1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Hi, again, Joe Brewer ,

2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 I identify you
as our  #1 catalyst for change
and fully support your innovations and enterprise.

3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 If one looks through the “right lens”, they would discover a cornucopia of viable projects-for-change emerging globally. None of this is reported in the MSM and the full scope of this activity is yet hidden to most online explorers. Indeed, most projects are aware of only a few, out of thousands of related projects.

4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 Yet, I detect something missing, seriously critical for the success of these many ventures. More disturbing, no one seems aware that something critical is missing, and thus nothing is being done to discover and develop appropriate strategies. All are deeply engaged in their projects and all assume a “coming-together”, a nu synergy emergent from their collective endeavors. This is their faith, without substantiation or concern about validity.

5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 Do we really “get-it”? Are there levels of “getting-it”?

6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 I see no evidence of a “coming together”, and evidence of many blocking factors. There is an enormous blindspot about the “endgame”, when the new movements confront established orders. Indeed, there is a shrieking vacuum for speculative, long-term  scenarios to a “state” when there are no more negative/catastrophic trends.  We appear locked in a “presentism”, oblivious of “futures cognition of a type required”. Long-term scenario are automatically rejected as top-down; while the sufficiency of bottom-up, alone, is blindly assumed true. “Grassroots” ignores the vast, essential diversity of humankind.

7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 What if every human has intrinsic cognitive limitations that blocks comprehensive comprehension of systems beyond a certain complexity? Individually, we reach closure prematurely, but are satisfied. This is related to George Miller’s 7+/- 2 limitations of independent variables a human brain can handle in “working mind”.

8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 This is but one small piece in a speculative proposition: HUMANS AND HUMANKIND ARE NOT AS WE ASSUME/BELIEVE THEM TO BE. Basing our future strategies on false assumptions about our “nature”, may well lead to disaster.

9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 I am pleased in the tasks (a) & (b) to see the recognition of the distinction between having the processes to apply (to saving the planet) and humankind implementing those processes. I claim that THIS is our primary challenge:  discovering what blocks humankind from doing what needs doing. I suggest a second level  challenge: admit that even with our very best efforts, we will – today – fail to discover our blockage BECAUSE we currently lack the requisite competencies and the appropriate episteme to discover the appropriate “reality” for our “Crisis-of-Crises.

10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 This realization is very positive, as “we” are fully capable of OLLO (Organizing-for-Learning=&=Learning-for Organizing) to gain the requisite competencies and appropriate episteme. We only need to recognize this as a required enterprise, in addition to continuing with our projects; without which our projects will not accomplish their intended goals.

11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 Explore http://nuet.us/ for some preliminary work.

12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 In summary: we don’t adequately comprehend our challenge because we fail to comprehend our critical, current limitations that block us doing what needs doing. How is our “belief in the nature of humans and humankind” false and what is a better model to use in our future planning and actions? This is our top challenge.  {Read Joe’s immediate reply to this, below.}

13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 ===========  Joe’s FB post:

14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 This morning I have been reading a book manuscript sent to me by Hunter Lovins about how to live out the new story of regeneration in the midst of planetary-scale collapse… as the only way to bring the Earth back within the empirical constraints of the Planetary Boundaries framework outlined by the Stockholm Resilience Centre.

15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 Again I am struck by the observation that:

16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 (a) We know all that we need to know in order to build human capacities to navigate the cascade of disruptions from ecological decline combined with wealth hoarding among financial elites; and

17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 (b) The main reason we fail to employ this vast knowledge is because it has yet to be translated into actionable practices at the necessary scales to demonstrate how the new paradigm works for large numbers of people.

18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 When I was in Costa Rica last week, I was surrounded by people who “get it” and know how serious our current predicament is. And yet these people have learned ways to heal landscapes, restore biodiversity, and increase the wellbeing of humans at the same time. It was powerful to be among those who see the world as it is (without being in denial) and still express so much hope for the future.

19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0 I am internalizing these experiences as I begin to prepare now in earnest for the workshop I will host next week titled Managing Planetary Collapse — and as I continue to take steps to build the first School for Applied Cultural Evolution with my growing number of collaborators around the world to help millions (possibly billions) learn how to live the story of regeneration.

20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 Onward, fellow humans.

21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0 =========== JOE IMMEDIATELY REPIES:

22 Leave a comment on paragraph 22 0 Joe Brewer I agree with you fully, Larry Victor. And I’d say there are only a few people I’ve met who seem to fully grasp this challenge — among them I’d include Daniel Schmachtenberger, Jordan Hall, and Gunther Sonnenfeld.

23 Leave a comment on paragraph 23 0 We have to build up systems of discernment (or systems of sovereignty, as Daniel and Jordan describe it) that enable us to deconstruct epistemologies in the midst of handling incredibly complex scenarios of systemic change.

24 Leave a comment on paragraph 24 0 This is indeed the frontier challenge that almost no one realizes or knows about. Very difficult indeed.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *