What Causes Corruption In Today’s Society? A Few Powerful Men, Or The Self-Interest Of All?

What Causes Corruption In Today's Society? A Few Powerful Men, Or The Self-Interest Of All?

Since the beginning of civilization those in power have successfully restricted the interests of the majority by regulating their values, by controlling resources through money, not to mention controlling the very processes that exist to challenge them.

Is it a conspiracy? Do such powerful men meet in dark rooms and work to figure out how to keep their power? Actually, no not as much as you might think. You see the hilarious thing about all of this is that such a process of manipulation is actually self-generating, justified in a step-by-step manner with basic self-interest guiding the whole way.

The real corruption is not occurring in back room meetings or at the docks. The real power resides in how you, the public, actually perpetuate, condone and support the very systems that suppress you.”

Change Will Come By Rewarding & Reinforcing Values Of Mutual Responsibility

Until the social premise itself, and hence the fundamental psychological drivers of our economy – balance, scarcity, narrow self-interest, exploitation and competition – until those are altered to the extent that the system begins to reward and reinforce collaboration, human and ecological balance, efficiency and sustainability, nothing is going to really change.

In a sociological condition where everything is based on advantage over others, what we call ‘corruption’ today isn’t actually corruption at all. It’s just ‘business as usual.’ I mean, seriously, what did you people expect? In an economy where everything is for sale by the very ethic inherent underscored by the false notion that we possibly can’t work together intelligently to benefit all, no level of supposed ‘corruption’ should surprise any of us.”

–Peter Joseph

If You Pay Attention, You Might Just See How Interconnected You Are

Old key chain in the shape of a small Earth globe

Old key chain in the shape of a small Earth globe

“Ahh, time for rest,” George said, lying down on his side of the bed. “Well, goodnight.” “Goodnight,” Sarah said. They turned off their matching bedside lamps. A moment passed. “Do you ever think about how interconnected we are?” she said. “Have you been waiting to ask me that?” “It just came to me.” “Did I do something wrong?” “No. Just-” “You know, that’s a helluva thing to ask when I’m about to fall asleep.” “Is it?” “Yeah, well, I think so.”

“So, do you?” Sarah asked. “Do I what?” “Do you ever think about it?” George turned his lamp on. “Why’d you do that?” “So I could see just how crazy you looked.” “I’m serious,” Sarah said. “I am too.” “You’ve never thought about it?” “Yeah, I’ve thought about it.” “Really?” “Of course. We’re married.” “No,” she said. “I mean with others. How we’re interconnected with others, with people we’ve never even met before.” “I’m turning the light off now.” He turned it back on.

“Maybe I don’t want to meet them. You ever think about that?” “I don’t know,” Sarah said, a broad smile forming. “I think I’d like to meet them.” “They’d probably ask me for money. That’d just be my luck. ‘Connected? Really? Gee in that case how about giving me some dough?’ No thank you.” “But that’s just the thing George. Whether we meet them or not we’re still connected. Somehow, someway, we’re all connected together. You should really think about it sometime.” “Why? What for?” “Because if we’re all connected it means we’re all interdependent too. And that means…”

“Well don’t just leave me hanging in suspense. What’s it mean?” “It means that we rely on each other.” “I’m turning the light off now,” George said. “We rely on them, and they rely on us.” “Alright, you can believe what you want.” “But it’s not belief. All you have to do is pay attention.” “Then how come this is the first time I’ve heard you utter a peep about it?” “Cause I just started paying attention.” “Alright, alright. I’ll pay attention. Now can I go to sleep?” “Promise?” “I just said I would didn’t I?” “Yes, OK. Goodnight.” “I only say goodnight once in a night. You already got yours.”

“George.” “What?” “You said it again.”

The Next Morning

The time was half past seven. In his Swedish bed with sheets from Michigan, pillows from England, and blankets from Italy, George awoke. Down from his bed onto the wooden floor manufactured in Portland, assembled from lumber cut in Japan, he carried out his daily routine.

Step 1: Turn on shower facet made in Taiwan. Let run.

Step 2: Place Columbian coffee in German coffee grinder. Grind. Deposit ground coffee into Turkish coffee filter. Brew in French press coffee maker (patented by an Italian), over a Milwaukee produced stove.

