Nothing is What it Seems

Nothing is what it seems, which is why I routinely interrogate my every thought and belief. To be capable of seeing the truth we must first shed all of the accrued garbage within our minds. And in my case, there is much to discard, as will no doubt be evident from what follows...

The narratives upon which we rely to make sense of the world are fast crumbling. It is almost impossible to determine the current status and trajectory of the human story. Now more than ever, we are aware that our civilisation is in trouble, and on a number of fronts. But it is difficult to comprehend what is actually going on. There are three main reasons for this:

1. An incumbent elite, individuals of affluence and influence who own the media, content curation and data analysis firms, smokestack legacy corporations, a few politicians and, in some cases, the judiciary - are manipulating how we make sense of everything that is happening in our world to their own advantage.
2. A combination of surveillance and curated content is used to manipulate instincts and social behaviour. This smudges perceptions, blinding us to the realities of our situation to such an extent that it is impossible to get a reliable bearing on just where we are.
3. Everything we took to be constant is in a state of flux and uncertainty. One outcome is that we, the general public, serfs in the grand scheme of wealth creation and socio-political game-playing, have not yet realised that our trust in this powerful elite is ill-advised and unwarranted - that we are being callously gamed.

If we did fathom out what was going on at a deeply metaphysical level, the ensuing outrage would be sufficient to fuel rebellion. I can imagine people all around the world rising up in defiance of authority, using the sheer strength of numbers to overthrow the established order in fury at such a grievous deception.

We take no action because we are confused - still trusting those with power or wealth to act in our favour and on our behalf. Instead, we remain cocooned in a comatose state of indigence and naïve lethargy.

To be fair most wealthy individuals, along with those in positions of power, probably believe they are helping to build a better society and might be confused by any criticism levelled at them. More often than not they are convinced their wealth gives them the right to influence elected officials and government policy, that the fortune they acquire is thoroughly deserved, and that it will eventually trickle down to the rest of us in the form of jobs, increased economic activity, greater inclusiveness, and philanthropic largesse. This “trickle-down” theory originally started as a joke by humorist Will Rogers. Today it expresses a naïve faith in the virtue of those wielding economic power and in the workings of the prevailing economic system, although it has never been confirmed by the evidence.

Not having yet caught up with these facts it should come as no surprise that the more affluent members of society continue to agitate for tax cuts to assist economic growth – even though in practice these policies perpetuate inequality and intensify the inherently oppressive nature of economic stratification. 

The apparatus of oppression in ostensibly democratic societies includes the weaponization of fear, threats of unemployment and privation, unprovoked discrimination, the need to comply with officialdom, pointless work, and differing forms of propaganda - much of it xenophobic in tone. While these instruments have been commonly used to repress freedom of thought and insurgency, mostly covertly, the brazen use of strong-arm policing tactics is becoming the preferred approach as a more sentient public reacts to authoritarian abuse by state actors.  

Naturally this automatically exposes the intentions of those in authority to continue their exploitation, larceny, coercion, cheating and deception, all the while engaging in disastrous environmental destruction, the stockpiling of armaments, and waging endless wars for no valid reason other than to preserve and expand their power.

How can we allow this to endure when it threatens individual health and wellbeing as well as the survival of the human family? Is it because we lack the will or capability to confront power? Or is it because we have been so utterly misled that we no longer see any valid alternative? I suspect it is a combination of both factors.

The former makes sense in terms of the monotony and drudgery we are willing to accept in return for money, without which even the basic necessities of life, such as housing, warmth, food, health, learning, information, and even respect, are unobtainable. The latter amplifies this dilemma by ensuring that the mainstream narrative is based on scarcity and competition.

Maintaining the illusion of austerity and struggle is vital – as is allegiance to the status quo. This is feasible by managing the information used to sustain the narrative. In contemporary society the control of such propaganda is most commonly exercised through the ownership of mass media, funding research projects and think-tanks, advocating censorship, or purchasing the loyalty of shady politicians.

The results are undeniably impressive yet - ominous. For example, we are told that we live in a free society where anything is possible for those who work hard. We are assured that life is getting better for most people around the world and that Western aid is responsible for that. We are taught to be loyal and to view other cultures with suspicion. We are cautioned that those who do not share our values are a threat to our way of life. And we are then cajoled into embracing conflict as the most natural reaction to that threat. From the cradle to the grave we are persuaded to believe wealth matters far more than health and wellbeing, and that striving for greater affluence is the most virtuous of goals. Furthermore, we are constantly reminded that compliance with these beliefs is an accurate metric of normalcy.

These are all deceptions of one kind or another. But is there any escape from this noise and all the organized racket that dominates our waking hours? How can we find the mental space and peace of mind to evaluate the endless string of stories we tell ourselves, and each other, about what is happening in the world more dispassionately – searching for empirical evidence rather than the self-opinionated articles of faith from Google graduates? How can we ensure that the lies are impossible to suppress?

