral. The universal law of attraction is again at work, but now enabling the self enforcing into a positive direction.
Any thoughts on this if this approach could work? Step by step, evolutionary, governance system by governance system or do we need a big bang governance redesign?
Business is usually about being Busy. Busy making profits, making sure you beat your competitors in a never-ending rat race towards (mostly) temporary successes. It costs people a lot of Energy. And because we put so much pressure on ourselves trying to win this illusionary rat race, we tend to make Business a very, very serious game. It almost automatically will lead to stress, anger and fear and all kinds of other negative energies. These negative energies are often self-enforcing. The universal law of attraction is at work here: negative energy attracts negative energy. And thus keeps the rat race alive. So what would happen if Businesses worldwide would introduce Joy in Business as part of their overall Strategies? (I call it Jozyness). Imagine what that would do to the Energy! It could turn negative Energy into positive Energy (remember the law of attraction). All we need to do is start adopting a totally free tool called Focus. Shift focus from being serious to being serious AND having fun and joy while doing Business. The world would transform! It can be done. You only have to start yourself. And it only costs Focus. Nothing more. Good luck with your personal shift of focus from negative to positive Energy and your personal transformation of Business to Jozyness.
We live in an attention economy. Unfortunately this sometimes (or should I say often?) leads to poor programming practices. Not your or mine poor practices but from all the others ofcourse. Consider the following example as stated in the Wikipedia article Principle of least surprise:
“A user is about to enter his username and password for a program or website when he receives an instant message. Some instant messaging clients will immediately grab the keyboard focus and move it into their own response field, because they assume the user will want to respond to the new message immediately. In reality, the user may be astonished to find that they have just typed their password into their IM client and sent it to their friends. This conflict arises because the two programs are not aware of each other’s existence, and cannot easily determine when they might get in each other’s way.”
So we see here that it’s the client that steals the focus. Look at the picture below to see how annoying it is if something gets focus without “approval”. The client ‘grabs’ the focus (which can be considered an act of theft!) and moves the focus to it’s own response field (which can be considered an act of greed or egoism!). Who’s to blame for this? The O/S architect? The programmer? The developer? The programming schools or institutes or practices? Or the “end-user” that didn”t make clear to the programmer that he shouldn’t steal the focus? I don’t know. Maybe it’s because we think that writing poor software is normal and should therefore be accepted. It’s a culture thing. Leading to mediocre quality software products. It’s a pity. I wish all of us a culture where we consider quality important enough to invest in. So we get better products.