====

“… if you look beyond the tumult of sensational headlines and well-publicized atrocities, there’s a quiet trend of improvement throughout the world.

But although it’s sometimes drowned out by the drumbeat of fear-mongering, the progress that gives rise to hope is real and ongoing.

Adam Lee

====

As we near another Christmas I don’t know if it is because I associate hope and hopefulness with Christmas or that I tend to pay attention more to the good things happening in the world (the sometimes unnoticed small steps of progress) than I do the bombastic voices of ‘everything is bad’, but despite all the noisy shitshow stuff happening, I do believe there is a quiet trend of improvement happening before our eyes.

I say that recognizing it is tough to be optimistic these days. And I don’t mean because of what is actually happening in today’s world, but rather because if you are optimistic you run the significant risk of being trampled by a herd of cynicism, pessimism and those unwilling to believe the future can be better than the past. That said. I believe the bigger challenge we face is a general reluctance to believe people can change or should be forgiven.

There is a quiet voice of positive being overwhelmed by a loud voice of ‘nothing can be good’

I mention this because I just reread an old Pope Francis Christmas homily. It was positive, hopeful, instructive and a request that we look beyond decadence and selfishness in order to raise all of human kind to a better place.

It is the kind of message you would hope a religious leader would give.

And then I made the naïve mistake of scanning the comments underneath the article <in several papers>. An overwhelming amount of comments were negative.

Either they:

<a> suggested the message was misguided <somehow some people saw it as anti-capitalism>,

<b> suggested the Pope was a hypocrite <because he represents a church with millions in assets>,

<c> the church had no basis to offer hope because of past transgressions or

<d> religion is bad and therefore what religious people say is simply fantasy <even if it is a good message>.

It is like people were seeking reason to not accept the positive message.

Let’s be clear. The Catholic Church and its history is strewn with moments of sin. And, yet, the Church has a Pope who not only accepts it, but is trying own its history. Should we judge an organization by the moments of transgression & sin <albeit they can be heinous transgressions on occasion> or by the true intent & soul of the organization and its voice for the future? That is a big question with an answer bigger than I can offer.

That said.

I find it disheartening that we cannot accept positiveness and hope without trying to burden it with cynicism or pessimism.

I find it disheartening we can’t accept heroic acts from non heroic people – when we view them in totality.

Good is good.

Hope is hope.

Heroic acts can be done by flawed people.

We shouldn’t discredit the words or the thoughts as we seek to diminish the bearers of the words & thoughts. Maybe we should seek to find the good in what someone says rather than find reasons to point out why the words are flawed or the deliverer is some insincere fraud.

This leads me to the bearers of the words & thoughts.

– Changing to do something good is being slowed by people who suggest someone cannot change.

====

“People tell you who they are, but we ignore it because we want them to be who we want them to be.”

Mad Men

====

Well. Surely doing good today doesn’t absolve you from something you did bad yesterday. And, yet, I could argue those who have made bad mistakes in the past, and recognize them as bad, are most likely the most qualified to lead today.

I scan the headlines of the papers and there are a shitload of flawed people saying a bunch of smart, positive, hopeful things.

I scan the headlines of the papers and I see article after article diminishing the people who are saying these things by pointing out past transgressions or their ‘lack of consistency’ with regard to their beliefs <so why should we believe their positive thoughts>.

Smart flawed people, who maybe had flawed ideas in the past, are often smart enough to realize they need to change or make changes.

I would like to point out that the difficulty seems to arise not in the person who has changed, but in those around the changer/doer. While the best of the best changers seek to build the new, ignoring the old, we the people, continuously fight back with the old.

Can someone actually leave the old baggage behind and move on to do better things? <a question we should all be asking ourselves in today’s world>

We seem hell bent on not letting people even try to change.

I would like to remind people of several things:

Andrew Carnegie, whose Pinkerton men shot down workers at the Homestead strike in Pittsburgh, also left the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and an international network of public libraries.

John D Rockefeller, whose use of troops against Colorado mineworkers led to scores of deaths, including of women and children, created his foundation, so creative for young people worldwide.

Alfred Nobel, arms manufacturer and “marchand de mort extraordinaire”, set up the peace prize.

Regardless. I fully understand why some people want to hold on to the ‘better days of the past’ and nostalgically wish we could go back to many of what are perceived as ‘better ways of doing things.’

It is natural and, honestly, comforting. But I don’t understand why we far too often hold on to the ‘bad things from the past’ and pessimism/cynicism and constantly burden people who, sincerely, want to do good things, show change, and offer a better version of themselves with the intent to create a better version of the world.

Far too many people today do not see much to be upbeat about. They simply see a lot of existing problems getting worse. And because of that they are tending to gather around anyone promising a return to an imaginary past era of greatness.

Some of the best leaders today are those who were in the past, and in the past flawed, and now are new versions of themselves and do not want to return t some past but try and create a new future.

People change.

We should allow them to change.

Especially if they are one of the valuable few who see the good and hopeful and optimistic in the world. For they are the ones capable of showing us light when dark can appear to be winning. In fact, many of these people accept the quite improvements, enable the quiet improvements, and facilitate the progress that humankind deserves. Maybe we just need to stop the noise and start quietly embracing good improvement. Ponder.

Earlier today I reshared my thoughts on the lack of civility in political rhetoric and how that fosters an environment of violence – either unacted upon violent thoughts or actual violent actions. I even wrote ‘the politics of resentment’. Which leads me to Trump. Violence has always bubbled below the surface in America, but where I lay a large burden of the blame on Trump is for using it as a tool of “America Greatness”, i.e., the violence is done by patriots passionate about their great America. It really was not that long ago that in 2015 and 2016 the Trump cult was being shaped with violence.

It seemed like just another day and another violent Trump rally. The incidents kept piling up.

Chicago protest fights. A Black Lives Matters protester was sucker-punched by a white bystander at a rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina. A young black woman was surrounded and shoved aggressively by a number of individuals at a rally in Louisville, Kentucky. A black protester was tackled, then punched and kicked by a group of men as he curled up on the ground in Birmingham, Alabama. Immigration activists were shoved and stripped of their signs by a crowd in Richmond, Virginia. A Latino protester was knocked down and kicked by a Trump supporter in Miami.

At that time I said this version of America is not the America I know, the America I want nor is it America anywhere near great. While I remain steadfast on the latter two, on the first I was wrong. I now know the Trump America and it is violent.

It makes me angry.

It disturbs me.

Just to remind everyone, one of the most disturbing moments, one which truly made me angry, was angry as I watched a protest in Chicago devolve into what could only look like a riot to the entire world.

Another reminder. A Republican, at that time, said: “Tonight the seeds of division that Donald Trump has been sowing this whole campaign finally bore fruit, and it was ugly.”

I am angry because Mr. Trump knew what he is doing. He was playing with fire. Playing it as close to the fire as he could without getting burned <or burning down the house> because in his own pea like mind he has decided that this warped version of passion will energize change and ‘winning.’

Just as he has shown a complete disdain for a ‘good win’ versus a ‘bad win’ he also shows no signs that he understands the difference between ‘bad passion’ and ‘good passion.’

That is the sign of an incompetent ignorant lazy leader.

I am angry.

I am not angry at America or its people or even most of Trump’s followers; I am angry at a person who wants to be the emperor who has no clothes. He offers only platitudes of ‘deals & wins’ as solutions to any issue he is asked about and, worse, simplistically twists the “us versus them” narrative into “we good people & they bad/evil people” platitudes.

He skates on the slippery superficial surface of emotion and an enhanced feeling of irrelevance <or being marginalized> from a minority of the populace who has now found a voice.

I remain angry even to this day.

And I get even angrier because Trump, to this day, assumes no, none, nada, whatever version of “zero” you want to apply here … responsibility for anything.

It is never his problem. It is never his issue. It is never anything but ‘the bad people’ <media, people who do not agree, Muslims/Islam, Mexicans, immigrants, stupid elite, etc.>. It is never him.

This despite the fact he is the common denominator.

And this also means, to Mr. Tump, he is never responsible for his words.

We are all responsible for the words we say. Everyone.

That said.

It most likely took me far too long to understand this, but while freedom of speech is an equal freedom for all & everyone, the responsibility tied to that freedom is not equal. Responsibility increases upwards. The larger the forum, the more impact as a leader I have, the larger the actual managerial/actionable responsibility the leader has AND the larger the responsibility to the speech portion of my freedom I have.

Trump acts, and has always acted, like he has no more responsibility with regard to what he says than the guy sitting at the end of the bar after a 10 hour day drinking his 5th draft beer with his buddies bitching about the world.

======== Trump supporter ==========

A leader has a responsibility to listen to his/her people but any good leader knows you don’t incite latent negative emotion within an organization … you show you listen, unite and give specifics on how the organization will progress from that point on.

Lastly.

I am angry because I have run across these faux business leaders in business and they are the worst of the worst. They are hollow of anything. And blanket their hollowness with superficiality or faux emotion. And, most importantly, they make nothing great.

Trump is particularly skilled at manipulating his version of the public to his own ends. And, in that, he doesn’t even recognize his divisiveness <which is frightening for someone who was leader of the free world>. I believe he doesn’t recognize the divisiveness because he lives in an alternative universe in which everyone else is wrong and the problem and protestors never have a valid reason and anyone not in ‘his crowd’ must be unpatriotic.

Mr. Trump, assuming he actually desired to be a president, never understood all citizens are his crowd. You either decide to try and unite by listening and convincing them of your path to ‘greatness’ or I imagine you just let them rot somewhere as you, and your followers, shun them. And, well, that’s what he did. And by shunning them, while fostering a violent attitude, he gave implicit permission to be violent as long as it was targeted to those he shunned.

I cannot remember in my 60something lifetime anything like this.

And, yeah, I am still angry.

And, if I am honest, a little nervous certainly unsettled and, well, maybe a little scared.

This feeling did not come easily.

And I know exactly when it happened. It was a March morning in 2016 when I discussed my anger at Trump’s lack of assuming responsibility after the Chicago rally incident and it happened as I said “I have never seen this before in my lifetime.”

Because I do know where I have seen it before. This is the divisiveness of dictators and autocrats. I hesitated to use examples from the past, but the names came very very close to crossing my lips. It was an uncomfortable feeling to be that close to comparing Trump to some of the worst of the worst leaders from past history. And what got me that close to uttering the examples is that instead of making a call for discussion and debate he insists on calling for silence and authoritarianism <absurdly under the guise of ‘freedom of speech’>. To be clear, I no longer hesitate to draw these comparisons. To be clear, as he harkens back to the ‘good ole days’ he even seems to encourages violence <under the guise of “we are so weak and need to be strong again”>.

This is bully logic.

Trump disavows violence and yet encourages it. He encourages a consistent ‘strong message’ <however you, the followers, would like to deliver that message to ‘them’> of silencing dissent, silencing debate, silencing real solutions, silencing critics and silencing competitors. And he fills their silent space with bombastic platitudes of deals & wins and divisive rhetoric.

While he’s narcissistic, self-absorbed, power hungry/crazy and driven by either greed or ‘winning by any measure” I almost think we are seeing a public case study example of the Dunning–Kruger effect.

This is a cognitive bias in which a relatively unskilled person suffers illusory superiority. This translates into mistakenly assessing their ability and believing their skills, and themselves, to be significantly better than what it actually is. Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their own ineptitude and evaluate their own ability accurately. When Trump looks in the mirror he sees only something superior to everyone else … maybe even superior to America itself.

Anyway.

I am not a huge follower of politics but it seems to me that consistent violence at the scale of 2016 was rare in American politics, but now it has almost become the norm.

And I am still angry at Mr. Trump.

Angry at his overall lack or personal responsibility. Angry at his disdain for the power of words. Angry at his lack of understanding of freedom of speech as it pertains to leadership. Angry at his lack of desire to try and convert dissenters, but rather silence or eject/reject dissenters.

Angry at his hollowness <because I want a leader who is full of a robust vision beyond deals & wins>.

And, mostly, I am angry at what he has done to America.

He never had any interest in making America great, he simply encouraged us to hate.

And hate is the foundation for violence. Ponder because this is important.

====

“So the universe is not quite as you thought it was.


You’d better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can’t rearrange the universe.”

Isaac Asimov

====

We talk about changing the world and ‘rocking the universe’ not only when young, but in discussions where we are thinking about maximizing our potential or maybe we do it simply to convince ourselves we can do something that matters.

In other words …

We have a plan.

Ok. Maybe its not a specific step-by-step plan, but we have a general schematic of a plan which showcases key lines and dimensions of what, where and how.

It is kind of a rough blueprint sketched out on a cocktail napkin.

Uhm.

But then some stranger randomly puts their drink on your napkin and the ink runs a little and there is an obnoxious ring cutting thru a key line or two. In other words, things get a bit fuzzy.

In other words, basically the universe you had planned against has conspired against you in a seemingly random way.

Yeah.

The universe is as it is. Despite all your wishes and dreams and desires to disturb or disrupt the universe you, well, you cannot. The universe arranges itself without consulting you or your plans.

That doesn’t mean you don’t have any control of what happens to you nor does it mean you shouldn’t attempt to shape things so you may achieve what you desire, it is just that sometimes you need to rearrange your beliefs.

Now. I write a shitload about maintaining you character and the core of who and what you are as well as maintaining a focus on the more important things <because a shitload of unimportant things are gonna be bright shiny objects that can easily distract you>.

To be clear. The universe is not something that is distracting; it is a consistently inconsistent environment in which distractions appear. Despite that, you need to stay the course of who & what you are and all the while rearranging some of your beliefs with regard to … well … what I will call ‘strategy & tactics.’

