Home » Posts tagged 'economics'
Tag Archives: economics
On a regular basis I am approached to tell about Sustainocracy, AiREAS, FRE2SH, the key human and natural values and the results of our innovative multidisciplinary approach and society model.
This time it was creative text writer Paul Carremans from Belgium who contacted me. He interviews people with a mission and publishes a free journal for the world wide field of readers of innovative ideas and views. Het publishes in two languages: Dutch and English (curious combination ;-).
Today I received the winter edition and am allowed to share it with you. Hopefully you enjoy it, especially also the other articles, as I did. This table of contents speaks for itself:
TABLE OF CONTENT / INHOUDSTAFEL
p. 3-4 Social Economy
COMPLEMENTARY CURRENCIES FOR A MORE SOCIAL ECONOMY
p. 5-6 Leven en maatschappij
p.7-8 Women in Business
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AT THE AGE OF 30
p. 9 Cursiefje
MONOGAMIE IN BEWEGING
p. 10 Social Economy
CREATING A NEW ECONOMIC REALITY
p. 11 Beroepen in de kijker
p. 12 How can I be of service to you?
Hoe kan ik u van dienst zijn?
Here you can download the full paper: PP Winter 2015
Feel free to subscribe to Paul’s work directly. He will appreaciate it.
We are worldwide in a complex phase of transformation from an ancient old human operational reality into a totally new one. We see this happening with ourselves and the institutions that surround us. This Global Shift occurs in three big awareness steps (Quantum Leap in our consciousness).
Step 1: Recognizing the obsolescence of the old structure and its functioning.
This ancient reality places the human being inside a regional (country) political and economic confinement. There are various 100’s of such regional “country” realities across the world, each pretending still to manage their own identity with a lot of subsystems (counties, cities, business enterprises, etc) that function the same way. Over the past there was a large operational diversity (society systems) spread across the world. Since WW-II many assumed the political and economical system’s reality of consumer economics, creating a diplomatic and commercial network between the countries with open borders for economic exchange of products and human productivity. Consumption, money and debt systems are a common denominator.
Step 2: The awareness of the paradigms of nature
Since around 1970 already we become aware that the old reality was going to become obsolete. Consumption based economies and exponential population growth was going to reach a point of singularity. A new reality forced itself into our awareness: the natural limitations of planet Earth. The old reality entered into stress and crisis.
Shortage of natural resources became something to account for in productivity. The local government systems had to learn how to deal with the consequences on nature (human welfare diseases and effects of pollution and global warming) and migration of cultures. Consequence driven subeconomies were introduced demanding more consumption to finance the problems it is causing.
Our health started to become affected by pollution…. Migrations began to follow material wealth (people in search for securities and wellness) and poverty (business in search for financial competitiveness through low wages). Climate is affected and influenced. System and Nature develop a tension that produces awareness and transformative processes through vision, need and crisis.
We are now in the midst of this awareness building and transformative processes. The old reality and its obsolescence is causing stress across the world as we can see from this impressive visual compilation (take some time to observe the explosion of stress in the last couple of decades) of the evolution of conflicts from 1979 till 2012.
The individual human being ( you and me) is trapped in between with our own awareness processes. We need our society for securities but realize its obsolescence in current executive positioning. We (as human being) tend to dispute and even steps out of the old perception, to create a broader view and experiment with new realities through new awareness.
Institutions follow human leadership and transform through awareness and conflict.
Step 3: The holistic awareness and human organization
Consciousness boosts throughout the world and people combine wellness with responsibilities. Nature (the Universe) is recognized as dominant and human system need to adjust to become servant. Debt will cease to exist and new value systems emerge.
Sustainocracy is a step 3 pioneer
Sustainocracy is a new democracy based on step 3 awareness, creating operational experiments (s.a. AiREAS) within the step 1 country and business positioning with step 2 stress reality. It helps self aware business and government leaders program the transformation processes through proof of sustainable development and change.
Three prophecies for human progress are seriously proposed around the world.
Prophecy 1: Robots take over
Ever since Orwell’s “Big Brother” in his book 1984 we see robotics taking over our lives. We are being “served” by all kind of institutions that supply us all our needs in a virtual reality called consumer economics. The only way we can get the robots to provide us wellness and luxury is by putting money into their systems. The money we need is managed by banks and governments and provided against a debt. This individual debt can be settled by serving the functioning of the robots. The servant institutions are being managed by people who have become experts in getting these robots to earn as much money as possible.
