An open space for global conversation
As I see it, WE the 99% live our lives based on concern for ME (our selves) and WE (our whole community, ultimately the global community). In contrast, the 1% are focused only on themselves (their ME's). I would like to see us explore what this might mean. Does the core concept make sense? And, if so, what can WE (each and all) do to bring it into being -- beginning with our occupation.
I'm still hoping you will respond to the idea I lifted from your earlier message.
I propose moving what has become pretty much our own conversation to this discussion in a relevant group that you haven't joined yet. Are you game?
I am still reading here..and sometimes a meaningful focused exchange between two members can bring more light than a thread with many participants.
"I focussed on your words --'what if we made our many economies out of the contributions people want/came to make day-by-day, instead of forcing most people to be something they are not, again and again?' And I realized that that was where I wanted to focus my attention. I think it is an excellent focus on what I see as a central challenge that WE (the people) need to become aware of ... and then develop ways of coping with that challenge."
What I'm thinking about the challenge today is that interested entities might collaborate on generating a list for a sort of scavenger hunt that individuals, families and intentional groups might conduct in their respective locales. The list would be comprised of agreements that, altogether, would directly enrich the lives of the parties involved (as long as commitments were sustained) and indirectly serve as action research on how many, in what variety, agreements it takes to stimulate jumping, with both feet, from the old tracks to the new tracks of being-in-the-bioregion (nature working).
David -- I checked out the "this discussion" site you referred me to and found it difficult to conceive of a conversation between the two of us. I even have had difficulty finding a way to reply to your asking me if I'm "game." I'm looking ways in which two people can explore their views together. It may be possible to add more, but we risk going off in too many different directions, so I*d like to begin with dialogue between two at first.
David -- I'm trying to follow one path of dialogue between us, but am having great difficulty doing it because it is so easy to lose track of the path. For example, your reply, with its reference to "more, new" seemed to disrupt the dialogue between the two of us. [I'll check it out now and see what I find. I find a way to stay on our path, I'll respond.]
Thanks for causing me to reflect on this common perception. What I'm hearing is another way of saying that the 99% is somehow better than the 1% or that the 99% is somehow less selfish, less greedy... and more generous, altruistic, etc..
To me it is dangerous territory to get into the judgement game of we and they... thinking that you or I dosn't have greed, selfishness, dishonesty, etc., simply is not the real world. And if you know how to rid yourself of these attributes I would say I will learn from you by watching how you live your life.
Let's start by trying our best to be honest with each other... one on one.