At http://exponentials.blogspot.com, 6 billion beings are all 122bis3 invited to vote on and relentlessly edit the 21 most urgent crises of going global * local that we now to need to collaborate in turning round to sustain humanity's future. We offer scripts from 22 years of open debates on mapping death of distance networks 123 and 30 years of Economics of Entrepreneurial Revolution 12 3 of Systems
A most loved pattern rule of conflict resolution: the greatest value multiplying act of leadership is to help peoples harmonise what conventional wisdom has historically mapped as warring opposites: can we practice conversation starters with whatever context will matter most in your family's life? Or who else sees sustainability and investment as bondedto all the future exponentials of the natural gravity of systems to spin life or death?
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Exponentials have been called man's greatest misunderstanding. Since 1984 this has bothered my friends (1) and I because the globalisation we choose to network worldwide is the greatest compound opportunity and threat that one generation has ever been responsible for. As microeconomists and entrepreneurial revolutionaries, we choose to define a global market sector as free if enough maps are transparent so that the value exchnage it mediates compounds no evil - in the sense of not compounding the greatest risk to community destruction that sector has most knowhow responsibility for flowing worldwide. It would seem evident from the 2000s that global sectors such as banking , energy, measurement and ruling professions, education, housing, dotcoms, utility market making,... have not been free to connect around exponentially transparent mapping. Economics itself has not been raisning sufficient expoential debates with leadership of the sort that the 1843 founder of The Economist designed that media to help all professionals explore fearlessly especially those advising on the biggest system decisions ever mapped.
Please help us microeconomists and end poverty entrepreneurs* review which global sectors have at least one benchmark for those who want to see human sustainability exponentials rise in the local to global world our generation interconnects
1 changeworld.net can you help us catalogue 1000 relevant links 2 smbaworld can you help us catalogue the most inspiring stories of what's urgently at stake 3 can you tell us info@worldcitizen.tv other urgent starting lines on hi-trust explorations with each other of sustainability - as the greatest collaboration race of our times, of all human generations...
end poverty's news searches on google by month 2009 january 1
Alan -what do you think of this content flow for book and can we take it to publishers before end of january
chapters 1 Mankind's 2 greatest misunderstandings , and consequences! 1.1Not understanding exponentials -strategists who assume linearity destroy competence to lead transparently. Unseen Wealth compounds contect-deep risks (Brookings 2000) - infotech misses every knowledge age opportunity to unite people's service economy energies around goodwill multipliers of compound phenomena -chapter 2 enumerates dismal exponentials' cases of losing first decade of century 21
1.2 Having no way to assess when a market's future is free: Hypothesis: The simplest definition of a free market connects everyone's trust in true and fair decision-making Map win-win-win between productivity coordinates * most vital purpose * demand coordinates Productivities can multiply sustainably when no knowledge/info silos Demands can muiltiply sustainably when no conflicts Purpose is communalised when costs of communications & educational channels are lowest practical
2 Mankind's 2 terrifying misunderstandings applied to first decade of 21st Century Dotcom bubbles Enronesque and anderson bubbles - Krugman's 5 ponti schemes of global accounting Housing bubble Banking bubble 3 trillion dolars wasted up to new year 09 and rising exponentially Carbon energy bubble (war & peace bubbles -not learning about exponential waste of postindustial military complex of superpower; not applying Churchill's learning on inconvenient truth)
This lost decade -ie compounding zero-sustainability of macro investments - puts us at a generational crossroads unlike any in the history of humanity and planet. The good news of one maths error being common to all sustainability crises is if we resolve the maths then yes we can: ..Create 5 million green jobs per quarter of a billion people - obama's usa goal ..Bank 2.0 - by invetsing in people's productivity and community sustainbility ..End poverty by celebrating achievinmg millennial goals with as much verve as we celebrate olympics
3 Cases of YBU applied to banking , going green, ending poverty
YBU emerges from 30 years of global media mapping triangularisation between Y communicate audacious goals -selecting urgent purpose's deadlines for actioning attention to sustainability exponentials, Be -studying demands and current solutions among those whose being is most vitally impacted, Us - connecting those of us with most potential resources to improve solutions at no cost
Collaboration's Good news: YBU applied to above 3 contexts has interfacing maps around microeconomics truths of: Yunus*Bangladesh*USA (Obama yes we can)
4 Five collaborations http://macrae.tv of turning curve of a networking era above zero sum
4.1 microeconomists map emergence of social business modelling third of century ago
4.2 first application of social business mapmakers: microcredit
4.3 since 1997 microcreditsummit has mapped most inspiring integration of annual worldwide meeting and continous online networking - can now be applied to any sector of importance to human sustainability
4.4 future capitalism partnerships are way to accelerate micro innovation of YBU and then treplicate successes
4.5 trillion dollar auditing needed for global markets that exchnage trillion dollars of value annually - start by having a future capitalism benchmark in each sector and undersatnding conseqeunces of 10*10=100 win or lose exponentilas - what glopbalsiation's choice was forecast in 1984 to impact generation 1984-2024 http://www.normanmacrae.com/netfuture.html
5 What's at stake for all our future generations
Reasoning's denial (ie framework of your last version of book ie people at top of global power have biggest difficulty of moving over from macroeconomic maps to micro especially when every global professions has siloised its own business case around denying micro (community-rising sustainability)
Definitely a lost generation worldwide, probably a lost planet - previously ciivilisations have exponetially destructed separately- a networked world means we all are connectred in each other's futures. Which is also why 1984 microeconomics scripted celebraing end poverty as the number 1 challenge of today's generation
seven wondrous trillion dollar sectors - we have already seen maps of how to go micro with banking, green and media of end poverty need to connect 4 more interfacing maps: every child's education every child's health every professions hippocratic oath must move from incon truth to whole truth mapping governments must go e- and serve within communities instead of lord over them whilst enjoying regulating win-win-win rules -celebrate poverty's museums everywhere
what's possible advice for President Obama from the world's most trusted free marketers of ending poverty: eg1 the president can declare the date for zero poverty in the whole world at the same time encourage the united states to set their date when their city be zero poverty when their county gets to zero poverty ..you are never going back- city by city, county by county, state by state, it can be done and it will encourage everyone else – ..that state can do it, we can do it -this is the way to go, so poverty will be the challenge –and once you have solved poverty other solutions come right away, environment will come right away source yunus, world affairs dialogue, nov 2008, california.
this conversation filmed by bronx cable tv - from the site where the United Nations was born -was first broadcast in may 2008
can you help us extend the lists of
1 global sectors most exponentially liable to crash 2 those global sectors which if they do crash will have a disproportionately tragic consequence on poorest communities that had nothing to do with low-trust leadership governance of the globals
if you have suggestions on how peoples collaboration networking can minimise harm and in future refocus on a community-risning and collaborative age, please tell us chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk washington dc 301 881 1655
21 Global Markets and Open Constitutions that humanity needs to turn round by 2010 if exponential downcurves are not to spin out of control
Our 1984 book of Death of Distance projected 2 scenarios for a networked world building on research of entrepreneurs, future historians 1234 and system thinkers. 2005-2010 was the most risky period life had known as we collectively understood networks as the greatest concentrate series of paradigm shifts in history making the industrial revolution look like child’s play to resytemise productive and demanding human relations around. Unless global sectors like those listed were governed and transparently mapped to sustain peoples everywhere , humanity would turn on itself and both natural and human terror waves would destabilise the globe at very interconnecting locality/community.
Below we ask for your help in tracking links on how these 21 sectors are spinning goodwill or badwill. We are also delighted to hear of other global markets which you feel need to be included. Much is more interconnected than this listing as a first order indicator shows. 1 National Governance (& peoples economics) 2 City or local governance (& 2 million global village inter-trading) 3 Clean water 4 Clean (photosynthesised) energy 5 Public media 6 Education of leaders and transparency of governance 7 Education of children 1 and charities and religions and science 8 Healthcare 9 Chemicals in meats and plants; Plastic’s non-degradable chemicals 10 Global Retail 11 Safety/Peace forces & resilience intelligence 12 Law simplified & periodically adaptive 13 Professional Hippocratic oaths 14 Insurance and property 15 Banks with profit models other than indebtedness 16 Long-term pensions/savings industries 17 Computers and telecoms investments in people 18 Bottom of Pyramid Preneurs – connecting digital & historic divides 19 Uniting nations and cultures around 30000 project-humanity initiatives 20 Travel industries 21 Great next-to-be invented open source or abundance market sectors
Change Corporate Governance Networks & Correspondence on Exponentials
CCGN1 Tomorrows Global Company Exist to enable global companies to benchmark how to include all stakeholdres in the way they govern etc
May 06 Mail I sent regarding latest quarterly friends TGC meeting notes Thank you for the very interesting minutes
1 regarding
* Suggestions for future inquiry work – particular areas of interest – should be passed to DL -can you give me DL's email?
2
* Reminder for all individual members to fill in the preference sheet and return to Richard van ‘t Erve -could you email me a preference sheet
3 Have already held the first few consultations – two in South Africa and one in India -when Mark sent me contact plans to colaborate around about 9 months ago, I dont remember India or S Africa being mentioned. How do I keep up with this- I have many relations across India as I belive British-India collaboration projects may be the most accessible chnace I have of changing global goodwill and transparent governance
social entrepreneur networks are ones that frinds of Macrae-Nets and I loosely interconnect with globally and locally as my father did 3 surveys of their future worldwide impacts - two in the 1976 and 1982 issues of The Economist and one as a book I co-authored on death of distance networking crisis waves 12 3 that would test how well we all collaborate. I would be interested to have any ideas on how far you may be introducing social entrepreneur maps into tomorrows global company; writing from the USA the Social Entrepreneur is currently the catchword uniting business and large scale worldwide philanthropy - see eg the book How to Change the World by Bornstein and http://er100.blogspot.com
In Washington DC region where I am based, the world's most connected change leader with social entrepreneur networks is Bill Drayton www.ashoka.org - fortunately he loved my father's lifetime journalism at The Economist so if anyine sees something that Bill is networking change around and has a deep connecting interest I can probably introduce them. Recently many corporates have started wanting to partnet ashoka projects such as thsoe emerging at www.changemakers.net though it pays to be very choosy indeed in the light of the history of sponsors of corporate responsibility co-branding 1
sincerely
chris macrae wcbn007@easynet.co.uk us tel 301 881 1655
if relevant pelase feel free to pass on email or extracts to anyone
Please help us choose sector debates you and communities around you want to inquire about and map connections with other people who share the same urgent exploration for action. A thousand people, each with a deeply chosen gravitaional purpose, whom I have connected to over my first 12 years of internet life are making a start and linkingin around the listing below.
I will try and bring links over to this blog but if you see a topic you need to be guided to most urgently, amil me chris macrae at wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
Multiplying Value Peoples Want – Where are the upcurves?
Underclass – compounding underclass- their loss of hope in life and mutual risks to all of us in a hi-connected world
NGOs/Charity – Global*Local infrastructure further removed from depth of grassroots needs in crisis or sustainability turnround challenges
Transparency – ever poorer system * system understanding and openness of inquiry between leaders of separate systems; increased siloisation just when networking value multiplies other way round
Queries Debates
Clean energy?
Technology – while power going up , has collaborative or inspirational use ever been as great as getting to moon in 60s?
Socially concerned networking hubs by 20-35 year olds?Open source active learning relationships geared round specific issues of greatest human need
Unfiltered Truth CEO Debate : Is the always low costing of Wal-Mart as world’s largest corporation also puuting 6 billion beings at risk to the greatest down (non-collaboration) exponential of the network age ? How many people make their most vital decisions in life on an always low cost basis? Does nature use such a pattern rule? So why would the most powerful organisation designed by man do so? What a big mathematical mistake to govern with
Will London’s 5 collaboration villages turn out to be a way to save all multi-cultural cities futures? Can you help us spread Queen Elizabeth's 2006 conversation opener across the Commonwealth? With 2005's hindsight we ask you, and public media like Britain's BBC and India's DD, to discuss: Is Humanity turning on itself?