Automated facilities surround us increasingly and technology even goes further every day. One of the argument is that we have such a large global human population now that we need automated processes to keep us going. From a consumer economic point of view the more fragmentation occurs in robotizing our needs, through artificial and money based robot intelligence, the more growth the economy shows. The analysts look for ways to keep us connected to the system by innovating the financial debt system through dependencies that already mortgage our lives for decades. Even money itself is a virtual system that is given virtual values through manipulation and speculation. Material scientists, economists, politicians, bankers, etc rule this world. Food, medicine housing, clothes, energy, etc forcefully (by law) need to be purchased. Governments give human health credits to financially based virtual systems. They defend it with strong arguments backed by the growing populations in city environments, attracted by this servant environment of perceived securities. These cities are concentration points for economics with the related robotics, as we can observe by analyzing city dynamics and human mobility. And humankind loves it. In a way we only have to worry about having enough cash. Everything else has been taken care of by the money driven robots providing us with a sense of abundance all the time. People have never lived as long before as they do now and we have never had such a wide selection of goods to choose from at the distance of the closest shop.
Prophecy 2: Sustainocracy
This prophecy is of course the one I incline to, even though I supported and worked for a long time in the “prophecy 1” system of consumer economics. However when I had to make a profound choice between the safety of my children and my executive career I became aware that money and robots cannot solve everything. Heath and safety are responsibilities that cannot be substitute by a coin slot machine. There are certain things that I have to take care of myself. When I wrote the blog “the universe and me” I realized that I AM the universe. From a molecular point of view I am the same and life has gotten into those molecules for God knows what reason. The only difference between my garden and I is that I am a conscious being that can walk, talk and think about it. When my surroundings gets polluted I get polluted. So when I realized that my key responsibilities are health and safety, I understood that robots can help me but cannot BE me. So from an evolutionary point of view I remain dominant and robots are servant, even if they are large and powerful, institutionalized and rationalized in our world. A human being is not just a compulsory, lazy, all consuming service and tax number. I am inclined to believe that we are a bit more than that, even though I understand perfectly well the mechanism of risk and fear avoidance by surrounding ourselves with luxury and services.
The human being is a purpose driven evolutionary miracle of a certain physical, emotional, spiritual and intellectual complexity. We have become aware of that and realize that our health and sustainable progress is much more delicate than an insurance policy for healthcare. One out of three persons has cancer, many people die prematurely of lung and heart problems, behavior is altered due to environmental unbalance etc. It has become clear that our health has to do with the health balance with our natural surroundings. Else we become sick and disappear, not just as an individual but also as humankind. The global pollution is not just leaving behind a footprint on the face of the Earth that future scientists and archaeologists can explore as Anthropocene, it is also leaving a footprint in our own genetic DNA. Our genes reflect for generations to come our irresponsibility causing people to be genetically coded already for all kinds of deceases. That is the reaction of nature to our robotics and we are becoming aware of it. We expelled nature, our universe, from our lives and surrounded us with a virtual world of simulated wealth. We have forgotten that we ARE nature and need that to prosper in a sustainable way. If we eliminate nature we eventually eliminate ourselves and nature remains.
So when we refer to heath and safety we refer to taking one own responsibilities as a living species of the universe. If I am so responsible then I should behave that way and I do. That’s how Sustainocracy got alive because now more and more people realize that we cannot leave such key issues of life to instruments. The instruments need human hands which are preferable guided by standards of universal ethics rather than economic standards. In Sustainocracy applied wisdom and universal awareness through consciousness (open awakened mind) rules.
Prophecy 3: Death and destruction
The third prophecy has been made known in 1972 by the Club of Rome, in 1990 by the Club of Budapest and in 2000 by the Earth Charter. They all agree that if we continue our human system of over-consumption, pollution and destruction of natural resources, three out of four human beings will die by starvation, war, chaos and crises by 2050.
Again I agree on this prophecy just like I agree on the first one of robotics. The third is the consequence of the first. It has happened so often before in history. The Mayas or the Roman Empire for instance. They lost their powers due to blindness to their surroundings and speculation as a matter of fact. When you neglect the human being and the universe you will be overruled by both.
The second prophecy is an odd one out because it skips the traditional path through renaissance, the era of enlightening that follows periods of chaos. But as said before human evolution is about applying knowledge and conscious awareness, not just the imposition of greed. History has shown us how disastrous the consequences are for humankind when greed dominates common sense and universal ethics. So Sustainocracy does not skip renaissance, it just places it in perspective with systems of greed, inviting the human robotics to become sustainable themselves by accepting universal ethics and co-creation as a guiding factor. It addresses the sense of human responsibility and global awareness of those who carry responsibility and authority. Their own position of power is in jeopardy if the do not go through their own enlightenment, producing a personal renaissance before the systems do. We need to allow complex co-creation to allow our greed to renew itself too. They then use their position of authority to make the difference.
The model I use for the translation of abstract ideology and practical understanding through awareness, is a result of divine inspiration. The human complexities that I have drawn up, including the historic processes of trial and error in our human evolution, can show the prophecies in the picture.
Someone who wants “to change the world” has an easy job. He or she simply has to change oneself and the world has changed. All you have to do thereafter is to show people how you are by being yourself. This serves as inspiration to some and may eventually spread…..In times of internet, with the possibility of blogging, to express our ideas and show the world the changes one has made, this process gets a modern unprecedented dimension. The problem people face is the huge amount of information that becomes available and the selection one makes for one’s own inspiration. By doing so one creates his or her own world of information and personal progress.
My own progression
After 5 years of blogging I see a progression in my own activities and also in the way I share this with my surroundings. I also see a steady and even exponential progression in the support I receive from you. The amount of readers has exploded in recent months and my practical contribution to the world through Sustainocracy is becoming a serious source of inspiration for people across the world. When I look at the blog items that drew most attention I see a certain tendency too, obviously provoked by myself through social media and public presentations, but also by a growing interest by you around the different views that I present. WordPress advises, through its statistics, that I should pick up these items and continue that line of inspiration for you.
The top 7 readings and topics are:
1. Why people avoid spirituality – This post was extensively read by the academic world after my presentation during the scientific encounter on Sustainability and Spirituality in September 2012 in Hungary.
2. Alternative definition of Sustainable Development – This post is key because it is used all the time to define the ethical basis of Sustainocracy. So every time I address and audience I need to clarify this point first to create the right mindset to follow my statements. The post is there extensively used by me as hyperlink.
3. Feminizing masculine cultures in crisis – This post appeals much to female groups who see a justification in it for their own emancipation. The masculinity of current manipulation and speculation of economies is often despised and purposely negated by masculine authorities but strongly recognized by the feminine structures causing an interesting Yin-Yang also among my readers.
4. The day after economics – I found that this post was appreciated by a broad audience that saw it as an eye opener to a trusted paradigm that was falling apart without anyone really knowing what was happening. “Economics” is a word that is seen as eternally connected to human development. To project it as a finite thing with a “life before and after” got readers to open up their mind to new worldviews.
5. Kondratieff versus Close – This recent post was re-blogged various times by people who like the analytics of human and economic systems.
6. Anthropocene I and II – Many people do not realize the effect we have on our surroundings and that this even is being defined as “an era” that will leave a lasting print or scar on the face of the Earth just like other natural disasters of the past.
7. Why only Sustainocracy can save the human world – This post is especial popular among the growing list of supporters of Sustainocracy as a solution.
Blueprint for prosperity:
I will certainly come back to these in forthcoming posts, as the trusted old world collapses and we all need to put our shoulders under the renewal. From the above posts, and observing the line of progression I made in my own work, we can define the key ingredients for a stable society:
- Ethics should rule (eg. Sustainocracy), not money
- Higher human purpose should lead the democracy, not economies of growths
- Self-sufficiency should prevail in primary requirements (food, housing, energy) to avoid dependencies
- Co-creative craftsmanship should provide sustainable local human progress
- Harmonious partnerships should connect self-sufficient neighboring regions for safety and sharing prosperity
We still have some work to do before this blueprint will be accomplished. What goes for societies, goes for us individually too. We are back again where I started. Change the world by changing first oneself by taking the above blueprint at heart. The rest will come automatically.
Recent blog and internet discussion, and our practical living lab exercises of AiREAS in the Dutch city of Eindhoven, got us again going about the overall complexity of the “psychology of change”.
On the one hand there are the impressive challenges of a global shift, a true transformation of society to save our selves, demanding tremendous changes. On the other there is the powerful resistance and dominance of the world’s institutionalized economics that produces many powerful lobbies to avoid change all together. The latter brings a certain material wealth to the world and to the financial mighty. I already wrote various blog items on it but the complexity of “change” seems an endless and highly repetitive topic. Why? Because it affects us intensely on all levels of society.
