Presenting a vision / idea of a new (or better) society is often done by the old paradigm of thinking, meaning the movement/org is fixated on its own belief, that their model is the best ‘Utopian’ one. This is however a thinking trap. If you present your model in the same way as it’s done in the old way of thinking, nothing is ever really going to change. Why? Because there will never be a consensus on which model to implement or in what way or manner to do so. Limiting to only ONE model within, beside, or instead off the current one, is bound to fail eventually. Understanding this is crucial.
The only way to really change things, is to step out of your ‘comfort’ zone of old AND new way of thinking, and step on a neutral ‘open source, open mind platform’. It is key to step out of the model you have designed, and you so deeply feel attached to, to create a distance between you and your beliefs. Only if you do so there can be room for overall debate and discussion, taking a good look at all pros and cons, for which models to implement, and in what quantity/mixture this will work best.
This is the only platform were consensus can and will be found. Change will come only from a cocktail of good ideas, reinforcing and supporting one another, also ‘weighing’ (balancing) how they will influence one another.
Change will not come from one idea only. It would be madness to think only one of the new models would work for all. To think that everything could work at the same time (if properly balanced) is a much more ‘common sense’ approach. If we do not understand this, real change will never happen and we will keep on discussing our new models in the old ways of thinking forever…
dear robert
as far as i can understand you you refer to thinking in- or outside of the box. your box seems to be that you refuse to consider the option that there is a one and only solution.
now this does seem a very comforting belief. for one thing nearly everybody seems to think this way and indeed those that proclaim to have found the truth, in most cases can be proven to have missed some or other essential point.
my point is that to date i have not yet heard of a convincing argument that there is no one and only solution. instead this maxime that there is no one and only solution is usaully taken for granted.
now i believe the matter is slightly more complicated. i do have an argument as to why there is no one and only solution and this argument leads the way to a unifying framework. in fact my answer to the question whether or not there is a one and only solution is: yes and no. i will explein my view:
yes, i do believe there is only one cause to our problems today: it is our behaviour. more precisely: we don’t take each others concerns into account. and consequently i believe there is only one solution to our problems. viz: take each others concerns into account. now a world in which everybody takes each others concerns into account is a utopia in the sense that there will always be people that do not take each others concerns into account. now to mitigate this problem many solution are currently being proposed, our current economic system being one of these solutions.
so for this latter reason indeed i believe there is no one and only solution.
but the nice thing about this argument is that a unifying framework unfolds from it. the search & share that i propose is the tool for this utopia. it is like the money of the future. the point is that to use this money you still have to figure out how to cope with people that are not fully trustworthy. this is where the myriad of solutions come in and search & share can unify these.
in other words: when you believe there is no one and only solution all you will see is a myriad of solutions. but when you do believe there is a one and only solution, albeit it is not attainable, this utopian solution can still be used to integrate the myriad of solutions. the power of cooperation is in this integration.