A weblog with random thoughts and reflections on society and ecology.   Archives << current   weblogs intro transdual view society & ecology personal design

Society & Ecology   Wednesday, December 03, 2003   Ecology & Economy We know that "environmental technologies" will be a major industry in the coming decades, as ecological problems become more visible, and their impacts closer to our immediate lives (health, water, food, mass migrations, etc). We also know that solutions good in the short and long term, and for people as well as ecosystems, are not neccesarily more economically expensive. In most cases, what is needed is good design. In that light, it is somewhat surprising to still see the old attitidue that these solutions are "too expensive". We see it in the Bush administration (which is not surprising since short term profit for buddy old-approach corporations is their main objective) and it also crops up other places. Most recently Russia's hesistations regarding the Kyoto Protocol. Developing technology that harvests clean energy, industrial processes that provides clean air, water and soil as a by-product, food production that enriches wild ecosystems, all these are areas of the future. Investing in developing these technologies today will lead to short and long term economical benefits. Instead of seeing these technologies as costly, they can be more correctly be seen as investments that yield profits in all areas. 14:45    (0) comments    Saturday, November 01, 2003   Cultural Change Strategies Three Dimensions Joanna Macy outlines three dimensions to The Great Turning - our shift from an industrial growth society to a life-sustainaing and life-centered civilization. 1. Holding actions - stopping the current destruction. 2. Analysis - of causes, processes. 3. Shift in consciousness - to a more systemic, life-centered view, and solutions emerging from this view. Perceived Substance In our current society, especially as reflected in media, the focus is typically on problems, mostly from a limited and mainstream view. There seems to be a perception that problems are more substantial than solutions, and that problem focus is a reflection of a more serious mind than solution focus. This attitude seems to be an integral part of the industrial growth society, and is ironically enough adopted by many who see some of the problems of this society. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately), it is less effective - and far less enjoyable - than a solution focus. Problem focus tells us what is wrong (as if we don't know!), makes the change effort appear dreary (which it is when a problem focus is adopted), and leads to burnout (wisdom of nature). Solution focus helps us see beyond the (often familiar) problems, gives us a direction and longer view (visions), appears more meaningful and joyful (it is), and gives us the energy and joy to keep going. Some Examples - Democracy [in progress] Here are some examples of problems and applied solution focus. All related to democracy: Problem: Diebold and voting machines Diebold is a company (ultra-conservative) given the lucrative task of providing the US with voting machines. These voting machines are proprietary "black boxes". There is no paper trail, and no-one is allowed to look at the source code etc. to control that the results are accurate. There have been several instances that seriously questions how reliable these uncontrollable machines are, and Diebold happily sues anyone who questions the wisdom of using their machines. (Strikingly Orwellian). Verified Voting Black Box Voting Blues - Newsweek All the President's Votes - Independent/UK Visualize a Fair Election in 2004 - Greg Palast/Yes! Safeguarding the Vote - Doug Pibel.Yes! Solution: The solution is Open Source technology. Software with source code open to anyone, and developed and checked by a large number of people around the world. E-Voting Done Right - article from Wired about e-voting in Australia (open source) Open Source Everywhere - Wired Magazine Open Source Initiative Linux / Open Source (Google News Search) History of the Open Source Movement NewsForge Linux Journal Problem: Marginal democracy between nations There is an obvious lack of true democracy on an international level. The United Nations is an excellent beginning, but also in need of reform. Currently, the permanent members of the security council have a veto power which takes power away from the general assembly - where it belongs. Solution: Reform of the United Nations to make it more truly democratic, and giving more power to the United Nations. Problem: Marginal democracy within nations There is much room for improvement in democracies around the world. Some of the problem areas are lack of citizen participation, corporate donations to candidates and politicians (in the US, a politician is dependent on corporate sponsorship to have any chance to be elected, even on a local level), corporate media that sets the agenda and content for public concerns and debate, and multinational corporations and their organizations (WTO etc) creating international laws and regulations that undermines national and regional laws (laws protecting workers and ecosystems). Solution: Increased citizen participation (citizen councils), multiparty system (in the US), better voting systems (instant runoff voting), crassroots globalization. Co-Intelligence Institute - techniques for citizen participation Instant Runoff Voting - info from Center for Voting and Democracy Instant Runoff Voting Problem: Neoliberal gloablization Neo-liberal globalization is a code word for removing obstacles for multinational corporations to amass more wealth and power. In the vast majority of cases, it is not in the interest of people, ecosystems, and future generations. Solution: Local economies Problem: Corporate media Corporate media (which is more than 90% of the media these days) align their views with the interest of corporations, and increasingly sets the agenda for politics and society. CorpWatch - watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting Cursor Media Transparency Who Owns What - Columbia Journalism Review Media Reform Information Center - resource list Solution: One solution is citizen media (online). IndyMedia Guerilla News Network Common Dreams AlterNet ZNet 07:03    (0) comments    Sunday, October 26, 2003   Relationship to Life A society must incorporate a deep respect for all life to maintain itself. To include all life in our circle of concern, to include them in what we see as "us", will help us organize our lives in a way that is truly life-supporting. A way that is sustainable - for ourselves and the larger systems we are embedded in. The way we currently relate to non-human species reflects a blindly dualistic attitude. We see "them" as separate from "us", and not how we are expressions of and embedded in one system (the universe, the Earth). We do not realize that the way we relate to other living beings reflect how we relate to aspects of ourselves. The dualism, the narrow circle of concern, hurts us as much as it hurts other beings and the ecosystems we all are parts of. Everything is in continuious change. Galaxies, solar systems, planets, ecosystems, individuals, bodies, experiences - all continually die as they were and is reborn into something else. There is nothing to hold onto - human beings is a transient phenomenon. How long we - and our (human and possibly post-human) descendants - will be around is largely up to us. There is a good chance that the universe is set up so that species that habitually harm themselves by harming the fabric they are dependent upon, will not be around for long. This may be no tragedy from the perspective of the Earth or the Universe, but it certainly is to us. Selfishness, combined with a realization of our dependence of a healthy Earth, leads to altruism. Bringing all life into our circle of concern. See them as "us". 22:40    (0) comments    Monday, September 08, 2003   Fermi's Paradox I was just reading a review on a book on Fermi's Paradox: If the Universe is teeming with life, where is everybody? Form what we know about life (which is admittedly limited to this one planet), it would not be surprising if the Universe is indeed teeming with life. Life (as we know it) does seem to arise quickly under the right conditions (liquid water, organic matter). It may also not be surprising that we have had no - verified and "universally" accepted - contact yet. Contact does require many components to be in place: (a) Another civilization that has developed technology for radio communication (since we listen for radio signals) or long-distance travel. (b) That they desire contact (they may have it as a low priority, want to protect the other civilization or themselves from the consequences of contact, or have other reasons). (c) That they are active in our vicinity (within this galaxy). (d) That they are active at a time that allows us to detect them (so their signals arrive now - when we are finally listening, or have visited during the last few thousand years, wanted their presence known, and the visits were recorded so later generations could decipher it correctly). Civilizations may be sophisticated and advanced, and yet use neither radio communication nor space travel - their technology may be very different from ours. They may decide that technology is far less important than many other areas of life (culture, spirituality). Or they may have the technology but not desire contact or letting themselves be known. Maybe most likely, civilizations with the rights characteristics for us to detect them (compatible technology, desire) may be (a) far away from us, and (b) active at a time that does not allow us to detect them (in the past or future). Still, I think that SETI (Search for Extraterrestial Intelligence) is one of the most worthwile efforts humans can undertake. It sets our own situation in perspective - we may be just one of a myriad of civilizations out there. And if there is contact, if we do detect another civilization, it will be among the most important discoveries of all time. It will change our own civilization forever. 