Can you take charge of the collaboration exponential of one of Project30000?
Would you like to join in celebrating Entrepreneurial Revolution’s 30th birthday party, born in 1976 at The Economist of EcoSaintJames, London by co-scripting a collaboration around a global market sector that matters most to you and humanity’s development? -cosponsored by aSIN, DoD & ClubofCity
Please tell us of any other spaces opening for hot exponential debates. chris macrae , wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
Across the world (wide and deep) the most terrifyingly destructive future exponentials are those which nobody has any future responsibility for. What communal and communications disaster for 6 billion beings!
As far as we can see, today's crises revolve round global markets at the sector level - be this energy, education, health, food and water, retail, consumer goods, professional services, media, charities, even place sectors such as nations
or any worldwide subsector
The number 1 questions of transparency of sectors are:
what is the future vision of this sector all round the world
and who has most influence over that?
Our mapmakers, economists, future journalists, globalisation brand 12 experts, risk analysts *1, leadership scenario forum-makers, intercitizen families 12, and mathematicians knowledge networkers and others who systemically interconnect human disciplines including what we teach our children -WE all only know one way in which all peoples can be sure of trusting that a sector is systemised so that over time it gets better for humanity and doesnt do the opposite which Queen Elizabeth in her year-end speech of 2005 eloquently called : humanity turning on itself.
For this way to be led: whichever organisation has single greatest power over the sector invites all other parties to collaborate over clarifying what deepest sector knowhow relates to the biggest sector risk to sustainability of all peoples (and nature) and transparently invites all involved to collaborate over preventing this risk's compound exponential downwards anywhere and everywhere that people live.
Trillion Dollar & Humanity Correspondence Network 1 : Now if you know an industry sector because eg you have worked in it lifelong, would you like to tell us whether you feel that sector's future is being transparently collaborated over so that its greatest risk is not compounding. We could then draw in ever more detail an expoentials picture like this - and your observation point can be plotted anonomously or linked as you wish
Chris Macrae
* Trillion Dollar & Humanity Correspondence network 2: I have heard about 100 leaders of the world's top 5000 corporations speak, and only two have been clear that globally collaborating over a sector's greatest compound risk is where governance of all valuation and risk analysis begins and ends. Have you heard any other corporation leaders spek of these. I would love to compile a links of honor here. The ranking only relflects the serial order in which I heard leaders make this crucial plea for sustaining humanity: 1 Sir John Banham, Chairam of Whitbread and various UK Plc, Survive Annual Risk Professionals Conference 2002 2 Ray Anderson, Chaiman Interface- filmed on The Corporation 2004, spoke at the Royal Society of Arts 2005
aSIN's events for open source best for world inventions who apply carnivilsation and other reality-participation modes of planting new seeds in deep cultures (if you need more guiding around any of the above, ask me at wcbn007@easynet.co.uk)
December 2005: an advent calendar of brand questions to your city
In this family season of the year, I will attempt each day to ask a question to one city which all cities and citizens can learn from. I intend to give the question a particular focus as well as to ask generally:-does your city either have an answer to some of the downcurves tabled above?Or a network deeply concerned with reconcilining one of these curves which wants to collaborate with similarly concerned citizens networks?
Let's play a game of intercity snap every deep way we are able.Mail me at wcbn007@easynet.co.uk if you want a particular city and question to be featured
I have chosen to start with New York for 3 reasons:
1 Although many cities have suffered terrifyingly from this war-prone start to the (grown up?) 21st C, if sustainable multicultural answers are to be found for mega-cities then London & New York will be seen as the earliest global test markets
2 In 1996 (the first time I hosted a year long internet debate) big corporate innovation directors told me that through an extensive benchmarking inquiry they had discovered network learning's deepest value multipliers. These would be realised by those whose organsiational systems designed elearning and real communal spaces round children's natural patterns of curiosity. When my father at The Economist and I wrote our 1984 book on the future of networks locally and globally, we believed the same reasoning both because my father had red many books on learning and because I had played with developing computer assisted learning back in 1973 as part of the UK's National Development Project in this field.
3 Because the question I will pose first to New Yorkers on behalf of Club of City is: Everyone I have met who loves New York seems to echo a view along the lines : it make hustle & bustle more fun than anywhere else knows how on a big stage. So how do you make hustle & bustle as much fun as it can be instead of downcurving the least fun?
2006 is 30th year anniversary of my father's Entrepreneurial Revolution survey in The Economist- our future history correspondens across every Club of City invite preneurs of every typology to join us in collecting scripts on revolutionary action learnings that sustained societies through multiplying positve expoentials of economics (ie ones that went above zero-sum by winning for all who systemically connected with the context's gravitational dynmamics of productivities and demands through time)
Shocking Mathematical mistake causes humanity’s last century –will you help prevent this? who’s who of leadership concerned with this globalization challenge
As a statistician, I have never gone to sleep worrying that a meteorite will strike earth or that nature will invent a great plague. It’s not happened in millions of years of life, so there are many more individual ways that my life or that of my family’s line might be snuffed out than a natural global implosion.
However, as we all know life changed in the middle of the twentieth century when mankind invented nuclear fusion. In the wrong hands that could end the cleanliness on earth that all our human bodies need. What’s odd is that the mathematician most associated with nuclear Johny von Neumann also warned us of the dual-edge sword of computer networking connectivity. Ever increasing human connectivity can lead on the positive development exponential to ever greater collaborations of service and learning (co-mantor) networks between peoples and across cultures, but on the disaster exponential it can mean that the power to terrorise gets distributed to micro-teams as well the top being disconnected from the whole's need to be evolutionary alert at every coordinate.
Even though one of my dearest mentors was killed in a terror attack in London, I still believe that love of humanity and cross-cultural care for one another at the grassroots of education and society can win out for all peoples. But, the extreme irony for a mathematician like me is to face the situation where an exponential mathematical mistake – how organisations govern performance and economist advise national leaders – is now actuarially like to cause humanity’s termination this century.(Your brain's not much use without its other organs so why in a networked world would people design organsiations so that top and coordination (productive & demanding pressure) hubs of gravitational flows are separated?)
