[deck made after writing to belong rev]
on belonging (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belongingness):
This desire is so universal that the need to belong is found across all cultures and different types of people. huge.. i think if we’re going to have any kind of a change for good.. it needs to be based in something universal.. something already in us however.. i think belonging is only part of it. in Peter‘s community – the structure of belonging.. he says our focus on individual transformation has been proved not to work.. and i agree.. but i don’t think the two are binary.. i think they (authenticity and attachment/belonging) not only go hand and hand.. but neither works w/o the other..
so i’d suggest.. (via Gabor MatÊ insight) that our 2 universally basic needs are authenticity (true to self) and attachment (belonging – known by someone).. and that we should focus on and facilitate both simultaneously
the reason this particular time in history is so important (for a revolution).. we currently have the means for tech to allow us to listen to and facil both (attachment and authenticity) at once
a quiet revolution 1\ quiet enough to hear every voice and
2\ sans violence/oppression/coercion/et-al
on revolution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution):
a fundamental and relatively sudden change in political power and political organization.. abrupt change in a social order i think all our part\ial initiatives/efforts are keeping us from the sync we need for global freedom/equity .. i think we keep getting distracted/disjointed by irrelevants (money/measuring/accountability/commitment/et-al) necessary to maintain/incentivize the partial ness. and if i’m wrong.. thankfully.. there are plenty of amazing people/initiatives/efforts going that route
more thinking on that here: thinking restate/update 7/18
so.. on getting to a true revolution – abrupt change in social order.. based on universal basic needs we could couch it in safety.. if you like:
safety gershenfeld something else law (Neil‘s response when asked by pentagon how tech could improve defense/safety):
so why hasn’t Neil (founder of fablab ness ..similar to Scott’s tinkermill) caused safety and/or a revolution..? i think it’s because of his focus on the tech to make the stuff rather than the tech to listen first ..to what matters to each (has to be all of us – everyday) person ie: whimsy/curiosity.. ie: tech as it could be
it/we won’t sustain (a revolution or whatever) if its energy doesn’t come from w/in (invited vs invented ness) each person.. everyday
imagining the means to get to that ‘something else safety’ that art (as Dan says – gift) is via:
daily curiosity i’m thinking we could get to those ‘gifts’ Dan talks about and that ‘something else’ Neil talks about if we would focus on cure ios city.. via 2 convers as infra
2 convos to reshape /do-over /revolutionize
everyday life for all of us
again ..huge that it starts from w/in each individual everyday.. and self-talk as data (convo #1).. is how that could happen
i’m thinking accountability & commitment.. even participation & engagement.. grate against curiosity, against gershenfeld something else law, against our w/in ness, and so against the energy we need most.. ie: the energy of 7bn alive people
to get to ongoing/authentic curiosity begs:
free\dom [krishnamurti free will law and krishnamurti partial law and burke freedom law and bishop freedom law] on talking to people about engaging (ie: neighborhood walks) of course they’re happy to be asked..of course they want to be part and belong.. so good on you for asking.. for having those convos.. but we need to realize the hidden (good willed) agenda in invited vs invented ness and when people are already too busy .. that turns into perhaps an unethical situation.. 1\ getting people’s hopes us for something that doesn’t yet have a mech to facil it in a humane way (currently all efforts end up leaving people on hold.. ie: bureaucratic hoops) and 2\ setting them up for feeling guilt/shame when they find they can’t fit it into schedule.. (costello screen service law)
and again.. to any/all of us .. if we are thinking we need to be accountable & committed ..that free\dom is compromised.. what we need are spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove.. otherwise.. we are like whales in sea world .. not ourselves.. (which is what most of us are today – hence the need to be freed-up/re-shelled)
perhaps getting to that total free\dom begs:
a leap a reset .. a do-over (a leap allows for more of a revolution – abrupt change in social order.. than i think what your belong rev might actually be – perhaps a reform/increment)
why try to leap back/to an undisturbed ecosystem..?
meadows undisturbed law: in undisturbed ecosystems ..the average individual, species, or population, left to its own devices, behaves in ways that serve and stabilize the whole.. – Dana Meadows
if we could only get back to that synchronicity.. we could let go of all our invented and time/energy-sucking bureaucracies. we need a revolution in reverse..ie: revolution of everyday life
leap\ing begs and/or creates:
sync many incredible people, have been seeking many incredible solutions, to bettering: education; health; budget; poverty; et al.. for many years. what if we already have the solution(s), we just don’t have them in sync. [people, space/resources, tech]
What if we bet (why bet) on an experiment, that no one has yet tried.
sync\ing begs and/or creates:
energy the energy of 7bn alive people.. which is again.. what we need most aka: eudaimoniative surplus
ongoing energy comes from:
equity if equity is everyone getting a go every day.. redefining public education becomes revolution of everyday life.. aka: global equity
in short imagining a nother way.. based on matÊ basic needs which we are currently capable of via tech as it could be.. ie: 2 convers.. as infra [aka: not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake‌] because what we need most is the energy of 7bn alive people in order to get back/to an undisturbed ecosystem in the city.. as the day.. via gershenfeld something else law [from a nother way book]:
the short equation
re iterating the coming together of tech (perhaps scott) and humanity (perhaps dan/mike): for tech piece we now have means to listen to and facil the chaos of 7bn free people.. everyday app/chip updates ie: hlb via 2 convers that io dance.. as the day.. as it could be for humane piece mufleh humanity law: we have seen advances in every aspect of our lives except our humanity – Luma Mufleh rowson mechanical law not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake a nother way
parts/whole graphic
let’s.. talk/listen/communicate/connect/community..
short: deep/simple/open
redefineschool.com/a-quiet-revolution/