Step 3: After showering, select suitable clothes for work from China, Taiwan, Indonesia, Peru, Italy, or France. Dress and walk downstairs.

Step 4: Drink Columbian coffee. Eat breakfast made by Sarah from Pakistan consisting of eggs from Los Angeles, bacon from Chicago, English muffin (called an American muffin in the UK) from Columbus, and a glass of orange juice from Brazil.

Step 5: Grab briefcase made in Holland, kiss Los Angeles born kids Samantha and Patrick made from Sarah and George, grab phone made in China involving nine companies located in four countries, and drive to work in automobile produced in South Africa made from parts from Germany and Austria.

“What was that she said?” George thought. “Oh yeah. Something about being interconnected and interdependent. To pay attention.” He was nearly to the office now, one branch in a communications firm with offices in Houston, Los Angeles, Holland, and Switzerland (involved in North American, South American, European, and Asian markets).

“Pay attention she said,” he shook his head. “Just exactly what am I supposed to pay attention to?”

Author: David Prosser

Image: “Old key chain in the shape of a small Earth globe” by Horia Varlan on Flickr.

Connected, But Alone [Ted Talk]

modern conversation

 

modern conversation

“I’m still excited by technology, says Sherry Turkle in her TED talk, “but I believe, and I’m here to make the case, that we’re letting it take us places that we don’t want to go.” Turkle is a psychologist and author most recently of the book, Alone Together.

Over the past 15 years, I’ve studied technologies of mobile communication and I’ve interviewed hundreds and hundreds of people, young and old, about their plugged in lives. And what I’ve found is that our little devices, those little devices in our pockets, are so psychologically powerful that they don’t only change what we do, they change who we are. Some of the things we do now with our devices are things that, only a few years ago, we would have found odd or disturbing, but they’ve quickly come to seem familiar, just how we do things.

So just to take some quick examples: People text or do email during corporate board meetings. They text and shop and go on Facebook during classes, during presentations, actually during all meetings. People talk to me about the important new skill of making eye contact while you’re texting… Parents text and do email at breakfast and at dinner while their children complain about not having their parents’ full attention. But then these same children deny each other their full attention.”

The Allure Of Connecting When You Want, How You Want, With Whom You Want

Why does this matter? It matters to me because I think we’re setting ourselves up for trouble — trouble certainly in how we relate to each other, but also trouble in how we relate to ourselves and our capacity for self-reflection. We’re getting used to a new way of being alone together. People want to be with each other, but also elsewhere — connected to all the different places they want to be. People want to customize their lives. They want to go in and out of all the places they are because the thing that matters most to them is control over where they put their attention. So you want to go to that board meeting, but you only want to pay attention to the bits that interest you. And some people think that’s a good thing. But you can end up hiding from each other, even as we’re all constantly connected to each other.”

Across the generations, I see that people can’t get enough of each other, if and only if they can have each other at a distance, in amounts they can control. I call it the Goldilocks effect: not too close, not too far, just right. But what might feel just right for that middle-aged executive can be a problem for an adolescent who needs to develop face-to-face relationships. An 18-year-old boy who uses texting for almost everything says to me wistfully, “Someday, someday, but certainly not now, I’d like to learn how to have a conversation.”

Over and over I hear, “I would rather text than talk.” And what I’m seeing is that people get so used to being short-changed out of real conversation, so used to getting by with less, that they’ve become almost willing to dispense with people altogether.”

The 3 Fantasies Of Connections Based On Technology

These days, those phones in our pockets are changing our minds and hearts because they offer us three gratifying fantasies. One, that we can put our attention wherever we want it to be; two, that we will always be heard; and three, that we will never have to be alone. And that third idea, that we will never have to be alone, is central to changing our psyches. Because the moment that people are alone, even for a few seconds, they become anxious, they panic, they fidget, they reach for a device. Just think of people at a checkout line or at a red light. Being alone feels like a problem that needs to be solved. And so people try to solve it by connecting. But here, connection is more like a symptom than a cure. It expresses, but it doesn’t solve, an underlying problem. But more than a symptom, constant connection is changing the way people think of themselves. It’s shaping a new way of being.

The best way to describe it is, I share therefore I am. We use technology to define ourselves by sharing our thoughts and feelings even as we’re having them. So before it was: I have a feeling, I want to make a call. Now it’s: I want to have a feeling, I need to send a text. The problem with this new regime of “I share therefore I am” is that, if we don’t have connection, we don’t feel like ourselves. We almost don’t feel ourselves. So what do we do? We connect more and more. But in the process, we set ourselves up to be isolated.

How do you get from connection to isolation? You end up isolated if you don’t cultivate the capacity for solitude, the ability to be separate, to gather yourself. Solitude is where you find yourself so that you can reach out to other people and form real attachments. When we don’t have the capacity for solitude, we turn to other people in order to feel less anxious or in order to feel alive. When this happens, we’re not able to appreciate who they are. It’s as though we’re using them as spare parts to support our fragile sense of self. We slip into thinking that always being connected is going to make us feel less alone. But we’re at risk, because actually it’s the opposite that’s true. If we’re not able to be alone, we’re going to be more lonely. And if we don’t teach our children to be alone, they’re only going to know how to be lonely.

So, How Can Better Relationships Be Formed?

I see some first steps. Start thinking of solitude as a good thing. Make room for it. Find ways to demonstrate this as a value to your children. Create sacred spaces at home — the kitchen, the dining room — and reclaim them for conversation. Do the same thing at work. At work, we’re so busy communicating that we often don’t have time to think, we don’t have time to talk, about the things that really matter. Change that. Most important, we all really need to listen to each other, including to the boring bits. Because it’s when we stumble or hesitate or lose our words that we reveal ourselves to each other.

Technology is making a bid to redefine human connection — how we care for each other, how we care for ourselves — but it’s also giving us the opportunity to affirm our values and our direction. I’m optimistic. We have everything we need to start. We have each other. And we have the greatest chance of success if we recognize our vulnerability. That we listen when technology says it will take something complicated and promises something simpler.

So in my work, I hear that life is hard, relationships are filled with risk. And then there’s technology — simpler, hopeful, optimistic, ever-young. It’s like calling in the cavalry. An ad campaign promises that online and with avatars, you can “Finally, love your friends love your body, love your life, online and with avatars.” We’re drawn to virtual romance, to computer games that seem like worlds, to the idea that robots, robots, will someday be our true companions. We spend an evening on the social network instead of going to the pub with friends.

But our fantasies of substitution have cost us. Now we all need to focus on the many, many ways technology can lead us back to our real lives, our own bodies, our own communities, our own politics, our own planet. They need us. Let’s talk about how we can use digital technology, the technology of our dreams, to make this life the life we can love.”

How Weak Is The Strongest Link?

How Weak Is The Strongest Link?“A chain is only as strong as its weakest link”… I am teaching hundreds of students from all over the world, age 17-70.. all walks of life, various educational backgrounds: poorly educated, well educated, super educated and over-educated. Great folks, no matter the character, race, attitude, beliefs…

There are many things that have fascinated me throughout the years about my students, but there are two that surprise me the most for their contradicting nature. On the one hand, all these great people, who learned all the “right” things (values) at home and in school, and generally in their respective societies, quickly agree that it’s thrilling to be together in such a colorful, culturally diverse environment and enjoy this mutual sharing, enriching each other with their unique flavors and vibe. On the other, how often I hear them bragging about their national soccer team – “we are the best,” or “she is the greatest singer in the world” (some girl from their native country), or “we have the best coffee”… And when they return to their ethnic “clicks,” the most entertaining thing to do after a dinner party is to discuss other “tribes” for how “stupid and arrogant” they are, and how, by comparison, “we” are by far superior. And it doesn’t matter that a soccer team is only a couple dozen players out of the entire nation, that a singer’s voice is, just like that coffee’s flavor, is a matter of taste.