Whenever there is a mathematical mistake, there is a mathematical antidote. The full antidote of value multiplying exponentials requires contextual governance of every market sector’s compound future consequences which can be mapped around 10 interactions of productive and demanding relationships. Quite simple really –as you can start to see here – but not the first lesson we need to share between every decision-maker fro the 10 year old child to the fifties something leaders of the largest organisations in the world or anyone who waves networking connections in between.
Until the 4th quarter of the 20th Century, few corporations had simultaneous global impacts in the risks they took on humanity’s behalf. Those organisations that operated around the world were usually multinational. In other words, most of the risks they took were seen and operated at the national level. Up to this stage those who led the world’s markets could be content with a good job done if they stewarded the interactions of 2 meta-variables : Lower cost Higher quality
Progress of humanity depends on innovating higher quality not always going lower cost. There are remarkably many measurement and legislative professions whose maths is not wholly transparent enough to systemise this dynamic correctly but people in most democratic countries had a chance of weeding out these poor mathematicians before they compounded too much harm. However the connectivity of networks which makes all our localities interact globally now means that a 3rd critical variable has come into this play. This is most accurately defined in terms of a sector’s sustainability vision around the world – is each industry typology compounding a better or worse world in terms of the chances of sustaining or destroying life? Unfortunately no organisational system defined by the 20th century’s national democracies – be this global corporation, national government, or human interest network – has measurable accountability for systemically stewarding each industry sector’s sustainability of life. Unless humanity around the world stands up and demands those with the biggest leadership decision-making include this as the third measure of valuation of any sector’s compound impacts on peoples, the 21st century is statistically likely to be the last one to sustain 6 billion beings.
Any questions about: cost, quality, sector sustainability of life? So now we know our mutual collaboration challenge, is there any way our transparency mapmaking communities at valuetrue.com or I can help you pass on this message? Chris Macrae, wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
Familial Sources (& learning curves): Future History economics (50 yearsA); Entrepreneurial Revolution Parties (30 years); open networking debates & project30000 (22 years); Bio of von Neumann (10 years)
Can you help us extend this who’s who’s listing of crisis in exponentials stewardship?
National Leaders who understand: Queen Elizabeth – 2005 end of year message to Britain Commonwealth – Is Humanity turning on itself Prime Minister Singh – 50 year learning curve on economics of nations who accept humanity’s number 1 duty : compound no underclass anywhere around the world
Corporate leaders known to fully understand: Sir John Banham Ray Anderson Probably ebay’s leaders in view of their foundation for microfinance; probably Gordon Moore of Intel in view of his exponentials laws; probably co-founders of google if do no evil systemises their leadership of and valuation of networks (please help aSIN extend this list)
Future History Journalists who appear to understand: Thomas Friedman Marjorie Kelly
Economists who may understand: ?Benjamin Friedman
Scholars of law who seem to understand: Margaret Blair, co-chair of Unseen Wealth Joel Bakan- scriptwriter of Canadian documentary schools on global corporation
Ray Anderson is unusual in exposing this business disgrace since he's the chairman of a New York quoted corporation. Extract:I’ve made the business case for sustainability over and over and over, as I have with you in terms of survival, the macro case, risk management, markets, people, processes, products, profits, purpose, shareholder value,all based on focusing proper attention to place.There’s no question in my mind, based on our experience at Interface that it’s a clear, compelling and refutable case, yet the sceptics remain. So given the sceptics’ reluctance, even disdain and unwillingness to accept my case, I wish to challenge the sceptics to make their case. More precisely, I’d like to hear the business case for double glazing the planet withgreenhouse gases and while talking about the cost of preventing global warming, please address the cost of not preventing it. I’d like to hear the business case for destroying habitat for countless species, about whose connection to human kind in many or most cases we have not a clue. Ecological ignorance abounds in our culture. Paul Hawken says an average American can name a thousand commercial brands and only about ten trees. Maybe with you it’s 500 commercial brands and 20 trees. I’d like to hear the business case for poisoning air, water and land. I’d like to hear the business case for disrupting pollination and photosynthesis - that ought to be a really interesting one.
example (pdf of Anderson speech at RSA) -DM review: here the Chairman of a company on the US AMEX stockmarket makes his lifelong learning plea to valuation experts and auditors- please dont exclude from your quarterly calculations the systemic understanding that sustainability revolves round the valuation of life - as far as we know the number 1 hierachy of need uniting out states and all human races.
Which of the 21 sectors is on an upcurve or downcurve for the world? Click your choice of debate? Or if you feel we are missing a global sector that has most upcurve or downcurve potential on sustainability of humanity, please describe this in a post. We believe it is only at global market sector levels that responsibility, transparency and sustainability debates of where is globalsiation taking the human race can be openly explored by people from every coordinate of our planet earth
Here's a review of one such interview. The interviewer Charlie Rose is polled my many as the most incisive interviewer on America's tv broadcasting as of the middle of decade 1 century 21. Which other interviews or reviews should we bookmark? Charlie didn't ask the sort of questions I would have been interested in.What's the biggest story of the coming decade? Does Murdoch have any awareness that it could be whether what we do and communicate irreversibly sustains or ends our species? Among people who believe the system is spinning completely out of human control be it wars, nature's breakdowns or inability to change the world for the third's poorest or most abused people -when aksed what are the components of the system that are spinning most viciously , media is a top 3 answer. So the responsibility, the sustainability of what media as a global sector is doing was ducked as an issue. Here is one of the most successful media moguls in history, if money making and building global media is your criteria. I would have liked to have known if there was any human mission in this guy's reason for life that could make us admire him. I confess I did fall asleep with about 10 minutes of the interview to go, but it didn't sound if the interview was going to ask any human whys of this guy. It seems to me that something that the GatesFoundation could help people do is get media moguls to declare their hand: which ones have a mission for te future of life, and which don't. Don't the public have a right to know? If we chronicle generations in 50 year stretches, then media is arguably the biggest revolution over the last generation to have been spinning human values and what we value in life. Speech on some sorts of issues is now very very expensive indeed destroying most of the assumptions of economics that what matters most to human progress will be freely propagated by news. Fox has even taken a case to the supreme court which revolved round the issue of whether newsrooms have any legal requirement to be aiming to tell the truth. The supreme court's answer on this was imo one of the most dismal judges have ever made. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3407997752764644269 We live in a world where more and more people believe transparency is reaching into globalization's final tipping point but Rupert's view on this was not inquired about
Chaos = Nature's Evolutionary way (for us to be or not to be, to work with as life's strolling players)
Conversation Pieces - an occasional series -Please don't let the Toff's vocabulary of Complexity & Chaos bamboozle you out of Sustainability's Vital Conversations. There are cafes for all ton play at and spaces tyo open - see such examples as project30000, ninenow, valuecity, clubofvillage, clubofcity or even begin with the simplest exercise of goodwill networking - will you swap with me up to 3 people the world of humanity should know of as being far more trustworthy in your experience than we have the right to expect given the business or social professions they are in?
As a mathematician, I ask that people do not let their self-confidence in integrity get bamboozled by words such as complexity and chaos. For starters, I suggests entertaining the ideas that
complexity is simplicity if you look at wholes before parts;
what people could start enjoy knowing is that: If people who study a phenomenon’s future dynamics in parts come up with a different consequential interpretation than people mapping whole, it is vital to openly debate the two answers, however unconventional the whole’s forecasts may be
The relevance today is that like many 1980s systems thinkers -eg Buckminster Fuller - we can be almost sure that globalisation (and all networking connectivity) will compound one of two very opposite scenarios depending on whether:
*Global decisions are mostly made in bits by a few superpowerful people
*Or evolve with 2 million global villages each determining its communal gravities but also interconnecting boundaries harmoniously
The scenarios forecast that one of the above will mean the end of most people two to four generations out (sorry if this timing strikes you as imprecise but as a blip in nature's world this is as precise as I can make it), whilst one will mean the most harmonious and fulfilling time to be alive everywhere. Crucially to me the chances of an in-between state 2 to 4 generations out barely exist – it is one or other of these futures that will exponentially compound.
I would suggest these are the key questions NOT to be bamboozled out of:
Which scenario is the end game of which type of governance?Which type of governance will we get unless a lot of people work to transform the patterns that are already spinning?By when will globalisation’s spin become almost impossible to turn round?
If what I have tried to summarise matters to you there is more at http://exponentials.blogspot.com/ and http://valuesystem.blogspot.com/ as well as much more if we choose some contexts but that tends to be most quickly mapped if you rehearse that biggest context which you see as one overall invitational challenge to reconcile. Rehearse your community's biggest context of concern with me at wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
When I am being a tad more controversial I will stand up and say the way we train or condition our children to think now is the war that horrifies me most of all. Because - even the most ethical or religious people may never see the choice that waved by us
chris macrae wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
Can you help me search for people who have put what these conversation starters need to be about far more eloquently than I am able?
I suspect there is lots in Shakespeare : try to be or not to be, and life is but a strolling player - or mail me with your finding
I am very confident when I read select sayings of John or Robert F Kennedy such as: Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of this generation --Robert F. Kennedy
I love what Lingis says:"One always sees things in joy. It seems to me that there is a very fundamental kind of existentialdecision we make: do we believe our joy or do we believe our neutralstates? In the latter case, the move is always one of prudence - not tomake decisions in a time of enthusiasm when one is carried away, butrather to wait until everything cools down. I think one of the mostimportant things there is - I would almost say one could make this a kind of maxim for life - is to always make decisions in a state of joy.One should believe one's joy more than one's prudence, or any cautiousor fearful state of mind". More on Lingis by searching: Lingis*HappinessLingis*Delhi
DEMOCRACY’S FORBIDDEN QUESTION A broken human relations system is one that is exponentially destroying value –even the prospects of life – for all who are enslaved by it. One of the paranoid characteristics of a broken system is however much it advertises freedom of speech, it has a forbidden question or two which the people need to explore if they are to become free and happy again. Before the end of this page we hope that we will have encouraged you to join this kind of goodwill debate: if the 21st C is to be best of any century for all of humanity’s 6 billion beings, let’s ask where do we see the nation system of “for and by the people” working with most sustainability?
Directly speaking, this can be an overwhelmingly hard question to dare to ask. So let’s try and find an analogous but safer subscript to rehearse first. Many of us may have sympathy with the idea that a lot can be learnt from the reformed alcoholic or addict. Future historians, which my father and I have played at being over the last 70 years of my dad’s life as an openly inquisitive economist, find that they learn a lot from the reformed super-powerful man. For example, one of London’s slave traders repented near the end of his life and built what is one of the city’s 2 largest public halls for communal debates. Or Nobel who lived a rich life from trading in gunpowder and ammunition repented to fund the Nobel prizes. Today, Bill Clinton may be an interesting example. At least these goals he identifies with his leadership network of global reformation initiatives are interesting ones for everyone to speak to: In my lifetime now, I am obseessed by only 2 things.
I dont want anybody to die before their time.
And I dont want to see good people spend their energies without making a difference.
You change the reality of human history by systemic 123 action.
Q: Apart from a dictatorship, why might a democracy end up tilting downwards from “for and by the people”? (Tilting downwards is a phrase connecting over 1 million Americans currently reading Future Historian Thomas Friedman’s 1 series of books on “The World is Flat”)
A?: Mass media’s barons or image-makers might –however inadvertently - have a vested interest in a different type of command & control leader rising up the power system. So might global corporations survival of the biggest, or professions that have found they make most profits by casting off the Hippocratic oath which was their original social license to be those who wrote down the laws of life. And then there are several ways in which countries research funds and academics transgress over time from keeping all questions open. More references on this are catalogued as subscripts of what we call peoples economics or of entrepreneurial revolution. Transparency inquirers work to help people map how many of these community-up conversation openers are not currently funded with as much energy as the economics of making the big bigger. You can rehearse or see debates like: The last Abe Lincoln? With the world going flat: Will nations get out of the way so that netizens can help everyone transparently prosper? When was the last time a government of a rich country helped to facilitate what its people most needed to be changed next? How can we all help put sustainability investment’s traffic lights up around the governance structures of the world’s largest organisations whether incorporated or other?
These questions might be interesting but not urgently critical if networking technology was not changing the globe’s ability to integrate every locality. Much already flows interlocally – eg Tsunami, Hurricane, the spread of HIV, the terror propagated by the disaffected or the next flying plague carried by bird or man-made flying machine. Seeing the gravitational dynamics of such interlocal systems (particularly where they interface with a web of other interlocal systems) is made ever more complex by arbitrary geographical separations governed only by top-down rulers. To go beyond the nation state system, which was conceived in an era when horse was the fastest transport and carrier pigeon the most efficient communications system, we are not expecting to see a map of the world that gets rid of nations, but we do want to see the networking integration of 2 million global villages. These can permit thriving relationships from each communal context up as well as interface with national or other types of leadership and governance. Everyone online is already only 6 degrees of separation from one another. An challenge uniting all peoples and all nation is to make that is soon no separation at all whenever a life-threatening challenge is propagating or festering. Futures, including in our global world ones with potential to exterminate our species, are always beginning to happen somewhere. We need a globalisation that makes us all simultaneously aware of the first risk signals and capable of timely reconciliation.
You can search how a who’s who of the 20th century’s deepest voices for humanity -Gandhi, Schumacher, Einstein, you-name-who, - have been preparing the way for this networked peoples economics and social revolution for many decades. Cross-cultural harmony will depend on 6 billion beings to finding all sorts of ways of uniting around voicing the forbidden question of where is for and by the people working. London’s 5 village networks provide one intersecting map that any rich collaboration knowledge city can try out and openly improve. We also need to find an equivalent mapping cluster for the third of the world at the bottom of the pyramid : A) in rural villages that are most cut off from being digitally connected, B) in slums in the middle of the fastest developing cities, C) to those who have become addicted, maddened or families spiritually broken in places where leadership is governed by too many super-powerful men and not enough nurturing women.
Which networks, spaces, cafes, permit you to ask your most urgent versions of forbidden questions? Simpol 1 23 (politics sans frontiers debate) and global reconciliation network 12 (cross-cultural youth networks guided by some deep healthcare experts) are two that aim to collaborate with any other peoples . Then, I – and my loose links with 30 years of entrepreneurial revolution debating circles launched in The Economist of 1976 – would love to know if you have found a network or space which empowers you and your most intimate co-mentors to ask democracy’s system simplifying question of -for and by the people - around all the communities that you interconnect by loving most and spending your most time – be they geographically located or productively & demandingly networked.
Why do we usually unwelcome views different from ours and are encouraged by the views in agreement to ours? It's a goodwilled & very big question, http://goodwillwars.blogspot.com and here may be a scaleable clue: A few years ago, I heard this guy's life-story. At university, his postgraduate thesis explored community. He told me the motivation: as a kid he grew up on the Italian side of the border with Yugoslavia and if he wandered over the wrong side he got shot at? Natural kids question: why?
In his research, one question he looked at: was how did national boundaries and identities form and then expentially compound http://exponentials.blogspot.com? He found: usually because peoples had a very opposite view (gravitational value, beliefs or context of sustainability) from their neighbours. ie national borders were drawn geographically around opposing identities. Do you know one that isn't?
I guess if we wholly knew (if we educated our kids from 9 up http://ninenow.blogspot.com ) that the reason that any community is formed is in opposition to one that did not give peoplle the space they wanted, we would adjust a lot of our time and effort to working to connect boundaries. we'd start over-welcoming people from another community to see if we could build higher order communities of communities. In fact since networks are nothing unless they interface systems or communities, this may be mankind's final compound challenge
for 30 years entrepreneurial revolution networks which I catalogue have tacitly thought this is the great economics challenge of our times http://entrepreneurialrevolution.blogspot.com - will you write a one-page script with us connecting your view and ours as part of our 30th birtday party since publication 1976 of Entrepreneurial Revolution in The Economist http://exponentials.blogspot.com
PS where does my deep community thread lurk - he's Livio at http://www.headshift.com - please send him my regards if you do commune with him
Elsewhere, http://www.egroups.com/group/simpol peoples from many countries are debating the irony that in the future -say the 2020s - China will not need the rest of the world -so from China's view who cares whether USA learns quickly enough to sustain its people that networks mean superpower without transparent collaboration leadership is valueless, self-destructing however big you were in century 20. Remember please -before you cross-culturally flame me - I am a Brit (well Scot actually), trying to learn as one person to the next : however Great Britain was in Century 19 http://exponentials.blogspot.com
Is Charlie incisive on issues to do with preneurs and national competition when his guests are politicians?
Both need defining openly because otherwise they risk systemically doing the very opposite over years. Maths shows tense systems -eg democracy - degrade (to do opposite of their founders' greatest purpose) unless vigilantly audited at every measuring cycle so that no trust-flow cancerous conflicts between stakeholders enter into system . Have we heard a guest use word stakeholder so much?
Mr Breton is called an entrepreneur. Hmm my dad help popularly define Entrepreneurial Revolution in The Economist survey of 1976. http://entrepreneurialrevolution.blogspot.com ...does Breton qualify?
Entrepreneurs change the system, wherever societies' future history needs, so innovation can help widespread co-creation of value by peoples. Urgent NOW due to death of distance networks -see Friedman or Augustine and storms gathering up Bush reveal. Or USA's new space races to freedom, happiness http://clubofbethesda.blogspot.com
What is Mr Breton's most entrepreneurial contribution in life?? - ironically, entrepreneur is a French word: originally born to revolutionise the values of egalite and fraternite. Not what France's contribution to European Union has spun for half century...
Competition to be an economic good agrees a goal and transparent info for that goal. Does democracy's goal of being governed competitively for its people mean it is systemised so most of "we the people" can make our own most productive difference in serving -individually and in teams and through open learning networks - what other people value (ie so life gets better over time across people's needs)?
http://normanmacrae.blogspot.com Ask: which is the last democratic government that facilitated what the people needed innovating: few independent economists (ie ones who are not primarily hired by government or academia towcapping to government) have answers. Examples are unlikely given such decays of organisational governance (how it systemises what leaders use as info for their top-down decisions) as:
Unseen Wealth - not measured in a way that compounds sustainable wealth
Not systemised so people can make a differnce- the majority of Americans now report they do not get achance to use their greatest skills at work
Declining trust in large organsiations and in the transparency of our relationships with each other whilst our time is spent in such systems; people report thye do stuff that is more unethical and less on their cultural values at work than in any other walk of life
So competition isnt working, for European nations' peoples anyhow. And Charlie doesnt ask about this in his interviews of folk like Breton. Am I am over-exgerating? here are 2 resources to review to see actionable meanings of entrepreneur and competition transparently realised for all peoples instead of politician's short-term goals to maximise their own 5-year powers. Not becasue most politicians are corrupt, but the system has turned on what its original objectives were as noted in threads on the last Abe Lincoln or Why we Fight http://exponentials.blogspot.comhttp://networkeconomics.blogspot.com
Can we uptilt the exponentials of Foundations, Learning, Charities?
Often worthy causes downtilt by wasting people's time or resolving small bits instead of whioles. When the whole system is the main crisis , working on bits can inadvertenetly spin the whole world down the tubes. Read this short Ackoff paper if you do not understand the risk of dogooders who do not help people transparently map the bigger corruption that is governing their connectivities.
Do Large Scale facilitators also talk about and collaborate around CONCEPT NETWORKS?
First, concept network is an emerging term. If you already use different language for the idea, why not tell me at wcbn007@easynet.co.uk Me no wheel reinventor! That said here are 2 examples of concept networks currently going the rounds. Do you have one to add or want to join in either round? CONCEPT NETWORKS what might these be? 1For example, there are about 10 well endowed (mulitibillion dollar) hi-tech philanthropists' foundations. Does even one of them enable a concept virtual community where a thousand or so people could debate ideas and if one best contender got produced a year, the foundation would find some small way of testing it out. 2we know of many cultural creatives (young at heart in any city we visit who want to change the world's humanity on at least one issue that seems to make common sense as well as provide a bridge to multicultural harmony and ending terror); however if you ask yourself the question, what list of 20 attributes help measure whether a city supports or pollutes the atempts of young creatives to activate such good work for humanity:where is the listing being commonly debated? if you do have a listing, do you know of one city anywhere whose system supports more of the attributes than it destroys. We don't but our correspondents are looking through 100 cities,-why not join in such a colaboration survey or suggest some young people do? cheers chris macrae wcbn007@easynet.co.uk http://exponentials.blogspot.com http://project30000.blogspot.com/2000_01_01_project30000_archive.html
Can you imagine a bigger open space than a peoples politics sans frontieres -that's the compass that www.simpol.org1 seeks to collaborate around anywhere people want to develop speakers corners on the issues that go beyond nations and shoprt-term (leadership by =4-year terms) if they are every to be harmoniously resolved. Not that we have ever, now that a networking world punishes every interaction between 2 non-harmonising neighbours.
Unfortunately, powerful people are too busy to find 3 days in their diaries for mutual meetings this side of eternity, so simpol has had to evolve one hour cafes
one of the first of these was help in the Friends house - it was on the human rights to water as connected by the man who has linked more of this topic across S American tahn anyone else even cheerleading the Brazilian Catholic Church to make 2004 the year of water in people dialogues scripted through its 7000 odd parishes.
In March 2006, our Brazilian friend gives us another 1 hour cafe update for those most concerned about this topic. The chalenge is to try and get busy people to join in. Who might this be: eg someone from tomorrows company, whose annual lecture at the end of mrch is being given by Al Gore someone from photosythesis water and energy is the number 1 peoples innovation-implemetattion of this decade someone for Anita Roddick and her troubled waters someone uniting religions and their views of human rights someone for the Brazilian embassy who can update theiur latest view on the 100 peoples projects being invested in round the river basins of the world's largest dam at Foz someone frrom bethechnage if they are interested in linking london and water and Gandhi someone from GRN if water is a reconcilitaion issue between palestine and israel and simpol Japan's hub who else? is there anyone from open space world?
The Peoples Exponentials Economics of Water -script version W06.0 (all peoples economics scripts welcome co-editing sugestions wcbn007@easynet.co.uk and open source debating use)
Have you -and all the people you influence most - been introduced to life’s sustainability exponentials of water? –version 06.0
Water is the most basic input into the health and sustainable development of people in a geographical community. What's survival critical is how water's future exponential is governed by the interfacing of 3 types of government: Local, ie sustaining the community up National, Across national borders and enough people's transparent understanding to self-organise and collaborate all across the community
None of these levels of government can act through time in exponentially sustaining ways towards the people’s lives (including their productive freedoms and happily harmonious demands) without interfacing fully with the way the other two organises. For example, whichever of these 3 organisational designs is driven by the most short-term pressures (or any closed need to know bottlenecks instead of open flows of understanding) is the most risky to the whole’s interaction on the people’s sustainability.
Consequently water provides the simplest of transparency and sustainability tests of whether both markets and societies are designed to be networking fit and fully conscientious of sustaining life . Do their communications, action learnings and service leadership systemise this at the practical human relationship levels of always ensuring no conflicts enter into the network that could start compounding destruction of life?
Exponential Dynamics interact around such core determinants as:
Future as well as current scarcity, transparently mapped and urgently prioritised in terms of innovation awareness
Non-pollution
Critical response to any wave dangers such as flooding
Boundary relations, since if water flows through various neighbours places before oit reaches you, its diversion or pollution, by design or accident, becomes a fundamental way that a neighbour can control another places’ peoples
Because life cannot exist without water, access to a minimum amount for survival should be treated as a human right at the national level. How water is priced beyond fulfilling the human right is a fundamental indicator of future market transparency and the interfacing of all governance systems as being for and by the people, and not the opposite.