The need for change has to do with ethics, sustainable human progress, in-dependencies, our environment and basic human rights, as opposed to nothing of that, expressed through individual and institutional power positions. It also has to do with awareness, responsibility, dominance, different paradigms and massive manipulation as part of the huge human complexities. Both sides of the problem, the desire and the avoidance of change, are firmly established inside the kernel of our individual and collective consciousness, self reflection, evolution and the ethical structuring of our choices. Despite everything there is always a dominant situation of overall avoidance of change.
Manipulation may sound unethical to you but we are being manipulated all the time. Not just through conscious manipulation of powerful institutions but also by the way we perceive our own selves in general. We react primarily to our surroundings using multiple sensory and extra sensory impulses. The way we perceive is the way we react. Within this simple action = reaction there is the “human psychology” involving fear, worry, happiness, wellness, anger, hate, education, jealousy, etc. All this can be manipulated, even by ourselves, consciously and unconsciously. In fact, it takes an intense learning process to to become aware of one’s own behavior, perception and choices, to get more or less liberated from manipulation. We call this a part of our higher evolutionary awareness. Not many people reach that state and those who do often become manipulators themselves with a large array of motives.
While I write this blog and re-read it I realize that I myself am one of them. I have grown over time mostly free from manipulation. Now (before I did not) I can see that I am being manipulated in intention by a dominant money and consumer driven system. This produces some kind of friction between me and the old generalized system. By introducing a new paradigm (sustainocracy) I also manipulate people by showing them a different truth. Despite my desire to be ethical and transparent I do create a new environment with the intention to provide people such a sense of new security that they decide to follow my views and let go of the old paradigm.
All I try to do, which justifies my motivation and passion, is to make people aware of manipulation and help them make up their own mind, without prejudice finally about their choice, not even when they decide to turn their back to me. I see it hence as a challenge to explain myself and Sustainocracy in such a way that people start believing in it, more than the other reigning system. But isn’t that what the system of capitalist consumer economics does too? And has been doing successfully for a long time? So we both compete in the psychology of manipulation presenting two different paradigms to the people. I am of course just a beginner while the other paradigm has thousands of years of experience.
Psychology of manipulation
When it is warm we buy an ice-cream when its cold we wear a pullover. We look around us and decide what we do, need, say, move, ….almost instantly. Our impressions do not just have to do with sensory perception, they are also colored by what we think is right or wrong, just, wishful, desirable, etc. In reality we have been conditioned to instant reaction right from the moment we were born and open our eyes to see the world. Normally we see the face of one of our parents at first, or a doctor or nurse. We see lights, colors, movements …. We smell and taste things….we hear noises, sounds, melodies, voices. All these first impressions reach us without giving it yet a conscious thought, they form however the basis of the big pile of sensory impressions to come that we do reflect consciously about.
After growing up in a certain environment it becomes so familiar, our own unquestionable reality, a specific truth. Every new observation and experience is being compared with circumstances we lived through before in the past. It enhances them, builds them up, or rejects them, until you feel at home right in the middle of those impulses from outside. This helps to react instantaneously on most issues of life during the day and makes you feel familiar with the way others react too. Together we form a culture, a set of values around language, beliefs, behavior, etc, that define us as a community. It gives us a behavioral identity. This gives a sense of belonging that remains united to our local natural and human surroundings. It is important to us because we need speedy adaptation and reaction when our behavioral routine is upset in any way. It is important for our mind to be able to distinguish between the normal and abnormal and react adequately, especially when in danger.
So securities are built up by ourselves and with our cultural environment to make us feel safe within ourselves. We auto-manipulate this feeling out of risk avoidance, fear control and sense of control. This can of course be manipulated also by an organized surroundings that is based on institutionalized principles. This then becomes also a paradigm, a worldview that is conditioned by certain values. Our current ruling paradigm is the one of capitalist economics. The one that I am introducing with arguments is called “sustainocracy”.
That is psychology of manipulation, the sense of providing external security to a community of people by the internal perception of security.
Psychology of change
People are of course reluctant to change when it addresses their sense of security. Nowadays we are confronted with a lot of information on climate changes, pollution, global warming, financial crises, other crises, etc. When we read such issues in the newspapers and watch documentaries on TV we become worried. We still, however live our day to day, everyday life. We are worried about the large picture and yet do what we have always done. “What do you want me to do?” you would say, “who am I to do anything?”, you may suggest. “Let the government solve it” most of us would say. And you are probably right!
