¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 The flow of information heralding the rise of entrepreneurial and P2P ventures is increasing. I take no issue about persons using this route for survival or for providing services for immediate needs. But, the unquestioned assumption that this is a bottom-up process eventually leading to a just and sustainable global humankind may be dangerously naive. IMO it is activity that will remain at the bottom. Bottom-up requires UPLIFT.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Even not-for-profit ventures must integrate with established business and financial systems to survive. Their label in reference to profit implies this. This embedment is highly constraining. Just to keep up with ever changing environments and survive competition new ventures become more and more dependent on established systems, even when they claim to be creating a new “peer” economy. And, they cannot move to become an effective alternative economy without bringing the BuzzSaw down on them . Most P2P entrepreneurs are not aware of (nor can’t accept) the deep nature of establishments’ excessive power and narrow vision. Although they may be critical of establishments, it is usually from a liberal/progressive perspective that assumes established systems can be changed from within. I believe a strong case could be made that anticipated reform is virtually impossible. Even revolutions end up simply replacing one oppressive system by another.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 The bottom-up/top-down metaphor implies a single system that evolves, using pseudo Darwinian processes. “Revolutionaries” like to think of themselves as opposing THE system, while they both are deeply entwined in a larger system. Societal metamorphosis involves one new system literally replacing an older system.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 Yet, as I learn of the great abundance of innovative ventures, I envision how each is highly relevant to UPLIFT and a move towards replacing (not reforming) established orders.
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 Two activities appear to be universally taboo today:
- ¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0
- 1) Exploring scenarios where various P2P ventures will synergize/organize into a force to successfully confront established orders rapidly re-configuring into high security “states” ready to suppress all opposition. NEED: Use all historical and current data, even when conflicting. Avoid ideological assumptions about “reality”.
- ¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0
- 2) Exploring scenarios alternative to (1) involving uplift and variations on the societal metamorphosis theme. NEED: Consider both immediate gains as well as long term success. From my experience this alternative is given less chance to manifest as an alien or spiritual intervention might save us.
- From my limited exploration of both, I conclude that (2) is much more probable than (1), and much more enjoyable.
- Both explorations must go on concurrently in strategy, but active teams are expected to concentrate on one or the other; but not exclusively.
- (1)=STICK : (2)=CARROT
6 Responses
Fabio, your feedback is valuable. People take for granted that others comprehend their messages – but often a response is to one small part of the message and we easily assume that other parts were comprehended. It is important to me that, in spite of my many posts and docs about UPLIFT, you (and most others) seem to have missed major parts. This is evidence that mutual comprehension is a much more complex process than we assume.
Although UPLIFT might assist reformist movements, I agree with you that I don’t see it working to resolve our financial mess or the whole of our Crisis-of-Crises. Indeed, it was my realization that Significant Transformation Was Impossible that led me in 1974 to start working on an alternative: Societal Metamorphosis. The movement emerging through use of BUS and UPLIFT strategies makes NO attempt to change the existing societal order (with exceptions only to keep the NWO from exterminating the UPLIFT movement before it is beyond their reach).
UPLIFT and the educated/organized populations emergent are the embryonic forms of a nu Humanity to replace (not transform) the civilization systems of contemporary humankind. This is well beyond metaphor, but a workable hypothesis/prospectus; yet it appears to be a conceptual scheme too big to be grasped from reading, even large documents.
In Humanity, and the early UPLIFT movement, learning/organizing replaces economics as the most important subsystem. Econo-centrism remains the dominant paradigm of almost everyone, including most activists working for significant change. Most entrepreneurial ventures which have great difficulty fighting THE SYSTEM, would have the freedom and synergistic support as parts of a nu Humanity forming.
The UPLIFT movement would experiment with various alternative credit systems now being tried to insert into the existing economy. Early on UPLIFT would have to acquire resources from its societal environment and a top priority would be facilitating basic needs for those participating – neither of which should be difficult if we put our creative minds to it and not be burdened by having to fit in with existing economic systems.
The basics of my model hasn’t changed since Mission2000 in 1975, although there have been many improvements and additions. I started before the PC and WWW. Most of my time and effort has been devoted to discovering how to share this idea and how to get it started. This challenge has led me to far better comprehend the “nature” of human systems, which has been the primary basis for modifications of the Societal Metamorphosis model and the current form of UPLIFT.
It is now my challenge to create a “forum/process/prospectus” where a few persons can devote the needed time to interact with me (and each other) to a threshold of mutual comprehension to design/construct/implement BUS1.0 .
Fascinating Larry. I have been thinking of the same. I also get messages in my inbox about social entrepreneurs and how their “conscious” business reconcile business with money. Most of them, very well-intentioned and beautiful approaches, but their creators often miss the context, the big picture, the entwined nature of “the” system 🙂
However, I must confess while I’ve been intrigued by UPFLIFT, and while I even asked you once about details of this, I can’t see how UPLIFT would untangle the finacial mess, or better said, liberate changemakers and dreamers from this oppression. I have seen UPLIFT mainly as an educational approach, not so much an economical one. I’d be interested to understand the latter better. Maybe a post about that specifically would be a good idea (at least for me).
[…] P2P or Networks are a basic aspect of new organizations, but the organizations have yet to emerge and form a nu ecology of orgs. The expectation that “swarming” (as currently practiced in online media) will be sufficient to seaf the emergence of new orgs may be wrong. I am not calling for a top-down process [from a person or group] to “direct” the swarming. I see missing swarming about higher level holons which will serve as scaffolding for lower holon development – as lower holon development fuels higher level development. We need neither top-down or bottom-up but both, integrated. […]
[…] wish I could relax and depend on quality networking-of-relationships being sufficient. IMO we need a new complementarity of bottom-up and top-down, as neither are viable […]
[…] Larry Victor writes: […]
[…] Larry Victor writes: […]