Simplistically, in my mind, you reside in this consistent inconsistent universe maintaining your individual ‘brand essence’ <distinctly different than personal branding> and grounded in a sense of purpose, i.e., what you want to contribute and maybe an idea of what matters to you, and rearranging your strategy & tactics to accommodate the universe.

This may sound intellectually challenging and mentally tiring and … well … a lot of work <when you were kind of hoping Life would be a little simpler>.

Well.

It is kind of tiring.

But that is kind of the price of living a full Life, well, okay, maybe at least some kind of ‘non-stagnant’ life.

I imagine everyone has a choice.

Try and stand still and weather the universe as it rearranges itself or attempt to move <forward, sideways, diagonally, or whatever direction you can  – because progress is not always ‘forward’>.

Most of us?

We just go on.

We step forward, backwards, diagonally and sideways, all with an eye on whatever version of progress we may have in our heads.

We do so because … well … what is the alternative?

====

“You just do it. You force yourself to get up. You force yourself to put one foot before the other, and God damn it, you refuse to let it get to you.  You fight. You cry. You curse. Then you go about the business of living. That’s how I’ve done it. There’s no other way. “

Elizabeth Taylor

Anyway.

It is quite possible that the business of living is grounded in the thought of ‘rearranging your beliefs’ because the universe is certainly not going to rearrange its beliefs.

Ponder <but do some rearranging while doing so>.

===========

“I desire the things which will destroy me in the end.”

Sylvia Plath 

=========== 

“All sins are attempts to fill voids.”

Simone Weil 

===============

Well. We all know at least one person who is always trying too hard. Or maybe they always seem to be overcompensating for something. Or even that they know they are ‘not as good as’ and spend far too much time trying to convince everyone they are at least better than maybe we know they are at something.

We like these people because we like the overall sense that someone is dissatisfied with the present person and seeking a better person.

We don’t like these people because we don’t like the overall sense of desperation and the trappings that often come with it.

We look at these people and … well … we think about ourselves and the crazy shit we do.

Let’s face it. Life makes us do a lot of crazy shit.

Okay. It doesn’t actually “make” us. It just full-throatedly encourages us to do some crazy shit.

It does so because it makes us desire  a shitload of things that can chip away at the better version of ourselves. And by better version I don’t mean external stuff but internal stuff … soul, integrity & character. But life has a nasty habit of encouraging us to think more about external stuff than internal stuff.

The size of your bank account.

How you look and what you wear and whether you sport Gap or Brooks Brothers.

The size of your house and whether you have gold drapes or Pier1 window hangings.

This kind of crap can screw you up let alone destroy you. You can get so caught up in what Life is whispering in your ear as what is important over time that is all you can hear and see.

Life becomes almost a parody of itself.

‘Less is more’ becomes the mantra of everything but to you, personally, where ‘more’ just seems to look less & less. Life can twist you into a pretzel trying to match up with all the external trappings of what it suggests you should desire. And as you get twisted all it really does is squeeze out character & integrity & principles drop by drop as Life twists harder and harder.

And as you get this squeezed out of you, well, you will naturally get thirsty.  Therein lies the big Life choice: what do you drink?

What do I mean?

Remember that kid you knew growing up who was always the bully, always the exaggerator, always the one trying so hard to show everyone how great they were? Well. At some point they realize that they are thirsty. Either thirsty for more or thirsty for what is getting squeezed out of them.

Now. That said. Don’t think Life is standing by silently.  All the while Life will whisper sweet nothings in that kid’s ear telling them what to drink to stay on their path to a ‘better person’ <and it is most likely the sweetest, least healthy alternative>.

Look. At some point we all get thirsty, even that young bully, and your Life gets energized by what you choose to drink <and I could suggest you get addicted to what you drink at a fairly early age>.

That said.

What I do know is that almost all of us end up being constantly nudged to believe we neither have enough nor are we enough.

And it is within those ‘not enough’ spaces, the voids if you wish to call them, in which we commit our gravest sins.

We commit our sins most often as we overreach.

Okay. We are tempted to overreach — in our words, our resumes, our successes, even our recaps of our ‘what we did today’ lists.

Some overreach more than others, but, we all get tempted. And, just as I noted above, it is explainable and understandable. When Life is trying to constantly tell you ‘not enough’ you will constantly be trying to showcase ‘more than enough.’ That is a natural response.

And this is where people separate themselves into two basic generalized groups:

those who define how they matter <enough> by an internal balance sheet

versus

those who define how they matter <enough> by an external balance sheet.

I am not suggesting it has to be 100%, internal or external, because most of us figure out how to commit as few ‘sins’ as possible and try and manage what they desire in a way they don’t ultimately get destroyed by their desires. Most of us figure out our ‘best version’ is pretty good; maybe less than some but more than others.

=============

“And so we all matter – maybe less than a lot, but always more than some.”

John Green

============

But some people truly do end up in the 100% column.

It is quite possible someone like the Pope is close to the internal 100% judgement, but I imagine a lot of people actually slide close to this Life self-framing. It comes with some external expenses, but a shitload of people are willing to sacrifice those things because they know the gold curtains fade, the money can be lost and the houses can burn down.  External trappings can only provide so much comfort.

On the other end of the spectrum are the hollow people. They look glitzy. They sound confident <if not arrogant or blowhards>. They have all the trappings of success. But their sacrifice is whatever internal compass that can guide goodness or true fairness as well as empathy & compassion. They have sacrificed counting internal cues because external cues are all that count.  All the while they are trying too hard, seem to be overcompensating for something and spending a shitload of time trying to convince everyone they are at least better than maybe we know they are at something. They fill their spaces with sins and laud them as virtues.

All that said. We all know at least one person who is always trying too hard.

This is the person who desires the things which will destroy me in the end.

This is the person whose sins are attempts to fill voids.

This is the person we know, & often wish we could change, but is quite possibly the most unchangeable person we know.

We all have voids.

We just need to be very very careful that what we fill that void with doesn’t destroy us in the end.

Ponder.

Capitalism is a ruthless psychological motherfucker.

What I mean by that is almost any sane, quasi-reflective , person will sit back at some point and ask the question ‘when I got duped into becoming an accumulator of things?”

Try this on for size:

“… we, and by that I mean most of humanity since the Neolithic, have been duped into believing that life must be lived by accumulating. This is simply an ideological lie. Is it impossible to imagine a world lived by the economics of the gift? Even the most cursory look at various enduring cultures around the world shows us that people (who are left alone to do so) living lives according to deeper principles are more content, more spiritually rounded, less troubled by existential angst, than by westerners tricked into believing in the ideologies of power and wealth.” 

comment in The Guardian about Materialism

Well. I will begin with acknowledging there is a shitload of psychological research that seems to support the fact that materialism <accumulating shit> doesn’t make us happier <psychologically>. The gobs of research suggests that materialism, a characteristic that reaches both rich and poor and researchers define as “a value system that is preoccupied with possessions and the social image they project”, is both socially destructive and self-destructive.

