toward a more compassionate culture

At any given time, there are three groups of people. First, there are those who mostly want to do what's best even if it involves some degree of personal sacrifice. Second, there are those who default to selfishness. And third, there are the fence-sitters. There are no clear lines that divide the groups. The distribution is actually along a spectrum. Each of us, with the exception of the most extreme narcissists and sociopaths, is a blend of altruism and selfishness.

The relative size of each group and the direction the middle group is generally tipped toward are influenced by the cultural context. Some cultural contexts are more encouraging of altruism than others. In the more altruistic cultures, the group of those who default to altruism is larger, and the middle group tends to be more altruistic.

My guess is that most people would prefer living in a society that rewards trustworthiness, fairness, generosity, and loyalty. The obvious question is what any of us can do to move the needle even a little bit toward the society we want to be a part of. How do we build up "social capital"? It's easy to sabotage, undermine, or erode the social and cultural fabric that makes it possible to have a reasonable degree of trust that other people are going to live up to their commitments and aren't going to stab us in the back. All we have to do to pull that off is follow the line of least resistance. It is far more difficult to be conscientious and to care about long term consequences of our choices.

What is especially difficult is resisting entrenched political and economic currents that are driven by greed and a lust for power. Very few of us have anything to gain over the long haul by going where those currents inevitably take us, but none of us can singlehandedly overcome the political heft that deep pocket money can buy. It takes enough of us standing in solidarity with each other to counterbalance the natural power inequity. The good news is that a broadly representative democratic movement can achieve critical mass and create a rising tide that lifts all boats by prioritizing the common welfare.

recovering optimism

One of the main themes of human history is the search for and discovery of better ways of doing things. We've gotten much better at meeting many challenges. We don't have to forage to feed ourselves. We have elaborate systems for conveniently providing not only the basic necessities of life but also great luxury that many of us have come to take for granted.

Recent centuries have seen the emergence of modern science, democracy, and more enlightened attitudes toward religion. The ensuing cataclysmic social and cultural shifts did not come without casualties or resistance, but until about a hundred years ago, it didn't seem strange or naive to believe that humanity was on an upward trajectory that would know no limits. Advances in areas like science, medicine, and technology didn't stop, but two devastating world wars and many other dark and discouraging byproducts of modernity have dampened our enthusiasm for progress.

The quaint optimism that was so abundant prior to World War I has been replaced by a desperate search for anything that might offer some basis for hope. People go to ridiculous extremes to escape the sense of doom they have about the general state of the world. It is hard to imagine what it would take to recapture that which motivated many previous generations to move forward and to regain a simple faith in ourselves, in our innate capacity for goodness, and in our ability to make the world a better place. Nonetheless, nothing else makes sense.

never too old to be idealistic

My personal commitment to preserving an idealistic outlook on life is a calculated move. Some people think old idealists are fools, but I have known too many embittered old men to believe that. I understand how cranky codgers end up where they are, and I don't want to go there myself.

I would prefer to risk becoming an old fool over finding myself in an emotional space that is all about how inconvenient it is to me personally that there are so many people in the world who want to have a fair shot at acquiring the basic necessities of life.

I don't want to be prisoner of pessimism. I don't want to resign myself to the gloomy attitude that there is nothing any ordinary person like me can do about problems like climate change. I don't want to give up on the possibility of a future that is brightened by what I do rather than darkened by what I don't do. It is about being responsible, but it is also about the quality of my own life.

going beyond getting the trains to run on time

Human beings are amazingly ingenious. What we have accomplished in areas like technology, medicine, and space travel is astounding. There is no reason we can’t direct our considerable brainpower and resourcefulness toward solving dire problems like climate change and unsustainable economic practices. One of the main obstacles is that we aren’t very good at responsible collective decision-making.

I’m a big fan of democracy, but the so called democratic governance models that we currently have are ineffective. Some say democracy is inherently incapable of “getting the trains to run on time”. I don’t agree. I believe that the problem is that our governments aren’t democratic enough. The main goal should be empowering and mobilizing ordinary stakeholders everywhere to contribute their ideas, talent, skills, time, and energy toward tackling the big problems that will never be solved without their vital participation.

The basic template for democracy as it is generally practiced today was designed by privileged white males who couldn’t imagine the possibility of sharing power with everybody else. To some extent, their fear of losing control was warranted. Democracy does need to be protected from itself. The majority can be very misguided at any given time. Mob rule run amuck is worse than being governed by an oppressive dictator.

We are currently at a crossroads. One way leads to an exacerbation of our worst problems. The other way would lead to new possibilities. The difference lies in whether we can translate what we already know about information architecture into a model that facilitates robust and broadly representative participation in responsible collective decision-making. I know that sounds ridiculously idealistic, but unless we can find a way to harvest the human potential that is currently being wasted and misdirected, we will continue in a downward spiral toward a series of inevitable global cataclysms.

standing on old shoulders to reach new heights

Self-improvement is not only a possibility for human beings; it is a necessity. That has always been the case. Even our hunter-gatherer ancestors weren’t born knowing instinctively how to survive in the wild. It took years before individuals learned everything they needed to know to be contributing rather than dependent members of their families.

That we can augment and override natural instinct is one of the most significant distinctive characteristics of human beings. Our ability to learn and to pass on what we have learned to successive generations is what has enabled the human species to live, build communities, and thrive in almost every habitat on the planet. It’s not that we lack instinct. We do have instincts, but they seem to be more complex, subtler, and more pliable than those of other animals.

It is as though we have an instinctual appetite for participating in the communal production and distribution of tangible and intangible resources that make survival possible and desirable. The experiences of acquiring new understandings, learning new skills, developing new insights, and sharing accumulated knowledge with others are deeply satisfying.

Since a community of learners and teachers is about simultaneously preserving what is already known and discovering new possibilities, what is required is a blend of conservative and progressive values. We need both perspectives. Not only do we need the contributions from each camp; we need to recognize that it is not possible to be exclusively one or the other. Each of us individually is a blend of both. None of us can reject either.

It is not possible to get by without the benefit of accustomed ways of doing certain things, but since the vast majority of what any of us knows was new at some point, no one can say they what is new is inherently bad. What we need is balance. Each of us defines that differently, but all of us have to find a way to welcome what is new and helpful, even as we count on being able to continue doing what we know works.

It would be foolish to precipitously trash the solid wisdom that comes from traditional sources, but there is always room for improvement. In fact, some of the problems that the global human community currently faces will only be solved by making improvements to our familiar ways of doing things. We are responsible for our own choices. Refusing to accommodate change is at least as harmful as the destabilizing impact of challenging that which currently seems unquestionably true and necessary.