09:46    (0) comments    Sunday, September 07, 2003   Lynn Margulis Lynn Margulis, one of my favorite scientists, was interviewed on NRK recently. She is the main (nearly the only?) proponent of the importance of symbiogenesis in evolution of life. Symbiogenesis is the emergence of a new species through the combination (symbiogenesis) of two other species. The cells in all plants and animals have evolved through symbiogensis (this is one of Margulis' theories that met immense resistance when it was first launched, and today is widely accepted). I thought the program did a good job in explaining symbiogenesis, and in emphasizing that it does not replace natural selection in explaining evolution. Symbiogenesis explains the emergence of some species, while natural selection explains the continuation (or not) of the species. The question - and here is where Margulis' views differ from that of most of biologists - is how important and frequent symbiogenesis is. How many species, and which ones, have evolved through symbiogenesis. Is it as common as she says, or infrequent - an aberration - as others assume. One thing is for certain, none of us would be here was it not for symbiogenesis. All life we see around us is the direct consequence of symbiogenesis (all eukaryotic cells originated through symbiogenesis). It cannot be seen as an aberration. The program also mentioned the other main theory promoted by Margulis: The Gaia theory - the Earth seen as a living system. Again, there is a general agreement that the Earth is indeed a living system. It is, after all, a seamless whole, and it is undeniably living. And again, the disagreement is to what extent and how (processes, mechanisms). Is it self-organizing (self-regulating)? Is it self-transcending (evolving)? Is it self-healing? I believe that all the data points to a "yes" to all those questions. The Gaia Theory does fulfull most or all commonly used criteria used to define a living system. It is just difficult for us, still living in an outdated reductionistic and mechanistic worldview, to accept the idea. It is also difficult for us as it is so much larger than us - we are just one small part of it. (Note that the Gaia theory says that Earth is a living system, not living organism). 18:16    (0) comments    Monday, August 25, 2003   A More Mature Democracy The democratic systems seen within nations today are all in their infancies. They are often based on majority rule (excluding minority positions), leave political power to those with financial power, leave decision making to an elected elite and their advisors, and often seem far removed from the lives of the voters. Among nations, the democratic system is even more in its infancy - the UN is a first step, although too often hijacked by the larger nations. Fortunately, there are several systems and processes emerging pointing to a more mature democracy. These are often explored by smaller groups, although some are already implemented by nations. Allowing all voices to be heard, and have a real influence, brings stability. Excluding some voices is a surefire way to violence, wars and terrorism. Here are some examples: * Deliberative Councils (allowing all voices to be heard, trusting the judegement of well informed smaller groups of citizens) * Separating politics and corporations (spending limits, not allow political advertisement) * Multi-party system (vs. the two-party system in the US which gives people no real choice) * Instant Runoff Voting 19:28    (0) comments    Tuesday, August 19, 2003   Rants I realize that this blog is turning more and more into rants about the abysmal state of the US, and although well deserved, I want to consolidate the rants and attempt more entries on positive solutions. These not only show some of the ways out, but focusing on solutions is a more effective way of changing the situation. They open up for partnerships rather than confrontation, and give hope. Read Rants here... 21:21    (0) comments    Tuesday, July 29, 2003   Process vs. Positions We have gained a good deal of experience with our current democratic system. A system where typically two or more factions are in adversarial positions to each other, and where one faction gains power for a while, creates changes, which are reversed when another faction gains power shortly after. We all know it is an imperfect system. Over the years, I have come to feel that most of the time it does not matter much who is in power. It is the same game of changing policies which then are reversed at next election. A solution to this is a more deeply democratic and participatory system - a system that focuses more on process and less on positions. One example is the citizen juries in Denmark, composed of a representative sample of the population, which examines in depth a particular issue - interviewing witnesses from all sides - and then comes with a recommendation to the government and the Danish people for how to approach the issue. As the juries are composed of a wide range of people and the process is solid, the solutions are typically perceived as balanced and wise by the general population. The Co-Intelligence Institute describes this and similar approaches to participatory/process oriented democracy on their website, and in the book The Tao of Democracy. 16:18    (0) comments    Thursday, July 24, 2003   Principles We have national leaders who accept, encourage and applaud the murder and assassination of leaders of other nations. Bush with Iraq's leaders - as now with the two sons of Saddam Hussein, and Sharon with Palestinian leaders. In the western world, the principle of ethical universality is strong and at the core of our philosophical and religious traditions - traditions they both claim to uphold and promote. I truly wonder if they would applaud and encourage this particular principle if they were on the receiving end. It becomes only more obvious that the so called "war on terrorism" is used to excuse inexcusable behavior - to further US global cultural, economic and military dominance (a goal directly stated by many US leaders). If they truly wanted to diminish terrorism, they would make sincere efforts to withdraw culturally, economically and militarily from around the world, and aid countries in strengthening their own cultural traditions and economics (on their terms). This will not happen soon, due to the trinity of multinational corporations (where short term profit is the main guiding principle), US politicians fully dependent on the same corporations for funding to be elected, and mass media owned by the same corporations. 21:31    (0) comments    Sunday, July 20, 2003   Human Bias Our experience of the world is shaped and influenced by a multitude of factors: (a) The structure and characteristics of this particular universe. The natural habits ("laws") as we know them. (b) Being a planet-based creature. (c) Our size. About 5-6 feet - enormous from the perspective of molecules or ants, tiny from the perspective of solar systems, galaxies and the Universe as a whole. (d) Our life-length. About 50-100 years - long compared to the lifespan of a lightning, a bubble or a fly, a glimpse compared to the lifespan of planets and suns. (e) Our evolutionary history. Our experiences is filtered through our evolutionary history - traits and patterns that helped our ancestors survive. (f) Our biology. We perceive with senses that opens up for some impressions and experiences, but leaves a vastly larger number out. We hear in a very limited range (compared to for instance bats). We see in an equally limited range (compared with gold fish). Our sense of touch functions on a limited scale (we cannot sense molecules or even quite significant collections of molecules). (g) Our culture. (h) Our personal experiences. (i) Our mental and physical state at the moment. It has many benefits to be aware of this. It helps us detect our own bias and that of others, and take it into account. Our experience of the world is always limited and biased. The world is always infinitely more than and different from our experience of it. And our *ideas* of the world are in turn rigid and limited expressions of our fluid experiences... Our views and theories express our particular relationship with the world. I was reminded of this when I read that an archeologist from Brigham Young University theorized that the Mayan culture disintegrated due to the "loss of the royal court and the erosion of public faith in the hierarchy" (National Geographic, August 2003, p. 99). Of course, Brigham Young is the University of The Church of the Latter Day Saints (aka Mormons), which place a very strong importance on faith in hierarchy. 15:07    (0) comments    Saturday, July 19, 2003   Lawns We are doing yardwork at our co-op today, which mainly involves lawn maintenance. The lawn will eventually be replaced with something else, but that is still somewhat in the future. The history of lawns shows how many seemingly insignificant factors combined to have a large impact - on the look of our communities and how we spend much of our time. The precursors of our modern lawns were the grazing areas around the manors in Great Britain. Following the industrial revolution, maintaining a lawn required hiring gardeners or having significant free time, and they became a symbol of wealth and disposable resources. As Great Britain was the main superpower of the day, this particular status symbol was adopted around the world. [Possible sequence: (a) The few wealthy graze sheep around their manors. The poorer use the commons. (b) The wealthy shift their investments from livestock to factories during the industrial revolution. They are used to short grass around their manors, and hire gardeners to mimick the effects of grazing sheep. (c) Short grass/lawns become a status symbol, also for the growing middle class. (d) Great Britain is the main superpower of the day, and people around the world adopt this particular British status symbol.] Today, lawns are partly a status symbol, but more than that - they are a sign of our lack of imagination. We plant, or inherit and maintain, a lawn because we don't know what else to do with it. There are currently about 30 to 40 million acres of lawn in the US (estimates vary), which makes it the largest crop in North America. We spend $17.4 billion dollars, 300 million gallons of gas and 1 billion hours to maintain our lawns. A look at biology gives us the reason for lawns being such resource sinks. All ecosystems evolve towards greater diversity and maturity, and lawns are a prime example of immature ecosystems (a monoculture). Through growing long grass and "weeds" they move towards increased diversity and maturity. In maintaining lawns, we work against natural processes which - not surprisingly - requires an investment of large resources (time, money, gas, chemicals). There are fortunately many attractive alternatives, ranging from low to high maintenance, and having few to multiple functions. Some examples are rock gardens, meadows and prairie (good insect and wildlife habitat), xeriscaping (plants thriving on regular rainfall in the area), and a flower and herbal groundcover. 09:41    (0) comments    Friday, July 18, 2003   Cultural Patterns I read "Lord of the Rings" as a teenager, and enjoyed it at the time. Now, I find it difficult to relate to the main premise of the story: The battle between "good" and "evil". It is a premise that seems to be at the core of what is unhealthy about our culture. It is the George W. Bush view of the world: The battle against good and evil. Sacrificing oneself for the sake of the higher truth... It is also the view of all caught up in a blindly dualistic view of the world - identifying people with abstract notions of good and evil, right and wrong. Some are "evil"/"bad" and "deserve" to be eliminated. Others are "good" and heroic. The alternative is to recognize in ourselves what we see in others (shared humanity), and realize that the world is always more than and different from our perceptions of it. Our ideas of the world is just that - our ideas. 