It’s associated with stress, anxiety, depression and even how personal relationships can be affected.

In fact there has long been a correlation observed between materialism, a lack of empathy and engagement with others, and unhappiness and research is reinforcing this by showing causation.

For example, a series of studies published in the journal Motivation and Emotion showed that as people become more materialistic, their wellbeing <good relationships, autonomy, sense of purpose and the rest> diminishes.

As they become less materialistic, unhappiness rises.

I say all of this to say … well … Nuts.

Nuts to the comment I began with.

Nuts that maybe I should be smarter.

Nuts that maybe I have been duped.

Its all a bunch of crap.

I haven’t been duped.

I have a mind of my own.

And do I really not know when I am unhappy? <and why I may be unhappy>

Yup.

Ok.

For the most part … yup.

I believe most of us understand that it is a dreadful mistake allowing ourselves to believe that having just having more money and more stuff enhances our wellbeing.

Oddly, despite the fact we poor everyday schmucks know this, this ‘have more’ belief appears to not only be embraced by those poor deluded people in movies, but by almost every member of almost every government <and civilization>.

How can this be?

Worldly ambition, material aspiration, perpetual growth … taken in and of itself … is a formula for mass unhappiness and, yet, it seems to be the main plot for almost every narrative out there.

That said. I have not been duped.

If I enter the rat race then I have chosen to be a rat.

If I choose to compete with the Joneses than I have chosen to be one of the Joneses.

Society hasn’t duped me into doing so.

Business hasn’t duped me into doing so.

Social media hasn’t duped me into doing so.

I am certainly not suggesting that all of the above aren’t relentlessly attempting to dupe me into believing all their bullshit, but, if I decide to follow an ‘ideology of wealth and power’ than that is my choice.

And you know what?

For the most part I don’t have to choose that game if I don’t want and I can still be successful.

Do I believe the game is rigged in some form or fashion?

Yes.

Do I believe that the game is easier won if you decide to play the wealth & power game?

You bet.

Not choosing to do so is like swimming against the tide in some form or fashion. It’s not easier, but it can still be done.

But the bottom line.

Do I feel like I have been duped into becoming an accumulator? Shit no.

If I truly believed that then I disregard free will, free choice and self-interest <balancing moral and material>.

Do I believe there should be a balance of moralism and materialism?

Absolutely.

But.

Here’s the deal.

Having a thread of materialism tends to make a better society through creating better and smarter stuff <innovation> and businesses attempting to address real human needs..

That last sentence will not go down well with some people but, yes, i am suggesting consumption can drive some innovation.

But being duped? C’mon. I am not buying it.

I think I am smart enough <and most people> not to accumulate stupid thinking.

=====

Everyone was born with a limited amount of fucks to give.

During your teenage years you give a ton and slowly give less and less from there.

just shower thoughts

=====

When I saw this quote had to sit back and think.

Why?

Because I could read it two ways.

First.

As you get older you just get worn down and just stop giving a fuck about a lot of things.

Second.

As you get older you learn that not everything deserves ‘giving a fuck’ and you give less, but, you should give more of a fuck when you do.

I pondered this a little.

And then I got curious and found that if you type “give a fuck” in google search you will get about 4,610,000 results (0.38 seconds), but … here is the interesting thing  … you get page after page on ‘philosophy <or ‘the art’> of not giving a fuck.’

Basically the internet is strewn with articles and advice on how to not give a fuck. How crazy is that? It is almost like the google world is attempting to offer some extraordinary justification for being indifferent, to actually practice being indifferent, which, in my mind, is maybe a different slant on how to be a complete moron.

I mean, c’mon, if we really only have a limited amount of fucks to give, well, wouldn’t you expect some really good advice on how to prioritize and parse them out? I say that because it seems like we could all use some good advice with regard to knowing when to give a fuck and when not to give a fuck.

I will say one thing about giving a fuck. Caring about shit is the essence of Life.

Ok. Maybe two things.

Caring and actively engaging in shit is the essence of Life <I actually called it RSVP and Life once>.

But. The moment you become indifferent, the moment you just don’t give a fuck, well, there is no Life. There is no heartbeat. Life is dead.

I am certainly not going to suggest you care about everything. I will not because I agree that we do not have an unlimited amount of fucks to give. But it just doesn’t make sense to not care.

Now. Life does a fairly good job of suggesting not giving a fuck is a much easier way of living Life.

Life is full of a lot of shit we don’t understand.

Life is full of a lot of things that just do not seem to make sense.

Life is full of a lot of things that just doesn’t seem logical.

Life is full of a lot of things that seem different than what you want or think about.

Life is full of a lot of questions and a lot fewer answers than we want.

Life is full of a lot of answers that don’t really solve anything.

Life is full of a lot of things that make you scratch your head and say “I never understood why.”

All of those things seem like “slow” as in “a lot of shit that will slow me down from getting to where I want to go and getting what I want to get.”

I imagine after reading that list and my last sentence many people may think “then why give a fuck.”

Well. Because none of those things make Life any ‘less’ or any less meaningful. They just make it a little less certain. They just make things a little more risky. They just make it all a little less straightforward.

In fact I could suggest that almost all Life throws at you could fall into the “WTF category”. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t give a fuck.

Anyway. I agree with the opening quote. I don’t believe we have an unlimited amount of fucks to give. That doesn’t mean we only have one or two just that they are not unlimited.

But that doesn’t mean you should embrace the thought “well, I have no more fucks to give … so … I just don’t give a fuck about anything anymore.” Nor should it mean you should start seeking opportunities to not give a fuck under the belief it will help you get what you want and where you want to be faster.

Look. Here is what I know about giving a fuck.

If you give enough of a fuck about your life, and trust it to give a fuck about you on occasion, well, a fuck of a lot of good things can happen if you just fucking go out and work hard. Ponder.

====

“The detective thinks he is investigating a murder or a missing girl. But truly he is investigating something else altogether, something he cannot grasp hold of directly.

Satisfaction will be rare. Uncertainty will be your natural state.  Much of your life will be spent in the dark woods, no path visible, with fear and loneliness your only companions.

But answers exist.

Solutions wait for you, trembling, pulling you to them, calling your name, even if you cannot hear.

I believe that someday, perhaps many lifetimes from now, all will be explained, and all mysteries will be solved. All knowledge will be free for the taking, including the biggest mystery of all – who we really are. But for now, each detective, alone in the woods, must take the clues and solve mysteries alone.”

Jacque Silette

====

We are all detectives investigating Life and our Life within it.

That said. We all think we are investigating purpose or career happiness or happiness in general.

But despite doing all that investigating most of us eventually realize that grasping the things we seek is fleeting and more often our grasp is tentative and indirect.

Sure. We all find some satisfaction, but they tend to reside in glimpses, not in endless continuity, and certainly not in perpetuity.

Suffice it to say we tend to find this inconstancy & uncertainty far too common … and uncomfortable.