Perhaps this is already happening. Certainly, the dominant narrative is breaking down in ways that are startlingly unexpected - yet exhilarating. Old ways of understanding what is going on are not working, which is why we are confused. Trust in the most venerable of our institutions is in a nosedive, often with good reason. Confidence in the mass media, too, is at rock-bottom. Meanwhile we are fast reaching the limits at which we can cope intellectually and emotionally with the changes we ourselves have initiated and are also feeling helpless to control the tools we are unleashing.

Few can deny this is an opportune moment for a fundamental re-envisioning of society and a rebalancing of the world order. The case for a thorough forensic examination of our shared worldview - the civilisational model upon which all human activity is predicated - and the subsequent crafting of a new narrative that makes better sense of the human condition, is compelling. For the first time, armed with hindsight, and using the extraordinary technologies we have fashioned, we have an opportunity to construct a new society from first principles.

Whatever the future holds for our species, the COVID-19 experience and the year 2020 will be permanently etched into our consciousness. The wildly impulsive responses we have taken to this plague which, for some countries, has resulted in the suspension of all economic activity; the anxiety, fear, bewilderment, and emotional turmoil generated from social distancing and lockdown restrictions; mixed responses to the epidemiological and medical science; and the proliferation of conspiracy theories and increasing numbers of individuals who refuse to comply with laws aimed at halting the spread of the disease, is seeing to that.

Hidden within the news of increasing infections, deaths, and morbidity rates, however, new possibilities are surfacing. An outbreak of compassion and collaboration between nations and across time-zones, occasioned by our interconnectedness, is proliferating. Within the stillness offered by the disease is an hiatus sufficient for us to take stock of our purpose and direction, giving us a chance to reflect deeply on what matters, and to decide if we want to go back to a grasping, iniquitous, everyone-for-themselves culture, within which even the survival of other species depend on the whimsical decisions of imaginary constructs - such as the nation state, Google, Facebook, and the World Bank - or invent something entirely distinctive.

Our collective future must surely result from a process of cooperative design. A future that is more desirable and sustainable than anything we have experienced thus far can be generated by a combination of new tools and practices driven by a totally new mindset guided, too, by a comprehensive appreciation of history and of our limitations.

For that process to lead anywhere other than back to detrimental economic conditions and toxic habits, we will need to reprogram the socio-genetic code that strands us on an island where we are complicit in seeing and interpreting the world, and our role in it, as comprising:

• the biosphere as an infinite cache of physical reserves available for extraction to the highest bidders
• people as little more than objects to be instructed, traded, coerced and exploited within the system of industrial production.
• a cutthroat quest for scarce material assets in which there will inevitably be winners and losers

If we are able to take such a giant leap of consciousness, and that is by no means guaranteed, we might then be open to repairing the harm we have inflicted upon each other from a range of tenets we still take for granted and that are so destructive. Such as, for example:

• the accrual of material artifacts and financial wealth is the pinnacle of human ambition
• the sub-optimal design of our most life-critical systems is legitimate and unavoidable
• that in-built obsolescence and other ways to swindle customers is justified in order for a business to remain profitable
• that some human beings are inherently inferior and less deserving than others
• that people must labour to earn a living even when such work is pointless, and when machines are capable of taking on tedious routine tasks
• that personal data is not a human right and can therefore be legitimately owned and sold by a company irrespective of an individual’s wishes
• that government budget surpluses are a sign of good economic management
• that competition is the natural order while empathy, cooperation and tolerance are signs of frailty deserving of exclusion and derision
• that the power wielded by nation states as autonomous sovereign entities gives them the permission to do exactly as they please regardless of any negative environmental and human impacts

A new society is possible based upon precepts that are viable, aligned to changing realities, and are wise, engaging, culturally respectful and morally responsible. It only requires us to jettison what is no longer working for humanity as a whole, and to re-imagine new ways of being in balance with nature’s laws.

For example, we could become less focused on individual rights and more concerned with appreciating, respecting and preserving the human family as a whole. Less obsessed with rebooting the economy than reevaluating and renewing our morals. Less about reverting to business-as-usual stereotypes than reinventing obsolete commercial principles. Less about harvesting profits from scarcity than spreading and sharing the abundance we see all around us. Less about nationalistic protectionism and more about enlightened globalisation and mutual support.

These shifts represent a more informed balance between the state, representing collective enterprise, and the citizen accepting individual responsibility but balanced by a civic duty to hold the state and our most venerated institutions to account.

There are signs that such shifts could already be occurring - that our collective consciousness is going up by degrees and that we are awakening to the reality previously hidden in full view. For example, spontaneous collaboration can be observed in the many ways we are adapting to new lockdown protocols.

Although the fabric of international commerce is founded upon competitive rivalries, with new products protected by patent law, the urgency and unfamiliarity underpinning the current pandemic, together with the degree to which we are all connected these days, is resulting in cooperation between scientists and nations, and rapid, real-time, collaboration across time-zones, which is unprecedented. Within 90 days of the coronavirus outbreak, an extraordinary 250 therapies were in various stages of development. In a month or so, we are likely to have over 40 or more different cures and vaccines that are already in clinical trials. Companies are reinventing themselves, offering new services, and anticipating volatility in the demand for their products. Some countries are sending medical supplies and staff to assist life-saving efforts.