23:04    (0) comments    Saturday, July 12, 2003   Media & Hindsight Media these days (especially in Europe) focus on Blair and Bush misleading the public about (a) the threat from Iraq (minimal or nonexistent) and (b) the ease of the war and occupation. The threat was known to be minimal even at the time, and the difficulties were predictable. It is astonishing that it takes so long for it to be a topic of conversation... Of course, it is a typical pattern: First commit atrocities under the cover of false (often seemingly ethical) excuses to gain power and resources. Then gradually admit the pretense after it is too late to undo the situation. The situation for the First Peoples in North America is a prime example. First committing genocide and stealing their land and resources, then slowly elevate them after they are no longer a threat or in the way. Here are some examples of what I wrote about the Iraq situation in March, four months before these issues became the focus in media: "Threat Iraq posed no immediate threat towards the US or any other nation, according to their neighboring countries, the UN weapons inspectors and the CIA. There was no reason to not allow the UN weapons inspectors to continue their inspections for a few more months, as they asked for. With more than 200 weapons inspectors in Iraq, and a close scrutiny by the world community, the situation was well contained. " "Misinformation The US government has systematically misled the public and lied about the Iraq situation. They have insinuated that there is a link between the Iraqi government and past, current or future terrorism, and there is none (again according to CIA and other intelligence sources). There is also no indication that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, according to among others the UN weapons inspectors. Hans Blix has expressed it clearly, and the Norwegian weapons inspector Jørn Siljeholm, said that the US systematically lied on this topic. ("Asked if the Americans lied, Siljeholm said: "Lie is a strong word - but yes, the information Powell presented about Iraq's nuclear program was simply incorrect," Siljeholm said.") " "Invasion It is likely that the invasion and occupation of Iraq will run into a number of problems. The main one may be a persistent guerilla warfare. The history of the Iraqi people gives them strong reasons for resenting and opposing an invasion and occupation by the US and the UK. Some examples: [...] To believe that the Iraqi population will welcome them with open arms is remarkably naive, and publicly expressing that assumption must be a willful deception or coming from a surprising lack of insight in human nature in general and the Iraqi history in particular. The Iraqis, no matter their view of Saddam Hussein, will most likely defend their country with any means available against what they see as an illegitimate invasion and occupation." "Occupation and new government Any attempt to install a US controlled government in Iraq is likely to run into massive problems, for some of the same reasons as mentioned above. The invasion, occupation and "nation building" process is likely to be long, tortuous, and expensive (in terms of dollars, lives, suffering, and loss of goodwill)." 11:54    (0) comments    Sunday, June 22, 2003   Clicker Training I started yesterday with using clicker training with a housemate's cat. He is catching on quickly and can now sit on cue. Some basic principles: 1. All positive reinforcement (no punishment) 2. Partner approach. Equal partners and free choice (the best is when the trainee initiates the sessions, as Parsifal - our previous cat - did, and my new trainee now is doing, after only a day). 3. Brief sessions. Keep it brief and fun. Stop while there is still a good deal of interest from both of you. It works better with brief and frequent sessions rather than long ones. 4. Appropriate reward. Use a reward that works with the trainee - food, praise, etc. 5. Follow nature. Help the trainee learn behavior that is close to natural behavior, especially in the beginning. Sometimes it may work well to just wait for the behavior you are looking for, and click when it occurs. Sometimes it can be induced easily. With a cat, an easy start is to bring food directly over its head so it sits down naturally, and click. 6. Clicker as communication tool. Use a click to communicate a desired behavior. The click is then followed by the reward (the click indicates the exact behavior, and acts as a bridge to the reward). Click whenever a desirable or interesting behavior occur - you can train several behaviors parallel with each other. 7. Keep it fun. If it is fun for both of you, that is a sign that you are on the right path. 8. I have found that it seems easier and quicker to train older animals. They tend to be more grounded and focused, while younger ones are have a more fragmented and shorter attention. With clicker training, old age is no drawback. The general principles in clicker training are important principles for all learning - for all of us and in all situations... 09:00    (0) comments      Happiness Researchers at University of Wisconson (in Madison where I lived for five years) have found that Buddhist practitioners are - on average - more happy than others. I assume it is due to a combination of mind training and sitting meditation. The mind training (lo jong in Tibetan) offers tools to approach situations in a more fruitful way. The meditation practice offers sentering and a sense of spaciousness and perspective. 05:35    (0) comments      Partnership, Choice & Positive Reinforcement I read Horse Sense for People by Monty Roberts a couple of days ago, on my way from St. Louis to Portland (coming back from Europe). His approach seems to be in the same family as that of Clicker Training and Nonviolent Communication. They are communication tools and languages, they offer ways to establish good connection between living beings, they help us meet our needs more effectively, and some of them work accross species lines (although NVC is more verbally oriented than the two others). They also share specific insights and tools. First, a partnership and power-with orientation allows us to seek strategies that will meet the needs of all involved. It allows for choices (giving choice to the other, taking responsibility for own choices), and requests (no punishment). Second, an emphasis on positive reinforcement (punishment is not effective in meeting our needs - we may get the behavior but also resentment, suboptimal performance and loss of connection). I am working on bringing NVC more into my life, along with the principles from Clicker Training and the Horse Sense approach. One training ground for me was using Clicker Training with our cat, Parsifal. He learned the basic principle quickly (click signals "correct" behavior and food), and quickly picked up tricks such as sit, lie down, sit up, stay, jump up on table/down from table, jump through a hoop, and follow a stick/cone of light - often in one or a few sessions. It engaged his mind (and sense of urgency) to an extent that I suspect only a life in the wild can. 05:06    (0) comments    Monday, June 02, 2003   Reverse Perspectives It is often helpful to apply perspectives reverse from those we habitually apply or typically find in mainstream community. I was reminded of two areas today where perspectives reverse from the mainstream appear to offer valuable insights. The G8 countries are currently meeting in France. The mainstream view, at least as reflected in mainstream media, is that it is terrible for (a small portion of) the demonstrators to use violence. The reverse is often ignored - the daily and massive violence engaged in by the G8 countries. This is a systematic economic, cultural and military violence aimed at maximizing profits for the few at the expense of the many. (A sidetrack: As is so often the case, the vast majority of the demonstrators are peaceful but the media focuses on the small minority who use violence - against property. The media also portay the demonstrators as "anti-globalization" while they in reality are concerned with one particular form of globalization - the current one that benefits large multinational corporations at a terrible cost to people and ecosystems worldwide. A true grassroots globalization, one that is people and ecosystem focused, is strongly desired by the majority of the demonstrators.) Another example is tagging. I am visitng family and friends in Norway, and notice tagging at certain locations. What is striking is that the tagging seem to occur on structures most people would find severly lacking in aestethic appeal (aka incredibly ugly). A reverse perspective here will find that the true "crime" may be committed by those who built those structures - structures which do not improve the quality of the community but rather detracts from it. The taggers seem to do us all a service by drawing attention to the most unappealing elements in our built community. 10:47    (0) comments    Monday, May 05, 2003   Open Source Approach The Great Giveaway - article from New Scientist Open Cola - softdrink with open recipe Open Source Car [in progress] 00:52    (0) comments    Wednesday, April 30, 2003   NVC & Holarchies Everything is simultaneously a whole and a part: (a) All phenomena are a seamless self-organizing system - we are a whole. (b) They (we) are also embedded in the processes of larger systems - we are a part. The Universe is thus a unified whole of systems nested within systems - a holarchy. Nonviolent Communication addresses the level of the individual. From a systems view, a natural question is: how does NVC look when applied to the level of social groups? Some collective needs of a whole society may be similar to those we have on a personal level, such as security, sustenance, etc. Other needs are emergent qualities, such as ecological sustainability. See more thoughts on this at Tom Atlee's NVC and Social Change page on the Co-Intelligence Institute website. 23:22    (0) comments    Wednesday, April 23, 2003   Nonviolent Communication I attended three days of workshops on Nonviolent Communication with Marshall Rosenberg. The following is an attempt to organize what I heard and my understanding/reflections on it. It is currently in the form of fragments. Overview NVC Nonviolent Communication is developed by Marshall Rosenberg. Still, it is nothing new - it is a formalized way of learning and adopting a natural and life-centered way of communicating. Life-Centered Communication In the west, and increasingly around the world, we are trained in a way of communication that reflect a dominance oriented culture. It includes notions of right and wrong, punishment and reward, authorities and submission/rebellion. On an individual level, it brings about anger, shame, built and depression. On an interpersonal level, we tend to meet our needs at the expense of the needs of others. On a social level, it is characterized by dominance and control structures. Life-centered communication, as found in some other cultures, reflect a partnership oriented culture. We seek strategies that will meet the deeper needs of all of us. We realize that we freely choose all of our actions. It brings us beyond notions of right/wrong, good/evil, submission/rebellion. Teaching NVC applies a quite different teaching philosophy than what is common in our current educational system. Decisions are made cooperatively among instructors and students. It is made clear that students always have a choice in whatever they do (this is true in all education, although usually not made explicit). The tests are held early in the process, and they give information about the effectiveness of the teaching strategy and on how to change it, not the students' abilities. Jackal vs. Giraffe Jackal language is language that is from an orientation where we seek to meet our own needs but not necessarily the needs of others. It is a strategy that is not effective in meeting all of our needs and tend to lead to experiences such as anger, guilt, shame, and depression. Giraffe is a life-centered language where we seek to first realize the deeper needs of all of us, and then explore strategies to meet those needs. Observation & Interpretation Differentiating observations and interpretations is vital in clear communication. Agreeing on the observable situation helps us establish common ground, and realizing that we add a layer of interpretation helps us see that it is just that - an interpretation (one of many possible). Feelings & Needs Literacy Learning a rich and precise vocabulary for expressing our feelings and needs helps us connect with ourselves and others. Needs We all share basic needs. Some of our needs are connection, honesty, play, peace, physical well-being, meaning and autonomy. When we are clear about our own needs, and we help others to be clear of their needs, we can creatively arrive at solutions that will meet all our needs. Our needs are never in conflict, but our strategies to meet those needs may be. Strategies In our culture, we are trained to have a muddled relationship to our needs and strategies. We tend to become attached to certain strategies, without being clear on the needs we try to meet. When we differentiate the two, we can step back and let go of specific strategies, and explore other strategies that may also meet the needs of others. Requests & Demands In our dominance oriented culture, we are trained in expressing and hearing demands - one person's needs met at the expense of the needs of others. Demands are characterized by single-mindedness of purpose, submission and rebellion as the only two options for the receiver, and reward or punishment as consequences. In most cases demands and its consequences are expressed in subtle ways. It is an approach that meets some of our needs, but cannot meet all of them (for instance need for connection). It is an approach that alienates us from ourselves and others. The alternative is a more life-centered approach, seeking to meet our needs as well as the needs of those around us. Having this intention, we can express a request rather than a demand. We stay open for feedback, seek to be clear on feelings and needs of all involved, and choose strategies that works better for all. There is no punishment or external reward - only the inner reward of contributing to life. Empathy Empathy helps us connect with the feelings and needs of yourself and others. It can be done silently, or expressed as a way to connect deeper with another person. Empathy is a way of translating jackal to giraffe: through identifying the feelings and needs behind a jackal expression (criticism etc), we uncover the giraffe language that will help us better meet those needs. And empathy is an excellent way of identifying our basic needs: empathy with feelings takes us to the underlying met or unmet needs behind those feelings. Choices We always choose our actions. Sometimes we are not aware of our choices, or we do not like the options we see, but we choose all our actions. Becoming aware of this can have a dramatic impact on our life. It frees us up to let go of actions that do not meet our needs, modify others to better meet our needs, and experience more joy in the actions we do choose as we see which needs they meet. Additional Life-Alienating vs. Life-Affirming Culture We live in a dominance/control oriented culture, and learn the dominance/control language from multiple sources: Religion, mythology, schools, media, and from those close to us who have learned the language from they were young. This language is also called "jackal language". It is a language that teaches polarities of right/wrong, good/evil, and reward/punishment. It tells us that the "good life" is the good punishing the bad. It teaches us to obey authority. It's symptoms in us as individuals is guilt, shame, anger and depression. It is a life-alienating language. A language that disconnects us from ourselves, each other, and the larger mystery we are a part of. NVC teaches us another language, a life-affirming language. A language that helps us meet all our needs. A language that helps us see that we always choose. A language that frees us from submission, rebellion, guilt, shame, anger and depression. A language of celebration and connection. Our Culture Our culture is a dominance and control oriented culture. It teaches us to obey or rebel against authorities, to act due to external rewards or punishments, and to think ourselves into shame, guilt and depression. It teaches us tragic expressions of unmet needs (criticism, anger), and dualistic approaches where we try to meet our own needs at the expense of others (selfishness) or the other way around (selflessness). It teaches us remarkably ineffective ways to have our needs fully met. Dominance Culture & Jackal Language Jackal language is born from, supports and is integral to our larger dominance oriented culture. It teaches thought patterns of right/wrong, good/evil, reward/punishment, and submission/rebellion. All these justify power structures and power-over relationships that (on the surface) benefits the few at the expense of the many. Our needs cannot be fully met in such a structure, so in reality we all suffer from it. Jackal language further yield anger, guilt, shame and depression. Anger is from a jackal mindset and perpetuates the dominance structures - either by setting up new ones, or by lending justification to the power-over strategies used by the existing structures. Guilt, shame and depression leads to passivity. None of these lead to a constructive approach for deep change. Stories If we want to explore the common stories and myths we operate from, we need to look at the typical stories in our culture. Today, these are told by mass media, and often reflect a static (identify people with transient experiences and roles) and blindly dualistic way of experiencing the world. These are stories of good and evil, of battles, and of victories involving the extermination of the evil. In some other cultures, including our own subcultures, there are other stories. These may focus on partnership approaches and commitment to connection until resolutions. They are process oriented (recognize transient experiences and roles for what they are) and go beyond blind polarities. These are stories of life, collaboration, and celebration. Social Change NVC has a strong social change aspect. It has a powerful analysis of our culture, helps us to liberate ourselves from dominance structures, and gives us a powerful language to have our needs met as well as the needs of others. Classic & Colloquial Giraffe Classic Giraffe includes several patterns of expressions, for instance (a) observation, (b) feeling, (c) needs, (d) clear and present request. Colloquial Giraffe is a looser and more spontaneous and creative way of expressing the same. Some examples: 1a. Classical Giraffe: "It seems that when what you said was not heard by the others at the table (observation), you felt frustration (feeling) because your need for connection was not meet (needs)?" 1b. Colloquial Giraffe: "So you were frustrated (feeling) because you wanted to connect (need)?" The situation is given by the context, and the need was in that situation expressed as a want. Expressions NVC offers templates as examples of the elements included in that particular form of life enriching communication. The basic template is "When [observation] I feel [feeling] because my needs for [need] is met/not met. Can you [clear request]?" Any of these elements can be expressed silently or explicitly. As a general guideline, whenever you have a sense that the other person is aware of a particular element, it can be silent or expressed nonverbally. If there is an element that the other person may not be clear about, or you want specific feedback, it can be expressed verbally. For instance, showing gratitude can be expressed in "classical giraffe" in this way: "I want to thank you for the three days we spent together [observation]. I feel joyful [feeling] and it met my need for companionship and connection [need]". Or it can be expressed in "colloquial giraffe" in this way: "I enjoyed spending time with you and getting to know you better". The nonverbal component is of course essential. Dynamic vs. Static Language Our culture teaches us static language - a language where we objectify ourselves and others, and identify ourselves and others with transient experiences or roles ("I am angry", "She is smart", "He is a socialist", "They are therapists"). It is more accurate and liberating to use a process language, a language that expresses transient experiences as transient experiences and roles as roles ("I experience anger", "She has much knowledge of plants", "He votes for a socialist party", "They work as therapists"). Labels Labels are one expression of static thinking. We identify a person with a particular (transient) experience or role, and attach a label to the person that is meant to convey useful information. Rather than convey useful information, it tends to lead to self-fulfilling prophecies. The person, and those around the person, behave in ways that are consistent with the label. Those transient experiences and roles are then strengthened and become more entrenched. These labels include formal diagnosis (hypochondriac, bipolar), informal diagnosis (idiot, genius, good, evil), and work (doctor, mechanic, secretary). In all cases, the label gives the appearance of permanence where there is none. The alternative is to use a process language that more accurately reflect the transient nature of our experiences and roles: She tends to be concerned about her health; he experiences strong mood-swings; she did not understand the instructions; he has a solid grasp of mathematics; she works as a doctor/mechanic/secretary. Jackal & Giraffe Views Jackal Show The Jackal Show is the Jackal patterns playing out in our minds. We can learn to recognize and enjoy these shows, and use them to be clear about the feelings and needs behind them. This will help us express ourselves in a way that is more Giraffe, more accurate, and more life serving. Enemy Images In our culture, we are trained in coming up with enemy images. When there is a conflict, typically between strategies, we tend to engage in thought patterns that (subtly) dehumanize and objectify the other person. The alternative is to look at the feeling and needs behind the other person's action, seek to clarify these feelings and needs with the other person, and then seek strategies that will work better for all. We connect rather than exclude, and get our own needs met in a more effective and efficient way. Restorative Justice Restorative Justice is an essential component to a life-centered approach to justice and dealing with situation with strong enemy images and anger. For the person injustice was done to, there is a situation where her/his experiences are truly heard and acknowleged - by the person that commited the act. For the person who committed the act, there is an opportunity to connect with the other on a deeply human level and see the hurt that was caused by the actions. In both cases, there is a tremendous sense of relief. It can diffuse unresolved feelings on both sides that otherwise could lead to further injustice. I know from my own life is that when I feel that injustice has been done to me, I do not want revenge. That is not powerful enough. I want the other person to truly see the situation and how I was hurt by the action. I want to connect on a human level. That seems immensely more powerful. Protective Use of Force In some situation, we choose to use force. This is a minimal force used to protect, not to "punish" (a giraffe force, not jackal force). Motivation The motivation behind our choices is essential. Do our choices come from fear, guilt and coercion? Or do they come from a desire to meet all our needs and enrich life? The answer tells us how well we can expect to meet our needs, and the quality of our connections with each other. Beyond Control and Permissiveness NVC helps us go beyond the limited options of control (my needs, not yours) and permissiveness (your needs, not mine). The process is to (a) seek clarity about the feelings/needs of all involved, (b) explore strategies that meets the needs of all, (c) agree on specific actions. When all involved see how their needs are met, we are more likely to follow up on the agreements. And if not, a connection is established that allows us to explore what is going on and modify the strategies to better meet our needs. Autonomy Autonomy is among our basic needs (along with connection). When we are presented with a situation where we experience that our autonomy is threatened, we tend to either submit (with resentment) or rebel. This is a dominance approach and typical of how we are trained in our culture. Expressing a request rather than a demand, and making sure that it is heard as a request, is one way of getting beyond submission and rebellion. Similarly, hearing the feelings and needs behind what appears as a demand, and seeking clarification of the underlying needs, can help us go beyond submission and rebellion. It will help us find strategies to meet all of our needs. "Should" "Should" is a central tool of the Jackal language. Shame, guilt, anger and depression are all symptoms of underlying "should" thoughts, and they are often connected with moralistic judgments. "Should" thoughts are effective in making ourselves and others miserable, and not effective in helping us meet our needs. Needs vs. Shoulds When we experience anger, shame, guilt or depression, there is most likely a "should" pattern behind it. We feel we "should" do something (shame, guilt, depression) or that someone else "should" do something (anger). Shoulds tend to not be effective in meeting our needs, mostly because they do not point the way to a constructive solution. Seeing the needs behind the shoulds opens up for a more constructive way of approaching the situation. When we become clear of our needs and the needs of others, we can consciously choose strategies that will help us meet those needs. Solution Focus Jackal language includes fruitless patterns such as complaining. Giraffe reminds us of our needs that are not met in the current situation, and helps us to actively seek strategies to meet those needs. It gives us a clear solution focus. Patience Learning a life-centered and life-enriching communication takes time. It involved re-educating ourselves and exploring the tools and stepping stones towards a life centered way of life. It requires patience, for our own learning process, as well as in our everyday situations. Seeking solutions that works for all takes longer than dominance solutions, but the rewards makes it worth it - meeting our needs more fully, and the joy of contributing to life. Win-Win vs. Compromises In our dominance oriented culture, we are taught that there are three different realistic alternatives: (a) Getting our needs met on the expense of others, (b) others getting their needs met on our expense, and (c) compromises where none of us get what we want. NVC, and other life-centered approaches, opens up for a fourth possibility: When we are clear on the needs of all involved, we can creatively explore solutions and strategies that will meet all of our needs. Such situations, where we actively seek clarity of the deeper needs of each person, tend to help us let go of our habitual strategies and actively seek creative and new solutions. Interconnected Needs Our needs are interconnected. The needs of others are included in our own needs. We cannot fully meet our need for community, connection, meaning and contribution if the needs of those around us are not met. This means that to fully meet our needs, we seek strategies that meets the needs of all of us. Selflessness (meeting the needs of others at the expense of our own) and selfishness (meeting our own needs at the expense of the needs of others) are both expressions of a life-alienating approach. Neither of these are strategies that are likely to meet our needs well. Life-enriching communication goes beyond selflessness (meet others needs at the expense of our own) and selfishness (meet our needs at the expense of other's needs). It is self-full - we have joy in contributing to other people in meeting their needs. We realize that our own needs are not fully met as long as the needs of the others are not fully met. If we use life-alienating communication, we are alienated from ourselves and others - our needs for connection and community are not met. If someone's basic needs are not met, our need for their well-being is not met. These needs are at the core of our common humanity. The Dance The honesty/empathy dance. Choices We always freely choose - although we sometimes do not recognize the choice, or are happy with the options that seem available to us. Here is an exercise to help us become aware of our choices: (a) Create a list of your "top ten least favorite activities" (b) Explore how you tend to talk to yourself about them (these are typically "I have to" or similar phrases). (c) For each of the activities, rephrase it to "I choose to ..." statements. This helps us re-educate ourselves and become aware that we are always making a choice. (d) Then, rephrase each to "I choose to ... because I want ..." statements. It helps us stay honest. This is a humbling but also liberating step. This exercise can dramatically change our life. We become aware that we always make choices, even when we don't particularly like the options that seem available to us. We also bring the underlying reasons for our choices into awareness. When we realize that a particular choice does not meet our needs well, we can explore other strategies. We may drop or modify certain actions. When we realize that a particular choice helps us meet important needs, we tend to change our attitude towards the activity and do it with more enthusiasm and joy. In general, we enjoy our actions more when we are clear on which needs they meet, and that we freely choose them. Detecting Hidden Choices Some phrases reveal hidden choices. The most common are "I have to", "I don't have time", and "I can't". Behind them all is a unacknowledged choice, and freedom waiting to be released when we bring it into awareness. Signposts Here are some of the NVC signposts I am aware of: 1. Body sensations indicating when have connected with the need behind four reactions. 2. Anger, shame, guilt and depression, indicating "should" thoughts. 3. Criticism as tragic expression of unmet needs. Anger Anger is a symptom of life-alienating thoughts. Here is a process to help us explore what is behind anger: 1. Observation - what particular behavior triggered the anger. 2. Thought - what did I tell myself that caused the anger? To get at this thought, try this sentence "I am angry because ...". This is typically a (life-alienating/moralistic) judgment with a "should" in it. 3. Empathy - with (a) self and (b) the other person/group. How did I feel, and what needs of mine were not met by the situation that triggered the anger. What needs may the other person try to express through the action/s that triggered my anger? 4. Connection - with the other person. (a) Express your feelings and needs, and make a clear request (e.g. "Can you repeat back to me what you heard me say?" or "What do you feel when you hear me say that?". (b) Guess feelings, needs, and request of the other person, and ask for feedback/check accuracy. Do this first if the other person may otherwise not be ready to hear your feelings/needs/request. Habits & Addictions In all our actions, we seek to meet some of our essential needs. When we are clear on our needs, and differentiate them from any particular strategy, we are more free in choosing a particular strategy or action. Similarly, if we are not clear on our needs, we tend to apply less effective strategies and typically become attached to certain habitual strategies. When we are attached to certain strategies while seeing that they do not meet our needs, we call them addictions. Here is one way of working with habits and addictions: 1. Differentiate needs and strategies (preparation). Become clear on the distinction between (a) our underlying needs and (b) the strategies we employ to meet those needs. For any need, there is an infinite number of strategies that can help us meet those needs. 2. Identify the underlying needs. Which needs do I try to meet by the habit/addiction? Empathy (self-empathy or from another person) can help us explore this. 3. Explore the effectiveness of the strategy. Which of my needs does it meet, and which does it not meet? 4. Explore alternative strategies. Which other strategies can I use that will meet more of my needs? 5. Support for making the change. Support - from ourselves and others - is essential in making any substantial change. It is helpful to find support from someone well versed in a life-enriching communication. Celebration & Connections Gratitude There is a great need for hearing and expressing gratitude in our society, and expressing gratitude in Giraffe is specific and powerful. It contains a reference to a specific behavior, a feeling, a need that was met, and possibly a request. Any of these can be expressed silently and implicit or explicit and verbally. As a rule, if the other person is likely to be aware of a particular element, it is not necessary to express it explicitly - unless you want to emphasize it. The complete and explicit pattern can be something like this: (a) Behavior that you are grateful for ("when you ...") (b) Our feelings ("I feel ...") (c) Our needs that were met by the action ("it meets my need for") (d) A request. If not certain that the person heard it accurately, ask "can you repeat back to me what you heard?", or otherwise "How do you feel when I say that?" When we express gratitude, the verbal part can also be very simple and direct: "I enjoyed getting to know you better." In this case, the time spent together is implicit ("We spent three hours together"), the feeling is enjoyment or lead to a sense of enjoyment ("I enjoyed") and the need is connection ("getting to know you better"). 22:17    (0) comments    Friday, April 18, 2003   Ecological Footprint An Ecological Footprint is the bioproductive land/sea area needed to support the lifestyle of an individual or a community. It is an effective educational tool and an intuitive sustainability indicator. Definition "The Ecological Footprint is a measure of the 'load' imposed by a given population on nature. It represents the land area necessary to sustain current levels of resource consumption and waste discharge by that population." Fair Earth Share The Fair Earth Share for each of the 6 billion people alive today is 4.7 acres. This is the total bioproductive area divided on 6 billion people. 4.7 acres is a high estimate as it leaves little room for other species. Footprint of Nations Some examples of the Ecological Footprint of the average citizen in different nations: USA - 24 acres | Denmark - 16 acres | Germany - 12 acres | India - 1.9 acres Footprint of Humanity The Ecological Footprint of the average global citizen is currently 5.6 acres. This is a conservative estimate based on public data from governments and the UN. Overshoot The Ecological Footprint for humanity as a whole is larger than the bioproductive land available. This state of overshoot is similar to living on the principal rather than the interest of an investment (there is no or little effect on quality of life until the bottom of the account is reached). Solutions To reduce humanity's Footprint - and live within the means of nature - we need to focus on two areas: (a) Prevent overpopulation (in all countries). (b) Reduce and shift our consumption. 10:03    (0) comments    Wednesday, April 16, 2003   Nonviolent Communication Nonviolent Communication (NVC) is an excellent tool for learning a simple and effective way of communicating. NVC helps us learn to communicate in a way that makes our needs clear, separates needs from strategies to meet those needs, and allows us to creatively find strategies that will meet the needs of us all. In our culture, we are trained in communicating in a remarkably ineffective way. We try to meet our own needs at the expense of the needs of others. We use a strategy of violence, one that includes intimidation, judgement, blame and punishment. This in turn leads to confusion, suffering, fear, dishonesty, and resentment, which sours our relationships. This strategy, or "jacal language", is expressed at all levels, from relationships among countries to our relationships with family and friends. The main aspect of NVC is an intention to (a) express your own needs clearly, and identify the needs to the other person, and (b) find solutions that meet the needs of each person. 08:52    (0) comments    Tuesday, April 01, 2003   Inevitability & True Cost of War The Bush government officials are masters in the strategy of inevitability - attempting to make it appear as there is only one choice, and they are just acting on the one choice dictated by the situation. We saw the strategy following the 2000 presidential election (Bush acting as if he was president long before anything was resolved), and it has continued since. They used it for invading Iraq, and they will most likely use it to indefinitely occupy Iraq, install an US controlled government in Iraq, breaking international law when dealing with prisoners of war, and engaging in war with other "rouge" nations. The justification in all cases will be terrorism. They will make it look as if they have no choice but to engage in actions that further US military, cultural and economic world dominance, while systematically violating international law and human rights. The strategy of inevitability has several strong allies: (a) An US media aligned with the views of the US government, (b) habituation (people getting used to it and unable to see alternatives), and (c) vicious cycles (they act in ways that fuel terrorism, which gives them an excuse to continue to act in those ways). On a different but related topic, it seems that the true cost of war is not reflected in US media: (a) Massive suffering among civilians (killed, injured, loss of relatives and friends, disease, malnutrition etc). (b) Further instability in the Middle East. (c) Massive resentment towards the US among people in the Middle East and around the world. (d) Soldiers mentally traumatized for life (killing of civilians, not knowing who the enemy is, suicide attacks etc). (e) US tax money channeled to the military industry, away from vital services (schools, health care). (f) Skyrocketing US foreign debt. 13:51    (0) comments    Thursday, March 27, 2003   Complexity Theories & Social Change Complexity theories (systems theories, chaos theories, fractals, gaia etc) has their origins in natural science. Still, they may offer important insights for us in understanding social systems and social change. Here are some key consepts and how they may relate to our social dimension: Humility One of the main yields from complexity theories is a deeper sense of humility. Control is futile, and change is always unpredictable. There are many factors that creates this unpredictability. (a) All phenomena are aspects of one whole system, and thus intrinsicly interconnected. (b) Change is often influenced in a significant way by what appears (to us) as insignificant variables, and we cannot predict in advance which variables will be influencial and to what degree. Any real-life system is thus far too complex to be predictable. Partnership Approach Complexity theories demonstrates the benefit of a partnership approach rather than a control/dominance approach: (a) All phenomena are aspects of one whole and intrinsicly interconnected. There is no us/them dichotomy, everything is "us". There is no outside. (b) Living systems are self-organizing and immensely complex. Attempts of external control is thus based on an illusion of seperation (us/them), and futile as systems tend to choose their own course, and adapt and respon in ways not completely predictable. Attempts to eradicate a virus leads to mutations. Attempts to eliminate terrorism with war leads to more terrorism. A partnership approach gives us the opportunity to engage in a dialogue, a dance that may lead to mutual benefits. Sensitive Dependence / Butterfly Effect Change is often influenced in a significant way by what appears as insignificant variables. We cannot predict in advance which variables will be influencial and to what degree. A seemingly insignificant occurence (for instance a conversation) can change the course of events in a dramatic way. Sudden Changes / Bifurcation Systems undergo sudden and dramatic changes. It may look as if nothing is happening for a long time, until the conditions are right and the change occurs faster than we expected. Again, we cannot predict accurately in advance which exact conditions are neccesary. 16:27    (0) comments      Shambala Prophecy The Shambala Prophecy seems more relevant than ever. See the link for more information. 09:49    (0) comments    Wednesday, March 26, 2003   Media - three worlds International media presents the Iraq invasion in a dramatically different way from US media, and the Arabic/Islamic world presents it in a third way. Not surprisingly, it seems that the most balanced and critical information comes from the countries not directly involved in the conflict. Norwegian media, which I am most familiar with, typically: (a) Balance the views and information from both sides, with a critical analysis and making the biases explicit. (b) Give in-depth background information. (c) Is critical to and analyze the spin of US government and media, as well as that of the Iraqi government and media. (d) Emphasize the uncertainty and problems with the US strategy (both invasion and occupation). (e) Prior to the war, emphasized that there was no connection between Iraq and terrorism, no evidence for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and misleading insinuations and information from the US and UK. (f) Emphasize strongly the human view - the reality and horror of war and the suffering of the civilians - including (i) interviews with regular Iraqi people and those wounded and those having lost relatives, (ii) photage of the destruction, and (iii) photage of US Prisoners of War. 16:02    (0) comments      Democracy The US is known for promoting democracy. At least verbally, and as long as it is within nations and not among them, and the democracy in question is aligned with US interests. Tyrannies aligned with US interests are OK (East Timor, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq prior to the invasion of Kuwait, and numerous other regimes). Democracies not aligned with US interests are at risk of being overthrown with support of the US (Chile in 1972 is one example). Further, democary is OK within nations (with the caveat mentioned above) but not among nations. The US has consistently worked against the UN (only moderately democratic), and any attempts to make the UN more democratic than it is. Not surprising, as a truly democratic and strong UN is clearly against the interests of the US. 11:37    (0) comments    Tuesday, March 25, 2003   Distractions It is easy to loose the view of the big picture these days, to allow the US foreign policies to dominate our thoughts and conversations as they dominate the media. Still, there are other and far more important issues that need our attention, and these - not surprisingly - happen to be connected to the high profile events these days. The main issue, as I see it, is the deep culture change towards a life-centered culture. A change that involves worldviews, language, and most of all our relationships - with ourselves, each other, the Earth, and future generations. Aspects of this change involves a move from control to partnership orientation, a shift of power from corporations to communities, and ecological sustainability on a large and small scale. What we see today, with the aggressive US foreign and domestic policies aimed at intimidation and control, is the expression of the dominant system. A system that is control oriented, where policies and media aligned with the interests of large corporations, and where the interest of future generations and nonhuman species is ignored. Fortunately, there is an international grassroots movement creating a life-centered culture - and it is vibrant, creative, steadily growing, and fun! It operates largely under the radar screen of the media, so most of us only see glimpses of it, so far. 17:31    (0) comments    Sunday, March 23, 2003   Double Standards The US government is a master in double standards. Iraq and Israel both have weapons of mass destruction, and a history of oppression (respectively Kurds and Muslims) and human rights violations. Still, there is no discussion of going to war against Israel (not that I would want it, for either country). Most of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, as was much of their funding, but there is similarly no discussion of attacking Saudi Arabia. There is also the striking fact that the US government itself fits closely the criteria listed above, and it often sounds as if US officials are describing themselves when describing Iraq. There is also a clear double standard in how the US regard treatment of prisoners of war. They demonstrate that they are willing to commit human right violation in how they treat their own prisoners of war, but demand a different and more humane treatment for US prisoners of war. For instance, the US government/media are eager to show photos of captured or surrendering Iraqi soldiers, while US officials now sharply criticize Iraq for showing photos of captured US soldiers. They say it is a violation of international law, which is Ironic as the US themselves have repeatedly and systematically shown disrespect for international law and agreements. One example is the most recent war in Afghanistan where they have admitted to torturing prisoners to death, and where other prisoners are taken to the Guantanamo military base in Cuba where their human rights are systematically violated - through inhumane treatment, holding of prisoners indefinitely without trail, and denial of access to lawyer. 14:35    (0) comments      Democracy & Dissent A true democracy has several characteristics: a deep community dialogue on issues and solutions, media that gives a voice to all views and represent these views fairly, and elections that gives each candidate an equal opportunity to have their views heard. Of course, in the US, none of these characteristics are met. People are pacified by entertainment and a consumer lifestyle that leaves little room for community involvement, corporate media only allows certain views to be presented and regularly misrepresent alternative views, and the political system favors those candidates who are aligned with and backed by large corporations. There is a need for dissent and critical analysis of policies and their effects at all times, but never more so than in a time of war. In a war, decisions are made that have a direct life and death impact on large numbers of people. Those decisions, and the assumptions and policies behind them, must be critically analyzed and questioned by the media and the population at large, and there must be a willingness to engage in civil disobedience at all level of society. Unquestioned decisions, especially in a time of war, can lead to tremendous tragedies. 11:10    (0) comments    Saturday, March 22, 2003   What is radical? Looking at what is perceived as "radical" in a culture and at a particular time gives us important information about that culture. Today, seeking deep culture change towards a life-centered and life-affirming culture, is seen as radical. Questioning the power of corportaions, and their control of the media and the political system, is seen as radical. Questioning policies of the US government is seen as unpatriotic, treason (Senator Orrin Hatch), and radical. Expanding true compassion and respect of life to nonhuman species is seen as radical. Wanting fair trade policies is seen as radical. Taking into account future generations in our decision making process is seen as radical. Currently in the US, supporting peace, nonviolent conflict resolution, United Nations, and international law is seen as radical. What does it say about our culture...? 11:54    (0) comments      Consensus Technique An effective technique for reaching consensus in (a) smaller groups (10-15) with (b) not too much polarization. As told to me by Brian Joiner. Ground rules: (i) Willing to listen, (ii) Willing to change one's own position. Method: Go around in a circle. (1) Each person says "what" (what they would like see happen, or a yes/no to a suggestion). Others can ask questions for clarification. (2) Then, each person says "why". Others can ask questions for clarification, to help them understand the reasoning behind the "why". Repeat (1) and (2) until a consensus is reached. This typically takes 4-6 rounds. I noticed that there is a parallel with Nonviolent Communication: The "what" corresponds to strategies, and the "why" corresponds to needs. The process helps us clarify and differentiate needs and strategies. We clarify and differentiate our own needs and strategies, and clarify and differentiate our own understanding of the needs and strategies of each of the other people in the group. Further, it helps us to (a) more clearly define our own needs, (b) more easily let go of our attachments to specific strategies, and (c) creatively/collaboratively explore other strategies that can meet the needs of all involved. 10:37    (0) comments    Thursday, March 20, 2003   The most dangerous man in the world Day One of the new Iraq war. More than 80% of the people of the world oppose the war against Iraq, including a majority of the nations on the UN security council. This again shows how the US verbally promote democracy within nations (although even that is questionable) while acting in a blatantly un-democratic way on an international level. Some thoughts: Threat Iraq posed no immediate threat towards the US or any other nation, according to their neighboring countries, the UN weapons inspectors and the CIA. There was no reason to not allow the UN weapons inspectors to continue their inspections for a few more months, as they asked for. With more than 200 weapons inspectors in Iraq, and a close scrutiny by the world community, the situation was well contained. Misinformation The US government has systematically misled the public and lied about the Iraq situation. They have insinuated that there is a link between the Iraqi government and past, current or future terrorism, and there is none (again according to CIA and other intelligence sources). There is also no indication that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, according to among others the UN weapons inspectors. Hans Blix has expressed it clearly, and the Norwegian weapons inspector Jørn Siljeholm, said that the US systematically lied on this topic. ("Asked if the Americans lied, Siljeholm said: "Lie is a strong word - but yes, the information Powell presented about Iraq's nuclear program was simply incorrect," Siljeholm said.") International Law There are strong indications that the war against Iraq is violating international law [2]. Blair, Aznar, and other leaders actively supporting the war may well be tried before the International Criminal Court. The US opposed the creation of this court, saying that it could be used against them for political reasons. The reality may be that it could be used against them for systematically violating international law. Cost The war on Iraq, and subsequent "nation building", is estimated to cost each US citizen $1700 ($500 billion divided on 290 million citizens - source). It will also cost lives and suffering on a massive scale. Terrorism War and violence can never quell terrorism. War has a specific geographical focus, while terrorism thrive in loosely organized international networks. War, invasion, and occupation can only fuel resentment, anger and despair leading to further terrorism. It is profoundly irrational to assume that war will prevent terrorism. The situation in the Middle East is especially volatile, and further violence may lead it to spiral out of control. Invasion It is likely that the invasion and occupation of Iraq will run into a number of problems. The main one may be a persistent guerilla warfare. The history of the Iraqi people gives them strong reasons for resenting and opposing an invasion and occupation by the US and the UK. Some examples: (a) Great Britain invaded Iraq during WW1 and occupied the country for several years. (b) The US supported and created Saddam Hussein and supported and encouraged the Iraq-Iran war where large numbers of Iraqis were killed. (c) The US was responsible for a large number of civilian causalities during the first Gulf War. (d) During the first Gulf War, they destroyed the infrastructure (including water treatment plants) which led to massive suffering among the civilian population. (e) George Bush the First encouraging a failed upraising against Saddam Hussein, which led to thousands of Iraqis killed by Saddam Hussein's government. The US did nothing to help them. (f) The sanctions has lead to massive suffering among the Iraqi population, while Saddam Hussein and his government have not been harmed. (g) The current invasion and war is again bringing massive suffering to the civilian population. (h) They plan to dictate and control the creation of the new Iraqi government. To believe that the Iraqi population will welcome them with open arms is remarkably naive, and publicly expressing that assumption must be a willful deception or coming from a surprising lack of insight in human nature in general and the Iraqi history in particular. The Iraqis, no matter their view of Saddam Hussein, will most likely defend their country with any means available against what they see as an illegitimate invasion and occupation. Occupation and new government Any attempt to install a US controlled government in Iraq is likely to run into massive problems, for some of the same reasons as mentioned above. The invasion, occupation and "nation building" process is likely to be long, tortous, and expensive (in terms of dollars, lives, suffering, and loss of goodwill). Democracy in the Middle East It is ironic that the US (a) wants to control the Middle East, and (b) express a desire to see democratic governments in the Middle East. They must realize that truly democratic