The truth is we are most often in the dark with regard to overall personal purpose with no clear path visible and even when on a clear path it is often paved with doubt & uncertainty. That means the physical companions which stand alongside are the companions of fear, doubt and loneliness.

Despite all of that I tend to believe we all know answers exist, and we all know they await us somewhere, even if we cannot hear them.

Because of that belief we are constantly investigating who we really are often desperately grabbing at clues or proof to provide some comfort that we have either solved the mystery or at least are on the path to solving it.

That said.

I find “who you really are/who am I?” as a silly, if not stupid, self question.

Why?

Who I am today is not who I will necessarily be tomorrow.

Which leads me to an uncomfortable thought.

If you take the time to really think about this topic, I believe we all kind of know, in an uncomfortable sense, that the mystery of who we are will only be explained … well … maybe lifetimes from now, but suffice it to say most likely not in our own lifetime.

How frustrating that sounds as I type it. Think about it.

The only people who will know who we truly are today are not us, but someone somewhere in a future yet to be defined.

What a frustrating thought <at least to me>.

And yet.

I have no doubt most of us, each of us a detective, will continuously search for clues and solve what mysteries we can today.

That’s what we do.

We scan about for clues to be better, think better and understand better. Why? Because we are all detectives, whether we want to be one or not, all attempting to solve the mystery that is us & Life around us.

Ponder.

============

“Community is the fact that we work toward the same goal, that we accept our respective roles in order to reach it.

Values is the fact we trust each other.

And, culture?

Culture is as much about what we encourage as what we actually permit. That matters because most people don’t do what we tell them to. They do what we let them get away with.”

Fredrick Backman

===============

“You don’t know what you can get away with until you try.”

Colin Powell

=================

Well. The relationship between secrets and culture and community is one which is fraught with contradictions, conflict and humanness.

I imagine this conflict is driven by the natural chafing between self-interest and community <I have called this community individualism & Enlightened Individualism in the past>.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

We talk a lot about community and team and all of that good stuff. And we talk about it with good intentions. The problem is that true community demands some sacrifice.

Therein lies our big secrets.

On occasion we decide self-interest is more important than sacrifice.

Uhm.

This is a version of ‘what you can get away with.’

That phrase sounds horribly horrible. It suggests nefarious type behavior. But the truth of it is most of us see what we can get away with on some very personal day-to-day less-than-nefarious type stuff.

• We cut some corners.

• We maybe don’t tell people how we truly feel <or who we truly are>.

• We steal some post-it notes.

These are our little secrets.

We may even have some bigger personal secrets that we decide are just not things we want to share <these are not nefarious … just personal>.

Regardless.

For many of us our behavior arcs toward what we can get away with. That doesn’t mean it is completely unethical, or some abhorrent behavior, just that while norms set a ‘median’ standard guideline Life is constantly suggesting ‘but this one time you can get away with doing this.”

Which leads me back to the real issue.

The issue resides with the friction between culture and community and self. What I mean by that is the stronger & more powerful the cultural community norm is the bigger your secret becomes if you avoid the norms. This secret takes on exponential size if you start believing that the norms that are good for you are good and the ones that don’t match up with what you believe is your self-interest are bad.

You only accept the existence of the formal and informal cultural norm structure that constitutes accepted community construct, uhm, only as long as that suits your purposes.

Your big secret, therefore, doesn’t have to do with your own behavior, but rather in your non-belief ,if not overall disdain, for the community norms.

Which leads me to hate.

Why hate?

When you decide to see what you can get away with, you have to mentally divide community into “we” and “they.” And in doing so you make ‘we’ good <which suggests what you can get away with is on the side of good> and, conversely, you make ‘they’ bad.

This is a simplistic tactic for attempting to carry the burden of a big secret.

Hate is simple and hate can be an incredibly powerful empowering emotion.

Why?

In this scenario, using hate, the world becomes much easier to understand and less confusing, in the scheme of things, if you divide everything into friends & enemies, good & evil, right & wrong and a basic we & they.

This helps us because the world is strewn with conflict. Not just physical war, but of ideas, thoughts, beliefs and attitudes. Cultures, communities and classes are bombarded with conflict after conflict. And maybe because of the sheer amount of conflict one of the first things we do is pick sides. We choose a side to stand on because … well … it is easier. It is easier than thinking or, even more difficult, trying to hold parts of two ideas which appear in conflict in our heads at the same time. And once we have chosen a side we then go out and seek some information, or ‘facts’, to confirm not only what we believe but the side we have chosen – this permits us to maintain the status quo and chug along with Life as ‘normal.’

Oh. Yeah.

And then we proceed to do is demonize, or dehumanize, the other side. We diminish them. Make them, their thoughts & ideas, lesser than.

……. making “they” smaller ……..

I would suggest this all just makes you smaller as a person <carrying around a big secret>.

Which leads me to say that big secrets make small people.

Yeah. Unfortunately all of us become smaller with a big secret.

And this smallness is compounded by the unfortunate fact that you become even smaller when ‘we’ are the people who others HAVE to keep big secrets from because they believe, and know, we cannot handle them <or don’t believe in them>.

All secrets carry a weight to them.

===

“To agree to keep a secret is to assume a burden.”

Sam Harris

===

In fact I could argue that all knowledge is a burden. It carries a weight of responsibility with regard to what you do with it, how you act because you have it, as well as how you think about you, and others, with it. Oh. Secrets ARE knowledge.

Having accepted knowledge you have made an agreement with it. I tend to believe we don’t think about this. We accept knowledge as … well … maybe like income earned – disposable income in fact. We worked for it, we earned it and it is now ours to spend as we choose.

But knowledge is actually more like freedom. It is an unalienable right, but it is also a privilege and therefore one assumes a responsibility to it.

Uhm.

And with responsibility comes burden. Which almost sounds odd in that something with ‘free’ in it also carries such a heavy burden. Maybe I should just suggest that nothing really comes for free, i.e., everything has something attached to it.

Knowledge?

Responsibility. The burden of responsibility. And that is a weight you carry. One which can be as light or as heavy as you make it. But. It is a weight nonetheless. One which you learn to carry well or carry poorly.

Knowledge tests our ability and our character with regard to how well we can carry this weight. It tests how strong we are .. once again … in ability and in character.

Having said that <and most likely having a number of people feeling a little uncomfortable thinking about knowledge that way>.

Secrets are a completely different level of a knowledge burden.

And secrets are tricky.

• Some are thrust upon you — unwanted but yet yours nonetheless.
• Some are gifted you — carefully shared by someone who believes the weight it carries is too much for themselves … alone.
• Some are just yours — built by you and carried by you.

But regardless of how you assume the responsibility of a secret; it is also knowledge. And therefore it also carries a burden, a responsibility, and a weight.

I don’t have the scale to weigh them, but my guess is that a knowledge secret exponentially weighs more than a traditional knowledge.

I also don’t have any research, but I also tend to believe, just like extra physical weight, as soon as we start feeling the extra weight of a secret … we seek to shed it.