Unless your name is on the list of the G7 and G20 encounter, or something like that. Which is what tends to happen. A few hundred powerful people join in global talks but fail to talk about change because they want to keep a capitalist economy going that provides perceived security to many people including the ones in power. And 7 billion people feel too small, too insignificant, too unaware, to do anything while feeling blindly secure in their day to day living experience, expecting that the big G solve it all. Until it is too late.
So if we want to change anything we have to overcome the “psychology of fear for change”. This starts with the aspect of “negation”. This feeling is normal. To accept a responsibility we have to be aware that we actually carry one. Or that we become aware that those who we think are responsible, have good reasons for themselves to avoid change and will therefor not take that kind of responsibility.
As explained above we see our direct environment as a secure cultural nest in which we were born and grew up. If we want to change we attack our inner senses of security and that creates an intense feeling of fear and insecurity. At individual level, despite the awareness that things need to change, we have the tendency of neglecting it just out of fear of the consequences. We tend to place the responsibility elsewhere, outside our own scope. You may say that this the mentality of an ostrich yet it has a strong basis of survival. If everyone would panic upon the wisdom of need for change the chaos would even be more dangerous. Human beings need some kind of leadership to address change.
The need for change grows, the negation too
Meanwhile a growing part of those 7 billion people are being incorporated into the Western example of material wealth. They feel that they have every right, just like European and Americans have enjoyed this wealth for a long time already. They are right of course. Why would they have to step back being the newcomers on the scene while the old guys made the biggest damage? Aren’t all people in the world allowed to have a TV set, a house, a car and a well stocked supermarket around the corner? Sure!
So the biggest challenge of the global shift is to change everything without changing anything. Would it be possible to keep up and expand wellness around the world without damaging it? Many scientists and business people would see a challenge in it, many local small governments also, but national large governments and bankers seem to be more than reluctant. “You can change whatever you want as long as it gives us an economy of growth” they would claim out of self interest. What they really express is their fear for loosing power, control and a financial profit. So when we introduce the need for change we also have to seriously accept the “psychology of change” as a challenge to overcome, including the powerful.
Two ways to change
There is the universal natural way, which is the traditional chaos of destruction through war, depression, recession, poverty, etc which obliges all people to change by external, non human force. When institutions keep up their opposition and negation too long they block the flexibility and adaptiveness of a population around evolutionary change and provoke a natural collapse. The human suffering is huge and so is the institutional because it collapses. It is all expressed by violence, demanding the liability of the old leaders which are prosecuted by the laws of chaos or history books.
Then there is the voluntary way, as proposed ( and demonstrated) by Sustainocracy. When we offer the current authorities the recognition of power, also in the new paradigm, then they feel secure to support change. Fear is overcome by safety, also involving the powerful. So psychology of change has much to do with communication, not just providing means for others to change but also by being the change by providing security in following. Followers show their own leadership by making choices in which we recognize the intense process of letting go of old securities. If the new securities provide a better perspective people are much more willing to open up for change, also when they have a high level position of power.
Yes, I can
Sustainocracy builds a new society directly in a new new paradigm using the same instruments of power and authority of the old paradigm. It is interesting to see that sustainocracy offers more security to the powerful than the crumbling paradigm of consumer economics. Executives that are value (not money) driven are the very first to support the transformation, which is also becoming a transformation of securities, not just of values, economies and ethics. Now executives have a choice and when aware of their own responsibilities they can claim: “I know I can”.
Like every situation when a choice is presented between two paradigms, a new issue arises: “explain why you made your choice”. That will be subject to subject of a new blog.
Nicolai Kondratieff (1892 – 1938) introduced a theory about cycles of 50 to 60 years in capitalist economics. The cycles show a sinusoidal shape that can be divided into four different “seasons”: prosperity, recession, depression and improvement.
Those of you who know my model of human complexities (see below) will also recognize the same four situations or states, named in a similar but different way and also following each other in a chronological way, despite human tendensy to counteract the flow in certain stages. Rather than showing a sinus timeline I show a cyclic movement that evolves into an evolutionary spiral (not drawn in this particular drawing that represents just a single cycle showing the phases we go through).
Using my own model I relate a number of human variables to the cyclic experience, as individuals and as communities. Each phase and change among them has much to do with the human psyche which would explain the linear fluctuations in time in both the Kondratieff and my (Close) model. We can also map generations on both models to see where they stood in relation to economic development or recessions and what emotional or cultural environment supported each phase. In the Kondrakieff sinus this is easily done against very specific chronological data. It is easy to plot also very specific events as points of reference, s.a. World War II for instance.
The points of reference help to relate the different models by synchronization in time and region. World War II got us (large parts of Europe) into a state of chaos for instance. It would be a “starting” point in my model due to the time reference that can also be further extended to a specific regional location. This you can read for Holland, Spain and the USA in chapter 11 of my ebook on the Global Shift (2011)
Then we could observe how generations evolve, one after the other, with the effects of the cycles of human complexities and the Kondratieff sinus of economic seasoning on them. In my model I show that people who grow up in a situation of wealth are being educated accordingly. This means that we are being educated with wealth as a matter of fact. I remember my own growing up phase in the midst of the post war culture of prosperity of the late 60’s early 70’s in Holland. We all wanted to be a millionair by the age of 30. What we were really doing was to create our own crises by mere cultural mentality caused by the environment in which we lived. Generations follow each other up every 20 to 25 years which would show another sinusoidial wave based on culture and mentality following Kondratieff in a different phase. We could probably draw the technological peaks with the mentality ones on the models, just to see how they influence each other.
In my model I do not relate necessarily to periods of 50 or 60 years for one cycle to complete as this may have to do with administrative economics rather than human (generational and environmental) complexities. I have even suggested that in prehistorical times a complete human complexities cycle could take hundreds or even thousands of years, affected more by natural environmental periods of abundance, interaction with hostile encounters or the chaos produced by natural disasters. When we look at the Chinese dynasties a direct link can be made with such cycles. Economics did not exist nor did therefor the Kondratieff sinus. My model did apply though.
Only now, the recent few hundred years we have found the cycles shorten to such an extend that we live through one or two complete cycles in an entire lifetime. My model hence relates to environmental circumstances (culture, war, periods of peace, nature, catastophes, crises, etc) as key influencial factors on human behavior and a historical clear reference with which we can relate human reaction and evolution both technologically and socially.
My model also introduces the line of sustainable human progress along which the traumatic human events can be plotted. This is new in any documentation. I use my transition phases (greed and enlightenment) while economists would only refer to entering and leaving the chaos quadrant as two seperate phases (bull and bear markets respectivily). The line of sustainable human progress is an evolutionary straight line that moves from chaos to wealth and beyond. The transition phases (greed gets us back into chaos and enlightenment gets us back to organized wealth) can also be seen in the sinus of Kondratieff.
Kondratieff shows an organic human logic in time phases with a build up of technological highlights and the economic effects. The same complex origin for progress can be found in the human complexities (psychology, education, culture) within the phase of chaos (war, depression) and enlightenment (the left hand side of my model). Humankind apparently needs stress to be inventive while in times of wealth and greed little to nothing new is added. Instead we see then an increase in risk avoidance, bureaucracy and hierarchies, which translates into a measureable increase in costs of society. This is also the reason of sudden collapse into a recession in cycles of about 7 years (domino effect).
- Year 1: market crisis (consumer crisis for whatever reason)
- Year 2: business crisis (expected turnover not reached)
- Year 3: government crisis (expected tax income not reached)
- Year 4: government dependent instances crisis (education, police, etc)
- Year 5: business downsized, fused, innovated, went broke..builds up again
- Year 6: government gets more tax income
- Year 7: government dependencies get more air
During those seven years all economic institutions go through reorganizations, eliminating bureaucracy and trying to open themselves up for innovation. Costs are eliminated and they are downsized, renewed their structures to get a positive impulse. The impulse gets everything into a new investment round that results in 7 perceived good years and then it starts falling back again. This would suggest that the traditional 7 bad years, 7 good years, 7 bad years, 7 good years could be expalined in a sinusoidal wave of 49 years. With economics we created an artificial environment that shows a more organized sinuswave than when interacting with the multidimensional complexity of nature and the chaotic tribal confrontations of the past.
Sometimes the economic years are stretched a bit after a capital injection, an overenthusiastic increase of national debt, etc. The figure we see returning all the time (“about 50 years” – equivalent to an ancient average generational lifetime) is just a logical reflection of our administrative economic organization of one natural year and our human “perception” of what we believe is good or bad. This would also suggest that if we would half the administrative year or extend it to two years we would see the waves shorten and lengthen respectively. This may be something for further study by someone even though natural seasons may still have some significance in our, otherwise highly automated artificial productivity.
It also has to do with our fragmented structure of society along a chain of economic dependencies. If we set up society differently (eg a Sustainocracy) then the economic world would never collapse. Sinusoidal waves would not exist because we eliminated the duality in our progress by concentrating on a single higher common purpose (sustainable human progress) with highly flexible, dynamically adaptive non fixed, hierarchical organizations. We unite our knowledgeable awareness with our adaptive productivity towards a permanent never ending goal.
What the Kondratieff model does not foresee is the piling up of an exponential curve within the current artificial sinusoidal. This is effect is caused in the last 40 years after the liberation of money for speculation around shortages by the entire, global institutional world. It coincides with the “information technology” era of the 5th Kondratieff wave, which is why it confuses the analysts. Taking also the limited Earth resources into account, the dip of the 5th Kondrakieff wave coincides with my crossing over from greed to chaos and a point of singularity of overall financial collapse.
The creditcrisis of 2008 has been just a warning signal. Banks will never recover despite the huge capital injections and government finances collapse all together. The Kondratieff’s winter and my model’s point of chaos are this time expected to be more dramatic then ever, making the Russian natural winter feel warm, and the Arab spring feel peaceful, compared to previous events. Some think that the solution lies in a new technological phase s.a. nano-technology. I personally believe that the next phase has nothing to do with technology or capitalist economics but awareness and a totally new type of society.
And that is where I come in with Sustainocracy. I cannot create a Kondratieff sinusoidal counter wave now to avoid a mayor crash, nor prevent local poverty from rising, or avoid a potential new world war. I can however introduce a new paradigm that can instantly transform current society, situated structurally in greed (recession) on the way to chaos (depression), into one positioned permanently in wealth (prosperity) by taking institutional responsibility today. This would maybe break or interrupt the sinus or introduce a new aspect that actually supports the sinus but from a different point of view. My own shortcut, interrupting the traditional ups and downs of society, has to do with our current state of collective understanding (awareness, consiousness).
We now collectively understand the above and the consequences of continuing. By introducing sustainocracy we now have a choice. We could trust the sinusoidal wave as an external matter of fact and realize that a new generation of prosperity is hopefully being born today to grow up and make it happen during the Konfratieff dip. We can also take responsibility and use what we know now to create a society based on new facts, a higher awareness, before it’s too late. Like building a Sustainocracy right now in ever city or region in the world.
How powerful will people remain when the collapse continues and the point of singularity makes the sinus wave the deepest ever? What interest can people have in total collapse? How powerful can these same people become when they assume sustainocratic responsibility and turn the ship with consiousness and planned wisdom before organic logic does it with brutal force? If you are in a position of power today just ask yourself that question.
It can be done through human ethical behavior, leadership and awareness. It is difficul but worth it. I am doing it with people around me who have fragmented authorities and power (government, business, science, civilians) and they use it with me in purpose driven social and technological innovation. We do not place money in the center of attention but sustainable human progress, a clear environmental and social balance in circular economics of value creation. By doing so we create a rapid change in mentality and see a period of many decades and even centuries in reformatting and organizing our civilization with a positive consequences for economies. That I call the second quantum leap of human kind. Not by chance but by willpower and awareness.
Sustainocratic transformation is a voluntary act of responsibility
With the kickoff of the first sustainocratic initiative in the city of Eindhoven (the Netherlands) the first step is made to create a “purpose driven economy”. What is the difference with what we have today? And why is it important for the rest of the world to follow the experiment in Eindhoven and, better still, start one of their own?
Our current economies are not purpose but consequence driven. The human being is positioned as compulsory consumer. The entire institutionalized society is focused on creating a mountain of wealth around this consumer that gives a sense of abundance at all times. The only way to access this abundance is through financial means. Some of these means are individually obtained through the production, logistics and sales infrastructure necessary to maintain this mountain of abundance. Other get paid out of the hierarchies funded through taxation on this consumer organization. Or through speculation on material resources contained in this “having” type of culture. And finally also debt.
The consequences of such consumer economy show a growing tendency of (negative) influences that need attention through investments. Think of infrastructures, healthcare organizations, police, etc attending the attitude of greed and its effects on the human being, physically and mentally. This also shows an exponential growth which is equally reflected in the world economy through the costs of societies. At the same time we see our environment and human behavior deteriorate fast.
The model of economies of growth purely based on unlimited consumption and the consequences thereof, is obsolete because we use our natural resources wrongly, destroy our environment, sicken ourselves and eventually eliminate our evolutionary chances.