Clearly, we cannot expect this new ethos to continue, nor to become anywhere close to being business-as-usual, if we are constantly looking over our shoulders and wanting the world to be the same as it used to be. Nostalgia for the past is deceptively alluring. But a liar nonetheless. And while we must provide for ourselves and our families, we also need to work for the greater good if we are to stay in balance with nature.

In the case of a coronavirus vaccine, the next step in our dance towards a regenerative and cooperative consciousness might be to circumvent Big Pharma companies profiting from the research altogether, ensuring treatments are made available to everyone as commons-owned assets. That modest act would signal our intention not to keep serving the vested interests of an industrial age mindset and habits.

We can do the same with education. By shifting away from the 180-year old production-line philosophy, with its emphasis on outmoded standards and pedagogy, and by reinventing learning from the point of view and pace of the individual student and their context, we can avoid returning to the physical familiarity and comforts of the school campus. Much the same can be claimed for other critical systems, including public health, work design, urban planning and public transportation, construction, logistics, journalism, governance, energy generation and distribution, automotive, real estate and agriculture.

We know that societal systems like these cannot change from within given the gravitational pull of the existing paradigm. Although the practical impacts from implementation are always disconcerting, and can continue to reverberate for years, the only considered input needed is a shift of mindset – from one of scarcity to abundance and from rivalry to cooperation. Indeed, this is inevitably the crux of the issue when any kind of transformative change is proposed.

It is why paradigmatic change relies on novelty rather than the tweaking of the current system. It is why disruptive innovation evolves from the edge rather than the current centre of gravity. And it is why it is always easier to create a new model that makes the old one obsolete than to exert effort trying to expunge the existing paradigm. So, let us start by reframing possibility in a shift from the scarcity mindset to one of abundance.

Scarcity and rivalry are ingrained within contemporary praxis. They both start with constraints, while abundance and cooperation offer new opportunities. Scarcity and rivalry encourage zero-sum thinking, whereas abundance is about plenitude and sufficiency. Scarcity and rivalry market secrecy and unethical behaviour as competitive advantage, whereas cooperation and abundance champion partnerships for the greater good. Licenses and patents are examples of scarcity thinking. Open source, commons, and peer-to-peer approaches are abundance in action.

A word of caution if I may. There will always be companies that disrupt the competition as well as entire industries, but that do not live up to any higher moral aim. AirBNB, Uber, and Netflix are cases of how disruptive innovation can result from the clever exploitation and leverage of abundance. None of them, I hope, would claim to make the world a better place for greater numbers of people. Why? Because their underlying values and calculations are still dominated by aggressive competition with the singular aim of market growth and profitability.

There are many lessons to be learned from the disruptions we are experiencing from COVID-19 of course. Live a simpler life. Do not take from the earth what you do not need. Shift from a competitive to a collaborative lifestyle. Work from home when you can. Understand that front-end schooling is not a substitute for life-long learning. Trust only what you can validate. Grow and buy goods locally. Save energy wherever possible. Reduce, reuse, and recycle whatever you can to avoid waste. Democratize the economy. Engage with others around what really matters.

There are many others of course that make going back to what used to be business-as-usual a travesty to anybody other than those vested interests that were happy to feed off our naivety.

While the way ahead is uncertain, reverse gear is not an option. Whichever path we choose we are bound to encounter transitional problems. And, as always, in order for our sense of moral community to expand and endure, the more difficult challenge will be to ensure the lessons of the past are not forgotten, and that new behaviours are sustained and cherished.

With climate change, a continuing loss of biodiversity, new pandemics, economic upheavals, geo-political tensions, mass migrations, and the rise of neo-fascist regimes, we have mounting emergencies to deal with, in addition to the substantial changes required to tame tribalism, predatory practices, prejudice, injustice and discrimination.

This will cost money. Lots of money. In order for our reserves to exceed the current rate of consumption, instead of the other way around, we will need to reimagine the fundamentals of our economies so that all life is ascribed inherent value, and measures like Gross Domestic Product [GDP] are seen for what they are – relics of another era. We have witnesses how some nations can be flush with funds, while descending into disrepair and despair because that money is earned by destroying everything that is genuinely meaningful - from jobs to trust, relationships, health and wellbeing, happiness, personal savings, and freedom.

Only when we can imagine a different kind of economics will we be inclined to allocate the estimated $20-30 trillion that will be needed to combat the perfect storm of existential crises facing us today. Only when we have a different kind of politics will we be able to heal rifts across artificially-created social divides. Only when we develop metrics that focus on well-being, wholeness, mutuality, reciprocity, kindness and reconciliation, in contrast to things that are broken, fragmented or disintegrating, will we be able to truly understand the measure of our success as a species.  And only when we can envisage a different social order will we be free to comprehend the human condition, reconcile our differences peacefully, communicate openly, and generate a more inclusive and expansive understanding of human purpose.

In the end we will only be able to reassemble the brittle husk of our humanity by facing our most dire threats together. Using surveillance, the force or arms, or decrees from those in provisional authority will not hack it. Ultimately, we will adopt cooperation and abundance as the basic elements in a new narrative for the alternative is to perish as a civilised society.