Therein lies the true test of character.

Therein lies how big secrets can make small people.

All knowledge tests you. Secrets test you even more.

Knowledge, and secrets, take a strength of self to carry its weight.

The weight of responsibility of having the knowledge, the weight of freedom knowledge typically gives us and the weight of character that knowledge either makes you bigger or makes you smaller.

Whew.

That is a lot of extra weight we have accepted by taking on these secrets.

Which leads me to good.

As in good people doing good things. And as in good versus almost good.

I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that sometimes very thin line between good and almost-good can make a massive difference in life. That sometimes very thin line can decide whether your secret makes you bigger or smaller.

Look.

If you are clever enough, even if you embrace community, you can get away with a shitload of stuff. But cleverness does not eliminate the fact you gain a bigger secret burden with every action.

And you know what?

The “community” knows we struggle with this a individuals. In fact it has even created some ‘auxiliary precautions’ to help us avoid unnecessary secrets.

Huh?

This is James Madison’s Federalist Paper #51 or “if men were angels” argument:

===========

If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

=================

We are no angels as people.

Secrets bear that truth out.

And … well … we all carry secrets.

And … the bigger the secrets the smaller we become.

Ponder.

=========

A man said to the universe:

“Sir, I exist!”

“However,” replied the universe,

“The fact has not created in me

A sense of obligation.”

Stephen Crane

============

“Nature uses as little as possible of anything.”

Johannes Kepler

==============

The universe has no real obligation to us. Period.

Yup. That actually means we are on our own. We have no rights, no privileges, no nothing to support or comfort our existence except what we choose to provide each other.

That said.

Let me make sure we are all on the same page with regard to ”rights” which means you need to ponder rights, freedom, liberty, prerogative and privilege. All of these are words which refer to the fundamental claims a person can properly make or his unfettered ability to choose <Use The Right Word: S.I. Hayakawa>.

• Right suggests a concrete claim established by legal, ethical or religious sanctions <e.g., right to equality before the law>. Although … someone claiming a right tends to argue it is inherent, a person’s rights are differently spelled out in different cultures & countries.
• Liberty is a more abstract and general notion suggesting the opportunity to choose among alternatives. A document such as the Bill of Rights spells out these conditions a citizen may construe as his rights. However … these liberties may sometimes in fact refer to an unwarranted breach of someone else’s right to consideration <we do not enjoy unbridled liberty without regard for the rights of others>.
• Civil liberty is understood to refer to all the rights enumerated in the US Constitution and its amendments.
• Freedom is close to liberty in its abstract generality but stresses a total lack of constraint more than the opportunity for choice.
• Prerogative and privilege are much more specific in their meanings than the other words here. Prerogative refers to a right that one has by virtue of age, sex or position. Privilege suggests advantages given as favors or added luxuries rather than necessary rights.

I share all that to point out that while we may complicate our lives by confusing all these dynamics we also complicate our lives unnecessarily.

Anyway. We tend to complicate our lives in a number of ways.

Sometimes it is we feel like Life, or the universe, should be a little more helpful.

Sometimes we confuse privileges and rights.

Sometimes we seek an easier path because the way we are going seems a little too hard.

Sometimes we abuse rights in the pursuit of bad things.

Sometimes we assume privileges with regard to desire of good things.

============

“People tend to complicate their lives, as if living weren’t already complicated enough.”

Carlos Ruiz Zafon

=============

“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.”

Søren Kierkegaard

===========

Far too often we view freedoms as freedom to be stupid, idiotic or thoughtless.

Specifically, far too often we view freedom of speech as a way to shared well-articulated insightful thoughts to better the world around them simply because, well, we were fortunate enough to be nearby when speech, freely given, was shared.

Well. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom to say only smart things. It also means freedom to be stupid, idiotic and thoughtless.

Yeah.

Freedom is a sticky wicket. It permits freedom to say stupid things, factual things and nonfactual things.

And, yet, as John Stuart Mill argued in “On Liberty,” freedom of expression is the freedom on which all other civic rights are based.

Now. Two things.

First. I do believe those who speak have a responsibility to be responsible. Freedom of speech, and expression, is a privilege not to be abused. But that is my opinion.

Just mine.

However, stupidity aside, I would rather someone speak, regardless of what is said opinion wise, than for there to be silence. In a world in which we complicate our lives and confuse liberties and freedoms and privileges … we shouldn’t shut up. And we shouldn’t simply shut off someone because they confuse all these things. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t shut down lies <because we should> but, generally speaking, if someone wants to say something stupid, we should let them because of this universal truth:

“Idiocy thrives in the dark, not in dialogue.”

Jen Floyd Engel columnist

I have had this debate, sometimes argument, with several people.

I want neo-Nazis speaking on campuses.

I want feminists raging through megaphones on stand at street corners.

I want pro Life & pro Choice advocates debating on stages throughout America.

I want the most extreme of all sides and dimensions and directions to publicly have the opportunity to speak out.

First of all.

We should all want that.

We, here in the USA, actually live in a country where unless you shout “fire” in some movie theater or seriously offer harmful threats you actually have the privilege & right to speak your mind. This is a gift that USA gives its citizens — a gift many of the 192 countries around the world are not so quick to give their citizens.

Second.

We should abhor silence.

It seems to me that we are quickly  heading down a path where the only opinions safe to say out loud  are the benign most milquetoast ‘safe havens’ of speech — Hitler was bad,  genocide is bad, beets are bad <oops, that last one was just a personal benign opinion>.

We say we want honesty.

We say we want to hear the truth.

We say we want free speech.

And yet we are relentless in chastising those who choose to speak and the words they choose to speak are wrong, maybe even stupid and possibly ignorant.

Uhm. This makes me say …

“I have met the enemy and the enemy is us.”

I do believe we are in the midst of a crisis of truth, ignorance and enlightenment … and freedoms, rights & privileges.

And it is an odd crisis in that we may actually speak up and out, but constantly get trapped in some simplistic dualisms/binaries — liberalism versus authoritarianism, Islam versus … well … Christianity/America/constitution/etc., white versus non white,  intellectual versus nonintellectual, urban versus rural and any other dualism thing you want to add.

But our issues seem to be more complex than ‘if this or maybe that.’

Our issues get compounded by the natural ebb & flow of “rights” <speech, religion, press, etc.> and what we believe is ‘right’ all combined with the unfortunate situation that the everyday person struggles to discerns fact from fiction <I would be remiss if i didn’t point out that 5+ years of Trump where he created his own fictional alternative universe in which his ‘facts’ exist and he wanted to manage the narrative as ‘his universe depicting reality’ didn’t help any of this>.

We complicate our lives needlessly.

And while Alexis de Tocqueville suggested in the 1830s that the American promise of meritocracy, its uniformity of culture and manners, and “equality of conditions” would make for immoderate ambition, corrosive envy and chronic dissatisfaction and could swell “to the height of fury” and lead many to acquiesce in a curtailment of their liberties all leading to a longing for the rule of a strongman … I do not agree.

No matter how divisive we may get and no matter how much we complicate our own lives and how much we may confuse what we deserve and what we earn, what is a privilege and what is a right, all of our freedoms & rights are grounded in the one unchangeable thing we have … the constitution.

That said. I am reminded of some words written by William Martin in his fabulous book “The Lost Constitution”:

=======

“A real American will tell you that our Constitution is not a tool for politicians hoping to make points, whether it is a cynical Republican pushing flag burning amendments because their poll numbers are down or a do-gooding Democrat who decides to protect ourselves by banning guns. The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing when they made the Constitution difficult to amend, so let’s think hard before we mess with it. 

What it says is what t said two hundred years ago. I think the men who set their thoughts down here were men who cared about America. Some of them believed in a strong central government, some believed that government governs best which governs least, but all of them believed in the ability of thinking Americans to get up in the morning and resolve their differences and solve their problems. And we have lost that in this country.

The framers created a means of changing this document because they understood that the world would change. But they didn’t want to make it easy. So it up to you, the people, pick up your newspaper and read them, and think about what you read, and don’t always believe what you hear just because it is what you want to hear,. And don’t listen to what you want to hear because you hear it from somebody who shouts it loud or makes you laugh. The constitution demands more. Don’t believe the people who vote straight democrat any more than you believe the people who befoul the airwaves with rightist rhetoric every day. The theme, on every night, is that we are all American. “

==========

All that said, I circle back to where i began by saying I wanted to say two things. The first had to do with individual rights and choices, the second has to do with amplification <the megaphones of the world – tv networks, podcasts, social media>.

While I believe any individual has the right to be an idiot I think we would all be idiots if we didn’t acknowledge we are in a universe in which the amplification universe is not indifferent. In addition the amplification universe has the ability to exponentially share idiocy – not additively or even multiplicatively. Therein lies the accountability and responsivbility issue. While it sounds nice to say every platform can say whatever it wants to say <kind of a misplaced freedom of speech play> the reality is it isn’t about saying iodiotic things or lies or disinformation, its about teh amplification. So without any rules on how things get amplified <usually this comes down to algorithms> we inevitably have to talk about the source of the things that are getting shared. I, personally, think twitter, Facebook, instragram, whoever, should clamp down on disinformation and lies. Will they always get it right? Nope. Will in most cases , even in their errors, benefit society? Yup. Anything at this point which slows down amplification, or mutes what may take some time to be proven, is good. we do not need to “know everything” immediately. Give some time to vet everything. Let idiots speak but maybe limit how far and wide their idiocy spreads <at least initially>. That actually seems to protect the privileges and freedoms of citizenry more than it limits it.

Which leads me to end with the thought that it is an odd place we are in today.

It seems like never have so many free individuals felt so helpless and in their helpless feeling many people seem almost desperate to wrest control from anyone, and institutions in particular, they can blame for their feeling ‘lostness’ <however you would like to define lost>.

As I finish up this piece today it seems important to remind everyone that freedom of speech is just that … freedom of speech – and that freedom of speech is the foundation upon which all civil liberties reside.

I would rather idiocy, our confusion about what we deserve and do not deserve, be discussed rather than have to thrive in the darkness of silent strength.

Because all speech does is to start a dialogue.

It forces people to talk.

Personally, I don’t want to read, or watch, only whatever validates my beliefs.

I want to challenge my assumptions.

Personally, I know I get confused about what is a right, what is a freedom and, sometimes, what is a privilege.

The only thing I am 100% clear on is that I am privileged to exist in a country in which I can be confused on all those things and still be able to speak out.

And, lastly, I am absolutely clear that the universe has no real obligation to me … or us.

We have no rights, no privileges, no nothing to support or comfort our existence except what we choose to provide each other.

What this means is that only we can complicate our lives and/or uncomplicate it.

Let’s be a little bit easier on each other.

Let’s listen a little bit better with each other.

Let’s become the universe in which we become obligated to each other rather than worrying about where my freedom begins and yours ends. Ponder.

=====================

“Culture is an elevated expression of the inner voice which the different peoples of the Earth have heard in the depths of their being, a voice which conveys the vibrant compassion and wisdom of the cosmic life. For different cultures to engage in interaction is to catalyze each other’s souls and foster mutual understanding.”

Daisaku Ikeda

==================

Let me get my main points out of the way:

• I believe, unequivocally, businesses should operate in ways that are conducive to a healthy planet and healthier society.
• I don’t believe businesses need to market such operations and initiative. In addition, i DON’T recommend they do so unless they are 100% committed to it. not 99%, 100%.
• Despite gobs of research suggesting young people (Millennials) prefer buying from businesses associated with sustainability & causes I don’t believe the majority would actually pay more nor do I believe it is a true deep-seated ‘preference’ (it is more about assuaging ‘guilt’ – read on for explanation).
• I believe business people confuse Purpose, purpose of a business, causes, environmental responsibility, and a myriad of well intended business actions all the time to the detriment of the action itself.

Anyway. Let me get to my points. There is a lot of research coming out suggesting the importance of Causes & Social Involvement <conflated with Purpose> in consumer choices and what they value. At its most base level this discussion is about cultural & societal concepts tied to future desires <and behavior> of people. It is kind of guessing <in an educated thoughtful way> how people will want to behave with regard to larger Planet-type issues and discussing what behavior will make them happy <from a Maslow type perspective> in the future <and the value associated with it>.

This is good type thinking, not simply mental masturbation.

By the way. Thinking about the future type stuff can be Jetsons type pie in the sky type thinking or it can be more pragmatic ‘rising generations with existing perceptions and how will they act in the future’ type thinking. I tend to be more pragmatic. I do so because it is fun. It is fun in that every every generation rising <young to old> rebel against the norms & ‘standards’ of the older more established generations and as we view ‘trends’ & research it becomes easy to confuse simple rebellion rhetoric and true desires that affect behavior.

Regardless. The windows exist and if you can identify the underlying attitudinal shifts you can be successful by offering things that tap into this attitude <and you can reap the benefits of their behavior>.

Let me get the contrarian conclusion out of the way:

• most people only care about Causes & planet to a point (despite what they say). The majority of young people say they care about Causes with regard to brand choice is out of guilt, not depth of caring. This is NOT to suggest social causes & caring about the planet & sustainability are not important, just that there is a gap between that importance to a individual and other things that matter when decide to make choices & do things. Altruism has limits to the everyday people and the everyday purchase.
• most people care about personal wealth & lifestyle. The majority of young people still want to accumulate money & things, they just don’t want to be seen as greedy as older generations. You would have to be blind, deaf and dumb to miss the attitude among the young that older generations are greedy. That’s easy. The hard part is that we old folk flippantly disregard this attitude as the naiveté of youth. Silly us old folk. The young DO recognize the value of accumulating wealth and the benefits that come along with it, they just don’t want to do it the same way. Conversely, it is silly to not recognize young people want shit – things, money & recognition (yes, they are capitalists too>.

No matter how we may want to couch attitudes in some trite platitudes — people will always want to be valued and fairly compensated for the value they provide. The future challenge is how to let the Reptilian brain ‘accumulate wealth’ and increase personal value all the while balanced with a moralistic <semi altruistic> belief that ‘I want to be fair’ <at its most hedonistic shallow level it would actually be ‘how can I become wealthy and not look like a greedy jerk’>.

Trendwatching in 2013 called it ‘guilt free consumption.’

I imagine the more positive slant on it is a revitalization of some sense of altruism or fairness while still consuming. People, especially younger people, are feeling conflicted between their desire to earn & spend and their aspiration to do the right thing. They are looking for products and services that will deliver value and quality while, at the same time, provide reassurance that their ‘accumulating’ is not seen as greedy or doing a level of ‘harm’ to the greater good <note: that ‘level’ is an individually driven assessment & typically not a societal standard>.

Trendwatching researchers suggested that consumers were experiencing guilt over how they spend, and on what they spend it on, which means they will look at how companies conduct their business, from where they source their products and whether they are engaged in socially-responsible initiatives.

Here is where the cynical me steps in.

The key to addressing consumer guilt is to identify the choices that cause the consumer the most concern and “absolve” them of the guilt.

Once again. This doesn’t mean ‘me’ desires go away. It, in its most simplistic sense, is suggesting a ‘guilt free’ aspect to the desire to accumulate wealth or things. Cynically, a person seeks an implied ‘balance’ —  a bargaining with a desire to accumulate.

In a non-cynical way someone has added a belief if that a ‘me’ can make more, earn more & and accumulate/have more and feel good about it if the ‘optimal end game’ is connected to a greater ‘we’ aspect <environment, society, sharing of that which is accumulated with less fortunate>. This mental bargaining is an attempt to alleviate the guilt that gnaws at the conscience of those who, mostly with good intent, want to do the best they can and accumulate the most wealth they can.

—–
“Guilt upon the conscience, like rust upon iron, both defiles and consumes it, gnawing and creeping into it, as that does which at last eats out the very heart and substance of the metal.”

Robert South

——

Wealth & consuming is achieved with a balance of ‘what I could have had, but shared.’ This shared aspect shows an innate sacrifice of ‘me’, but not at the expense of success <or actualization>. Instead it shows a sharing of individual success. Successful wealth management <growth> shows ‘not too much’ by ‘I could have had more but I don’t.’

It also meets a Maslow thought: ‘I am successful – not everyone can be successful – therefore by being as good as I can be (which is better than many people) I am contributing to the greater good for those who cannot do what I can do.’

All the psychological mumbo jumbo aside. Guilt free accumulation, despite sounding like some moral relativism, actually does deliver a sense of fairness — fair to me and we. It’s not straight up altruism but its a version of individualistic altruism.

I called this basic attitudinal concept Community Individualism in 2010. And I still call it that. The seeds of this type of thinking have been planted and while it will most likely not prosper in current adult generations it will thrive in younger rising generations. It will be <at least in my eyes> the prevalent psychographic attitude every business will need to attend to in the future.

Hey. Interestingly if you google my ‘community individualism’ concept you will find a number of really well written articles and intellectual papers outlining the battle <tension> between ‘community’ and ‘individualism.’

I say interestingly for 2 reasons:

1. Because I believe there is an entire rising generation who is answering the battle for “us” <versus just ‘me’>. They are living it and have grasped it and are embodying how to be and do both. We <older folk> could not figure it out. They have.

2. I am the only one, I have found, who believes there is no tension, but rather an embracing, between community & individualism in this next younger generation.

Anyway. ‘Community Individualism’ or “Enlightened Individuality.” I will not bore you with everything I have written but give some relevant highlights to align everyone on my thinking.

——-

The post millennial generation (The Global Generation – others call it “Z”) will have been preceded by the two extremes of community and individualism. The worldwide web will enable a higher level of intimacy between cultures and globally dispersed local communities (or maybe, more specifically, individuals). We see this emerging even today (it just has not matured). Not surprisingly, this technology has transformed our worlds – empowering people with access to extensive circles of population as well as connecting in surprisingly personal and intimate ways.

My thoughts may seem extreme … but I believe the Millennial generation is “too far down the path” to be the Global Generation. They were the early adopters of a web based global community aspect and there will certainly be “cusp” generational citizens, but as a whole they are being bombarded with the vocal minority and don’t have the global counterbalance (I guess what I mean by that is I believe Millenials will still fall back on country cultural cycles as the subconscious place to go). Millennials will be open to a global community (which is the reason why I believe the Global Generation will be successful as they follow in their footsteps).

Remember.

Generations are not set by birth, but by accumulated experience over a lifetime. As Millennials will deal with a Crisis, the Global Generation will deal with the aftermath.

This balance of community and individuality will permit this generation to better accept and respect the choices made by individuals globally and yet strengthen local communities (I actually believe that will be represented by strengthened country patriotism). The community aspect will definitely lead to some cultural or geographical driven conflict yet the respect for individual choices elsewhere will balance the conflict within a “values set of rules.”

——–

All that said. As noted above I believe that while generations turn and attitudes evolve over time that the advent of the internet has truly enabled a new ‘mixing’ of an attitude and should enable new behavior. Interestingly the internet has not just changed behaviors, but also attitudes <in that we are now better able to judge others’ behaviors>.

Yeah. Transparency doesn’t just go in one direction <towards the bad guys … and ‘evil corporations’>.

And while the internet may appear to sharpen <or cocoon> opinions & beliefs it has actually made us more aware of issues and differences <whether we like or dislike the differences is a different issue>. It may have made us more defensive with regard to our own attitudes it has also encouraged us to go on the offensive to showcase our ‘moral cores.’

By the way.

This doesn’t mean a ‘flatter’ world. It means a more aware world. You can no longer just ‘be me’ and be invisible — me is now always visible.

This comes with some repercussions whether it’s protecting or projecting your image or character. The world today with its internet driven transparency forces us all to take a closer look at not only our behavior, but also what that behavior ‘begets’. Oh. This also includes what we purchase.

In the end.

Guilt free accumulation is an attitude <generating a type of behavior> that needs to be addressed if you are in business and want to innovate products & services … or just want to understand what attitudes which need to be tapped into in order to be successful.

Why should you believe me? I will end with what I started with … “an elevated expression of the inner voice which the different peoples of the Earth have heard in the depths of their being, a voice which conveys the vibrant compassion and wisdom of life.”

Listen closely.

Branding people may misuse the information and and others, like me, will caution the depth of this caring & inner voice.

But.

The inner voice of fairness is raising its voice to be heard. A lot of us older folk may try to shut it out, but the younger voices will be heard. And in being heard they will drive the behavior of the future.

Ignore this voice at your own peril. Ponder.