Fragmented complex society
We know this now, including scientific proof, but have difficulties in changing the course of society. We created a very complex mesh of fragmented financial entities with dependencies and interests among each other on which powers and influences are being based. Each institutions has a perceived right to exist and defend its own interests. There is not one single institution that takes full responsibility for sustainable human progress. The institutional mesh is based on fragmented self interest and competition.
Key is the understanding that no institutional specialization can take holistic responsibility for human safety, health or sustainable progress. It is the human being itself that needs to take this responsibility. What went wrong in the consequence driven consumer economy was that the human being delegated its wellness through fragmented institutionalized structures that grew into tremendously inflated organs like an abscess or cancer would do on a sick body. Instead of serving humankind they try to serve themselves. This fragmented type of human organization is institutionally sick with the risk of the cancers to develop themselves further and destroy our evoutionary chances.
Purpose driven economies
The big difference with the old consumer economy is that it is not based on consumption and growth but on true value creation (purpose). It is not based on massive productivity and distribution but on local content. It is a circular type of economy where “purpose” is defined according local human needs, obtained through local effort and using local resources in a circular way.
To achieve a purpose driven economy an intense transformation is needed. But it can be done using the same institutional instruments of the old society. Each participant needs to cure its cancer like development and abuse and become functional again within the scope of local for local requirements. It requires a different mentality and true transformative leadership in each institution involved.
Abundance is not presented through logistic channels from around the world, it is created by local cooperative efforts. In such local cooperation we see the four traditional human values come together: attitude, creativity, environment and wisdom. Those values in the old economy were split into separate institutions that do not act locally but globally, not in an integrated way but based on self interest, greed and fragmented excellence. Now we bring this global expertise back to the local context.
Using what we have learned
The great advantage of today is that the old consequence driven consumer economy has left us with a huge amount of accumulated experience and material knowledge thanks to the concentrated specialized, fragmented functions of expertise that developed over time. This would never have occurred if this phase of humankind had not taken place. For a long time it was very constructive. Now it has become destructive.
We hence do not criticize our past but use the best of its elements in our new progress. We can of course be critical to those old time forces that try to prevent us from creating purpose driven progress. It is just a matter of time for that opposition to disappear. Eventually the purpose driven economies will develop there where the old one has become obsolete, entered into a crisis, providing room for renewal, not just in a physical, organizational sense but especially emotionally, spiritual and rationally when people become aware.
Complex transformative process
It is a complex process that is typically developed locally and bottom up with executive support to make it happen. The reason that it happened in Eindhoven first and not yet in another region is simply because this small Dutch town unites the essential ingredients to make it happen. What are these ingredients:
- Awareness at executive level
- Open democracy of true equality
- Level of education and experience
- The right people at the right time
These qualities produce the necessary flexibility that can address the future with adaptive determination in a complex modern world. People take responsibility individually, convince their surroundings to support change and find ways to make it happen. The purpose is found in the essentials of human existence: food, health, security, wellness (housing, energy, etc) and knowledge. When it becomes clear that the global consequence driven consumer economy is obsolete speed is required to create a new sense of reality and responsibility, including a change in behavior. When the time of old abundance is over, new abundance needs to be created, preferably on time.
Wellness is not a cost or right but the result of a responsibility and hard work (purpose) together. When circumstances change stability is found in change too. In a sustainocracy the purpose driven economy is initiated together. We do this by making human wellness a purpose driven issue of the local population with the support of the accumulated institutional excellence and enhancing potential.
Purpose driven economic development based on sustainocratic complexities is needed to save humankind from the present day destructive expectations caused by the consequence driven consumer economy. If not we will face disaster. Yet if we assume responsibility individually and institutionally we also face a huge transformative challenge that will upset everything that we have known so far. The choice between destruction or working together on a healthier perspective is easy for me. I have become self aware and dedicated more than a decade to come to these views and initiatives. It is a start, giving comfort that humankind has a choice indeed. A choice that simply depends on one own and not someone else. But I realize that it is a difficult one, not only when one has to make it, but also for me to reach out to the world and make the choice known to all. If one does not know than no choice will be made. My personal challenge is hence multiple. Make it happen for myself, provide proof to my surroundings and reach out to all of you with sufficient clarity that you take sufficient confidence in the course that I have taken in order to let go of old securities and create new ones for yourselves and your direct surroundings.