I sometimes ask my students “What’s in it for you to brag about someone you have never met as if they are you closest family? Does anybody really care about who wins what in what contest? And how is it your merit anyway?” They first look at me puzzled and wide-eyed, then half-frustrated, half-sheepishly say, “But… but everybody knows it’s true!” I don’t know what is true in their case, but I surely understand the “national pride” thing and all, and yet, it doesn’t get through to me how it makes one nation greater than another just because their few guys play sports better than some other nation’s few guys who do the same, and so on.

This whole thing brings to mind what Richard D. Lamm (now deceased), a former governor of Colorado, once said in his infamous speech “I have a plan how do destroy America” : “Celebrate diversity rather than unity… It is important that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America, reinforcing their differences, rather than emphasizing their similarities.” This is a strikingly bitter but profound remark in terms of how well he realized how easy it is to destroy not only America but the world altogether! Let is sink in – “celebrate diversity rather than unity… Reinforce differences rather than emphasizing our similarities..” Isn’t it what has always worked, since Julius Caesar? – “Divide and conquer,” remember?

If you are interested in a deeper review of Lamm’s comments, they are available. But his point is not what lies on the surface. He didn’t want to destroy America. And my point is not that my wonderful students, whom I feel privileged to teach, are in some way “bad.” The point lies somewhere between the lines of Lamm’s speech, and I think it is that if we wish to keep this country “United” and develop as a unified body, a wholesome organism, we need to focus on our similarities, not the differences. It doesn’t mean total assimilation but rather, unity enriched through diversity. I am seeing on Facebook hundreds of unity quote posters, links, songs, and some pretty large networks promoting the idea of unity and love. And my question to all of us is – what does it take for all of us to unite if we can hold hands only until somebody sticks their tongue out and says: “but OURS is better!”?

–by Irene Rudnev.

How Weak Is The Strongest Link?

Can The US Economy Be Fixed?

Can It Be Fixed?

Can The US Economy Be Fixed?Newly Re-Elected President Obama Is Expected To Fix The Multiple Problems Ailing The US Economy

Jeffrey Sachs, American Economist and Director of the Earth Institute writes in The Economist in his article “Obama has four years to fix the economy:”

The modern president must therefore not be the overseer of aggregate demand but the conductor of deep-seated structural changes. He should be the convener of governors, mayors, university presidents, CEOs, healthcare providers and scientists to clear the obstacles from investment programmes in energy, education, infrastructure, health and skills.

Mr Obama’s legacy should be to foster the overhaul of the US economy.”

It is widely accepted that the newly re-elected President should be presiding over a structural reform of the economy, but most probably not in the way the writer suggests.

What Is The Main Problem With The US Economy?

As the global crisis exemplifies, despite occasional revivals,  the constant quantitative growth economic model is unsustainable, as it is unnatural.

This model is built on excessive overproduction and over consumption of mostly unnecessary (by certain statistics over 90% of what is produced is obsolete), and many times harmful products.

This model is progressively exhausting both the natural and human resources, causing increasing social inequality and tension, jeopardizing food and water supplies within the very short future. As a result, human beings themselves are becoming increasing sick and depressed, the family unit and the social network is breaking, basically all human built institutions are in crisis.

The human society within nations and internationally is strained and threatened with conflicts all over the globe, and humanity in general is at war with the natural ecosystem around.

A viable structural change for the economic model is to first make sure that everyone’s basic needs are met, i.e. that people have a home, food, health care, and all the necessities in place to provide them with a comfortable life. Secondly, people would need to develop their awareness about how to live comfortably in today’s new globally interdependent conditions. In other words, where the constant quantitative economic growth model, together with its inherent individualism and competitiveness, leads to the increasing problems mentioned above, a new model embracing mutual responsibility and cooperation would literally need to be “taught” to people regularly in order for the economy to truly become fixed.

On top of that, such change cannot happen nationally in isolation. Since humanity is an interdependent network, any planning, decision and action needs to happen in conjunction with the rest of the network. As such, any plan or action people make should be in line with the whole system’s well being, otherwise it cannot work. It would cause harm, and that harm would return to the initiator as a boomerang with multiple force.

Any Solution To The US Economy Needs To Consider Global Interdependence

Only taking the above mentioned into consideration can the President or any other leader hope for a true legacy and a place in history.

Image: “tools3” by tigrre from Flickr