The big questions are too hot to handle
In all the newspaper articles, in all the radio programmes and TV shows now exposing our MP’s expenses, and previously, our failed bankers’ bonuses, two core issues have been strikingly missed. One is to question the suitability of the type of people currently in both those roles to be there at all. The other is to question the wisdom of desperately propping up a failing, obsolete and unsustainable world economic system.
Let us start with the first issue. Individuals, tribes, cultures, nations and humanity all mature or evolve psychologically, psychosocially and psychospiritually over time in a broadly similar predictable sequence. Some individuals may mature rapidly triggered by a crisis, and others may choose to embark on a journey of conscious self-development by a variety of means including the use of psychological or spiritual practices. Thereby these individuals climb the evolutionary ladder through sequential stages in a decade or three, whereas collectives such as a culture may take several centuries to attain the same heights.
By understanding the pattern that individuals follow, the progress of a culture or a nation becomes predictable, and the stage that they have reached is identifiable by certain known characteristics. Those who study the evolutionary consciousness of humanity all over the world, have developed countless maps and models of the evolutionary journey, from simple easy to understand three stage models to complex ones of 15 or more stages. When they are superimposed over one another, they show a consistent sequential pattern.
One of these models, a four stage one devised by Kohlberg and Gilligan, labels Egocentric as the lowest level, followed by Ethnocentric, then Worldcentric and finally Kosmocentric. The other more complex models provide more detail, but I am intentionally keeping it simple here. This model can be described as showing the size of the person’s consciousness or what the person includes in his or her field of care. A recent study suggested that some 77% of the world population is currently Ethnocentric or below.
This Ethnocentric stage is characterised by tribal orientation, nationalism, rivalries, adolescent behaviours, and the like. Let us consider now the responses made by the bankers and the politicians to media and public criticism. They were very similar.
- The claim that “Everything I did was within the rules.”
- An inability to recognise that what they did was ethically or morally wrong.
- The excuse that “I made a mistake”, but the mistakes were all to their own benefit.
- An almost pathological inability to take responsibility, and to say “I am sorry”.
Anyone who has a teenage son will recognize these adolescent traits; however, when one is under 25 such behaviour is to be expected as an acceptable phase in growing up. Above 30 or so, and especially if one is a banker or a politician with power over many, such behaviours are not only unattractive, unacceptable, and inexcusable, they are positively dangerous. Why have the media not picked this up and pointed it out?
Introducing tighter regulations for bankers or politicians does not raise their level of maturity, morality or their ethics, it just limits what they can get away with. No, it is the type of people, the Ethnocentrics themselves, that have to go. Worldcentric people by definition and by their nature would not have abused the old regulations, let alone need new ones. Anyone below Worldcentric on the “chart” should not be selected or elected into positions of leadership in politics or big corporations, not just banks. Fewer people would fit the bill and that would limit our choice, and so it should.
The second of the two issues was the failure of commentators to seriously question the capitalist economic system that has proved to be so fragile and unjust. It has brought wealth to half the world while the rest starve; it thrives on excess consumption and the inevitable emissions, and it seriously retards the evolutionary development of individuals and cultures. Bankers and politicians alike strive to prop up the old failing system which they abused, because they know no better.
It did not occur to them that this was a golden opportunity to start to create a viable, sustainable economic system in line with the requirements of emerging Worldcentric human consciousness stage. Putting off the inevitable only makes the next economic crisis bigger and sooner. Worldcentric observers are amazed, distraught by the primitive ethnocentric thinking of our politicians and bankers, but they are up against the power that they still exercise.
However there is also a groundswell of more conscious or ‘worldcentric’ people who will no longer tolerate the old order and they will become ever more vociferous until the ethnocentric majority of politicians are discredited, ousted and replaced. Some commentators will reread if not resurrect Karl Marx, but the way is forward not backwards. A new economic order is essential, one that puts people and planet before profit.
So why have these two core issues been bypassed? Because few can contemplate the demise of capitalism and so they retreat into a state of denial, and few so called leaders can face the fact that despite their profile and in some cases their cleverness, their behaviour is adolescent. They have no knowledge of the evolutionary imperative that determines our future and ultimately our survival, let alone any understanding of it, or are guided by it. Why not? Because our schooling has tragically failed many generations now by ducking evolution, in simple terms, it omits the development of emotional intelligence followed by wisdom. Instead schools have been obliged to promote quantitative technowledge to meet commercial goals. The result is a gross excess of designed obsolescent material gadgets, goods, guns and emissions, and an absence of the wisdom to use our innovative ability responsibly for the collective benefit of mankind.
Are Worldcentric politicians and bankers too much to ask for? Many conscious people are waiting in the wings for this adolescent lot to get out or grow up. Worldcentric people are described as having “a greater expansion of self to embrace all people regardless of race, gender, class, or creed; social activism, moral relativism, rationality that questions rigid belief systems and transcends traditional rules and roles”, and so on. Kosmocentric ones would be better still. They “identify with all life and consciousness, human or otherwise, have a deeply felt responsibility for the evolutionary process as a whole, and have an innate universal morality”, amongst other things. This is, after all, what we need if we are to overcome further economic crises and the even greater environmental and social justice crises that are on the way.
Popularity: 83% [?]
How does the Worldcentric and Kosmocentric view affect individual liberties and freedoms?
Should he be speaking to an American audience, I would suggest that Sir J. W. would appear to have assumed too much, on the one hand, while ignoring the obvious on the other.
As described in various sources including in Michael Hudson’s book ‘Super-Imperialism’
(http://www.michael-hudson.com/books/ super_imperialism_II.htm), after the bankers (agents of those in the City of London) set up the US Federal Reserve Bank (in a clever maneuver in 1913) and, ever since, the leadership of that institution has managed to exercise great control the economic fate of the USA. The various strategies employed to finance the warring European parties during World War I apparently proved somewhat less than completely successful from the point of view of the USA’s financial decision-makers/controllers. However, after World War II, the leaders in the USA government and the Federal Reserve had learned a lesson and had come up with strategies to deal with many perceived economic problems by taking advantage of several institutions, especially, the AID and the IMF which, together with the World Bank, were propagandized to have been designed to provide economic aid for a number of war-torn, undeveloped and/or otherwise needy economies around the world. Eventually, over time, the USA managed to wrest control of natural resources from many sources while also gaining control of the political leadership of many countries. Segments of the economic/political leadership of this country were able to push through a military/industrial program which accompanied a plan for eventual world domination (though the domestic propaganda organs conveyed the ideas that such efforts were important to maintain world peace, to help recovery in the recipient countries and/or to permit control of US national security). Meanwhile, the main-stream-media (newspapers, magazines, etc.) were taken over by corporations which eventually did away with most of their news-reporting departments, foreign correspondents, etc. The well-known efforts of many of those who held high positions in the G W Bush administration were ostensibly designed to facilitate the ‘new world order’ in some form or another. I would not be surprised that these individuals and their backers think of themselves as having the answers needed to facilitate a ‘world leadership group’; in that context, I would guess that in a rather perverse manner they may have even considered themselves to be ‘Worldcentric’. However, such a definition of the term/word(s) is probably not what the author of this article has in mind. The reason why no member of the so-called ‘fourth-estate’ does not speak up in the US about behavior of banksters or other crooked corporate leaders may be that the media is eventually (though, perhaps, indirectly) controlled by a number of considerations including the fellows who caused the current economic crisis. The extent to which such behavior of journalists would manifest itself in the UK is beyond my ability to speculate, however, a number of people think that bankers world-wide are able to influence politicians/powerbrokers in a variety of manners, not the least of which is quite fundamental – money!
Although the idea of political and business leaders with characteristics of “Worldcentric people” and above is very, very attractive, I’m afraid it won’t happen with the methods of selection that exist at the moment.
Most business leaders are selected on the basis of the selfish chase of profit or personal power and the same can be said of politicians, although the development of spheres of influence, is most vital for politicians. Take as an example my local MP; a very clever and successful businessman, widely tipped for high office in the next government. Locally he is considered a “good man” but he has used the excuse that things were within the rules, when morally they were dubious, (think expenses and a previous purchase of ex LA property from the sitting tenant via right to buy). The previous incumbent resigned his seat to follow a career in the church, his replacement was brought into a safe seat by the party machine, who wanted a successful, photogenic, writer of right wing economic pamphlets as a replacement for a very highly regarded, but low profile, constituency MP.
It is a truism that those most suited to high office are those least likely to seek it, conversely those who should be excluded from high office will seek it, almost obsessively. Both Terry Prachitt and Douglas Adams have used this idea for comic effect, which isn’t funny after longer contemplation.
Anon asked,”How does the Worldcentric and Kosmocentric view affect individual liberties and freedoms?”
It the context of Sir John’s previous article this appears to me as a silly question as people with a wider view would seek to avoid transgressing on others liberties and freedoms, as to do so would undermine their view of themselves. If every member of the population was of similar mind, the society wouldn’t need rules, as all individuals would be self-governing, with an imperitive to protect the rights and freedoms of others. Unbounded freedom can be given to those of proven good judgement. Where this all comes horribly unstuck is the interation between those at opposite end of the spectrum- the conflict between the selfish and the selfless. The other issue is where two parties can hold opposed views, both in good faith; mercy killing vs. murder or matters of personal choice.
James May, (the journalist and broadcaster), expressed an opinion that there should be only one rule, expressed as “do not be a cock”, and that all and any transgressions should be tested against that – for some that would be a major restriction of their freedom as there would be no ‘loopholes’!
Does anyone know how we could select for high office the World or Kosmocentric?
“How does the Worldcentric and Kosmocentric view affect individual liberties and freedoms?”
I support Jeremy’s answer to that markedly egocentric question, and tritely note that my liberties and freedoms depend on others’ duties and responsibilities, just as theirs depend on mine.
“Does anyone know how we could select for high office the World or Kosmocentric?”
Disenfranchise the egocentric and ethnocentric majority. Otherwise, at least one of their own will successfully pander to them. Shame about the impracticality of this obvious but, I fear, unique solution.