governments, responsive to the views of their citizens, would strongly oppose US interference. I watched Good Evening, Mr Wallenberg last night, and was struck by some of the parallels with our current situation. During WW2, the Nazis saw Jews (and others) as not quite human, and disposable for the purpose of reaching a higher goal. Today, the US government is saying that a certain number of Iraqi civilian causalities is acceptable for the purpose of reaching a higher goal. ("An estimated 3,500 civilians were killed during the 1991 Gulf War. Crowder said the U.S. military weighs what level of civilian casualties would be "acceptable" depending upon the importance of a given target." source) 20:22    (0) comments    Wednesday, March 19, 2003   Dialogue - breaking out of the insular patterns During the Iraq situation I have forwarded news stories to likeminded people (on the lack of substance to the US view), had conversations with likeminded people, put up lawn signs that likeminded people agree with (and feel supported by) and others get annoyed with, taken part in peace marches and vigils with likeminded people, sought out news sources with views similar to my own (most of the international media and the US alternative media), written reflections here that likeminded people may mostly agree with and others won't, and taken part in Conversation Cafes with likeminded people. Rarely, if ever, have I had the opportunity to engage in a sincere dialogue with people with differing views. And just that seems to be a significant issue in our time. We too often (a) choose to expose ourselves to that which supports our own views and (b) we choose to interact - especially when it comes to quality dialogue - with likeminded people. In a culture where debates and entrenched positions are expected, and quality dialogues among people with differing views is rare, we have few models for and little access to situations that encourage such an exchange. A small step in the direction of sincere dialogue among people with widely different perspectives and backgrounds is the Commons Cafe, where people from different parts of society are actively recruited to take part in dialogue. Another, more formalized approach, is Citizen Councils. I wish there was a news source that was widely inclusive of differing views. One with quality news reporting that honestly represent the strongest case of the different perspectives on a wide range of issues. I have yet to find it - although it may be out there. The closest righ now may be the Google news service, which draws on sources with differing views and from all over the world (although only in English). It is all automated, so no human editors are involved (although that in itself is no guarantee of lack of censorship). 12:03    (0) comments    Sunday, March 09, 2003   Control and Partnership I helped organize a panel held at the Public Interest Environmental Law Conference today. It's topic was "Community, Networking and Complexity", and included Alder Fuller from ProtoTista (complexity theories), Mark Williams from OPN/EFN (Open Source), Diane Brausse from Lost Valley (intentional communities), and Nick Routledge from Eugene Permaculture Guild (ecological design). Jair from Imaginify was the main organizer, and Wynn Swafford from Sunrise Facilitation Collective facilitated. It was a great experience, and I think we all had our minds tweaked, even those of us who have previously explored the connections, parallels, and possible cross pollinating among the different areas. They all have strong commonalities in terms of paralell patterns and processes, and a shared partnership and solution focused approach. What came up for me the strongest was the difference between the control and the partnership views. The control view is embodied in the institutions and structure of modern society, including the corporations, proprietary software, mainstream media and genetic engineering. This is a power-over and a win-loose approach. The partnership view is embodied in systems theories, Open Source, intentional communities, and ecological design. This is a power-with and a win-win approach. The difference is vital. The control paradigm operate from an intrinsically arrogant (and naive) assumption: we can control social and ecological systems. It brings a sense of alienation from ourselves, each other, and the Earth. The partnership approach is humble at its heart, and is from a realization that we are a small part of a vastly larger and complex system. Our only choice is to use a collaborative approach. It allows for connections and for feeling at home with ourselves, the larger society and the Earth. The control vs. partnership views are also reflected in communication. When we operate from a control and win-loose view, our communication tends to be towards talking more than listening, and be tinged with fear, hostility, threat of punishment and much more that alienates us from each other and ourselves. If we instead learn to operate from a partnership and win-win view, our communication tends to be characterized by genuine listening, compassion and a more flexible and solution oriented approach. We can more easily untangle our needs and the strategies we have for meeting those needs, let go of our attachment to specific strategies (often habitual), and seek creative and maybe unexpected strategies that meet the needs of all involved. It is more effective, and more fun. 15:00    (0) comments    Friday, March 07, 2003   Fragments - Bush, Iraq & Hitler Some fragments on hot topics: It is interesting to follow the news these days - and especially comparing international vs. US media... European media tend to emphasize the optimism and request for more time from the UN weapons inspectors, Iraqi cooperation, lack of evidence for illegal weapons in Iraq, and the lack of substance in the "evidence" presented by the US and UK. In contrast, US media reflects the Bush government's positions with not much analysis or fair presentation of differing views. And on that topic, here is an interesting story from Norwegian media: Arild Linneberg is a professor of communication and was recently interviewed by NRK2, a public broadcast TV station in Norway. Mr. Linneberg has analyzed and compared speeches by Adolf Hitler (prior to WW2) and recent speeches by Mr. Bush. He found strong similarities, especially in terms of rhetorical strategy and content, including the representations of their own position vs. that of the "enemy" (moral superiority and divine support), and justification for going to war (own country's security). To test his findings, he asked his students to identify the author of a speech. His students guessed Bush. In reality, the speech was by Hitler prior to the invasion of Poland in 1939... A majority of Europeans see Bush as a far greater threat to the world than Saddam Hussein. I suspect that many are struck by the same as I am - when US government officials describe Iraq and other "enemies", the descriptions often seem strikingly appropriate for the US government itself... A classic example of shadow projection. It is difficult to see how Saddam Hussein currently is a threat, especially considering the UN inspectors currently at work in Iraq... A war will most likely have numerous unfortunate effects, some quite dangerous for the region and the world. It will increase international resentment towards the US, fuel terrorism, bring further suffering to the Iraqi people, and may initiate an escalating and spreading cycle of violence in the region. It will also bring about a serious budget deficit in the US (through transferring tax money to the war industry), and cut into vital services (schools, health care etc). In the US, there seems to be unlimited amount of money for war, but very limited amounts for services essential to a healthy and equitable society... A list of the questionable acts and policies following the systematic strategy of intimidation by the US government is longer than one person can compile. One example of the current mindframe of the US government is the torture ending in death of prisoners in Afghanistan. This is in addition to the secret arrests, denial of access to lawyers, and indefinite detention we have seen for the last year and a half. 23:36    (0) comments    Wednesday, February 26, 2003   The Abysmal State of US Media Pointing out the shortcomings of the US media is trite, but it does need to be repeated. A true democratic and useful media would (a) give a voice to all sides of an issue, (b) represent the various views in a fair way, (c) present in-depth analysis of serious issues from several viewpoints, (d) give a venue to the voices critical of accepted views, (e) make their own bias (we all have one) explicit. The US media, owned by a few large corporations, do none of these. They rather see their role as (a) entertaining (even with the serious issues), and (b) support the interest of large corporations and the government (and those are aligned most of the time). Fortunately, there are alternatives, and more and more people are becoming aware of the situation. 18:00    (0) comments    Friday, February 21, 2003   Kurds The US has made an agreement with Turkey, stating that Turkey will be allowed to occupy the Kurdish area of Iraq after the new Iraq war. This shows the true values of the US administration, which is anything besides a desire for democracy and justice. The Kurdish people want what we all want - independence, autonomy, and their own country. Now, the longstanding suffering and injustice inflicted upon them by several regimes, is continuing and worsening - with the blessing of the US. Rather than diffusing tension and resolving injustice, it will only give more people a reason for resentment towards the US, leading to further instability and violence. US news media, and to some extent the international media, is largely ignoring this aspect of the story - focusing on the money offered to Turkey by the US as the main incentive for Turkey to allow US troops into their country. 21:53    (0) comments    Wednesday, February 19, 2003   The Beginning of the End of US Dominance? Following international news and analysis, it is clear that resentment towards the US policies is increasing all over the world - among regular people as well as among politicians. Impermanence is intrinsic to all phenomena, including the power of nations. The current behavior and policies of the US government leads to not only increased resentment, but also stronger coalitions against the US policies - on a grassroots level as well as on the level of nations. It seems that the US is in the process of isolating themselves. If it continues in the longer run, they may - as they are fond of representing those not aligned with their views - increasingly render themselves "irrelevant". It may be that this is the beginning of the end of US cultural, economic and military dominance. It will happen one way or another. The only questions are how and when. 11:35    (0) comments