This is a great article and for me it re-enforces the ‘battle of the future’, a ‘battle that transcends nations’ … a ‘battle of values’ …
I describe this battle as: Leanomics vs Poweromics & Ignoromics
… where
* Leanomics = People taking responsibility for adding value and continuously improving the situation for others (e.g. customers, communities, overall environment), based upon fundamental values such as trust, honor, responsibility and respect.
* Ignoromics = People are either effectively ignorant of the situation (e.g. the overall environment) or not prepared to take responsibility to make sure it changes for the better.
* Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
Traditional ‘economics’ is too narrow in scope, out-of-date and effectively dead (nb Dr. W. Edwards Deming, a ‘creative outsider’ highlighted this over 20 years ago) … and following up on his work, and the above definitions … what prevails today is a lethal combination of Poweromics & Ignoromics (nb ‘partners in crime’), which the growing groundswell of ‘Worldcentric’/'Kosmocentric’ people are starting to challenge – take a look at the following about the ‘battle of values’ too for instance
http://poweromics.blogspot.com/2009/06/leanomics-v-poweromics-ignoromics_01.html
… and the wider blog below for more examples of the application of Poweromics around us (including the failure of traditional establishments such as mainstream education and the media also referred to here) and those who are starting to challenge it …
http://poweromics.blogspot.com
A link there also points to this blog too, pointing to the great work being done here (and by others) – so keep up the good work … as there’s a long way to go in this crisis before we see any significant change … e.g. in the ‘behaviours’ from those ‘leaders’ in ‘power’ (… because most of the ‘current leaders’ are unlikely to ‘grow up’ and/or will fight hard to avoid losing their ‘positions of power’ …)
However, the internet will change everything eventually, including power, politics and economics …!
David Clift, Future 500 Leader, UK
“One of these models, a four stage one devised by Kohlberg and Gilligan.”
What is the title of the book they have authored on the 4 stages?
I have found my self in amazement, truly a first. The amount of intellectual conversation in such a “for the greater good” is overwhelming. Overwhelming due to the fact that I have searched,studied, and in some cases investigated the current system with only a feeling of emptiness driving me relentlessly forward with no known destination whatsoever. Then “Whack”, I find these paragraphs, farmiliar to me as if Ive already examined them, thrown around as if they didnt really contain the answers to the problems as well as the solutions. If the media is a veil to deceive or control then it must be REMODELED COMPLETELY. It would far better serve as a true example for all to follow. What if everyone had what they needed, and knew the difference from what they wanted, like food, clothing, etc. equally everywhere? In order for that to occur, Im just storming out loud, people would still have to work to supply goods and services, currency (+or- greed) would be unnecessary, like Star Trek for lack of a better example, if only the materialistic wants of society were shunned and selfless acts celebrated instead. To fill the day, instead of going to work, one would instead be volunteering, making themselves useful, acting as a team. If we could only learn from the examples set by the ants in a hill or the bees in a hive.
those who would be coaches arent elected or searching those positions out. They are just naturally found there by the collective conciousness of the necessity, and ablity for them to be there, and if they dont belong there, they wouldnt be. I apologize but this is actually my first blog, EVER, So thanks for allowing me to get that out as well as sharing your thoughts on and in a direction which becomes the solution as soon as you get the populace to adopt that direction simultaneously become a hive entity. I can only IMAGINE WHAT THE FUTURE COULD BE LIKE IF WE COULD JUST ALL GET ALONG AND WORK TOGETHER TOWARD BUILDING A BETTER WORLD FOR OUR GRANDCHILDRENS CHILDREN, SINCE ITS REALLY THEIR PLANET ANYWAY. WERE JUST BORROWING IT FOR A MINUTE AND I WAS TAUGHT THAT YOU MUST RETURN SOMETHING BORROWED IN THE SAME OR BETTER CONDITION(PREFERREABLY THE LATTER). Does any one know what the BIGGEST word in the dictionary really is? RESPECT. If we just taught that one word, I mean really schooled it to our children, that alone would change the world sooner than bailouts and power-con-me-icks. What if we (in America) sent the amount of Federal Income Tax to the State and the State amount to the Fed. That would triple the amoount for social services, clinics, schools, police, and on and on. As well as force the Fed to cut out all that is unnecessary and erase options like trillions for bankers and debt. for our future programs. Leaders like lawyers who say theyll never pass a bill with earmarks or hasnt been posted publicly for five days, or has pork products, and my favorite, one that hasnt been read at all, then immediatly does the opposite. Leaders that say thay make strict laws to keep lobbyists from changing policies with the price of a steak dinner, then makes them head of the treasury and the pentagon are powerful salesmen for the uberrich to maintain their worldly position above the havenots and as history tells us over and over, change will only be made after the masses have had enouph and a revolution occurs. The idea of a slow change over a couple of decades will not disassemble the walls between the haves and the have-nots. Only when all is levelled will we be the same.When nolonger do we use terms like “those in power” to describe a “leader”will the path be visible. Communication, Education,Respect, Generosity, and such should be every where, in every book, replacing ads and propaganda.
Instead of news about someone who shot someone else, lets hear about the 9 year old who saved the little girl from a pit bull by grappling it for 45mins on his way home from karate class til animal control got there.