Where water is not abundant and therefore a constant future crisis, sustainability challenges at local levels are contextual and combinatorial. The last thing in the world a community of people’s need are a powerful industry group from the other side of the world contracted to water stewardship without transparent mapping of all the conflicting variables being publicly and constantly on view.
Water, especially where it is scarce, should also be seen as a fundamental part of educational curricula since collaboration around water interfaces cultures, people’s future as well as the way communities visualise how whole system interact within an overall network, and inter-generational trust in investing in future exponentials as well as taking what is needed from today’s market. The transparency of information and understanding flows around water link to the most critical social and economic dynamics impacting the wellbeing of every person.
If being human values health and what we can communally develop, why do so many monopolies of organisational measurement blind leaders by only looking backwards at historical performance?
I'd be interested to be emailed at wcbn007@easynet.co.uk if you have a humanly vital context where this question is relevant. I might be able to connect to you to people who have already raised the debate in an analogous context or help in some other way
What I can do below as a career-long mathematician is to start compiling a checklist of 100 why's. First as I am keen that professions make their Hippocratic oaths transparent, mine as a mathematician begin with ideas that I hold dear to seeing whole systems (which ranks for me as the most valuable true job that mathematicians can enable) :
if you are presenting information around which decisions will be made significantly impacting people's lives: -never claim more for what you measure than you know to be true;
-make sure that decision-makers have signed off that they understand the assumptions the measures were made on, because all measurements are boundarised by assumptions;
-encourage people to make simple maps of connections of what we are looking at before being given huge analyses on parts; enable everyone who is involved with what’s being measured to see how to walk onto (their) part of the map and conversationally discuss connections with people who feel familiar with their part of the map
-encourage questioning (before rushing to answers) of what impact change will have on combinations of the coordinates not single
-never devalue context by present some analysis as a more universal standard of authority than it is (eg if you are shown a measurement standard, ask what context that standard was first developed to measure, and be in charge of the debate whether that context and your morph to be comprised of a similar combination of connected variables)
-want to see the future consequences with as much goodwilled learning energy as the examiner who ticks or crossing what's past
CHECKLIST
Know how people make money out of numbers: collecting them, computer installations around them, publishing standard formats, making a mass of data so big that an organisation couldn't afford to get rid of the manager who knows the number's history best-unfortunately almost all these most profitable ways of number crunching are suite to backward reports to the nth decimal place but not on mapping what forward health or exponentials we are compounding; they also drown separate silos in their own complexity instead of prioritising communal connectivity of understanding at the simplest level. The forward exponential mapmaker does not want to compute one answer to an nth decimal point. The first thing they should want to know at the whole system level is: are we compounding an upcurve or downcurve- ie let's know what direction we are heading. Then as we agree that: the strategy will be different if we need to intervene to turnround from crashing than if we want to move as full a speed ahead as we can sustain on our upcurve.
Quantitative assumptions distort understanding in ways such as these: implying a differential is linear when it will not be
separating and so not enabling discussion about conflicting coordinates or goals, even though conflict resolution is the first job before leading a system forward; if you leave a conflict unresolved in a human relations system it will compound like a cancer cycle after cycle of measurement blindness to the conflict
I only value mathematics in practice as far as it enables groups of people to make greater communal sense; oddly there seem to be some types of administrator who value mathematics as a way of denying responsibility to make a judgement; they lean on the numbers as a crutch so that they are not responsible if in the future it is clear that there were better decsions to make. This is extremely risky behaviour because it leads to all sorts of coner ups (often unknowingly done). If you make a wrong turning at a mathematical crossrodas and deny the possiblity to iteare back up then over time you will compound more and more misatkes ending up with a book full of worms, as many accountings of global corpoartion performance have done in recent years. The 3 biggest worms that tangible historically separate accounting is the worst maths for valuing future exponetials around are: trust-flow aka intangibles of resolving conflicts between deiffernt human relstionships of productivity and demand
transparency where systems conect across boundaries be these external between partenring organsiations of with environments of society or internal (silos of different professions or divisions)
sustainability of thye whole of a global industry sector's impact on every locality
Tomorrows Global Companyin collaboration with Entreprenurial Revolution since 1976 ; ER100;.. social-entrepreneur &.. deathofdistance newsfeeds including Algaeworld- clean energy photosynthesis futures and journalist pledges for BBC world service since 1984; valuetrue;.. macrae.nets;.. intangibles-valuation; ClubofScotland and ClubofCity web-log correspondents of collaboration knowledge city towards maps for world citizen integration
Rev5: Media's Gathering storm - see bottom of March blogwirePeace Movements of Goodwill WarsCLUB of Europe, London, City, VillageCLICK if interested in seeing : Mathematical Mistake of economists and global markets that will end the world- and CLICK who do you think is doing what to save humanity in time? THE CRISIS TODAY'S GENERATION WAVES
Since 1984 anyone who has interacted with our stories 123 has come to know why globalisation of networks will turn humanity in a wave of unprecedented revolutionary consequences. Which of 2 ways -empowering or destroying trust and society - is the 64 trillion dollar question? The opportunity for all 6 billion people to influence the exponential out comes remains open for a few more years.
OPEN SOURCE : THE GOODWILL INITIATIVE
Exponentials & the Peoples Economics welcome you to our open source initiative. Our goodwill collaboration is concerned with mapping trust-flow and transparency of governance and valuing sustainability of peopleâs lifetime work and investments. You can join 2 levels of initiative
1 The organisational system empowers or destroys productive & demanding human relationships. WHICH future is surrounding the organisation that matters most to you?
2 The global market sector empowers or destroys productive & demanding societal relationships at every locality. It does this by multiplying together organisational systems in networks of the empowering or destroying type. WHICH future is surrounding global market sectors with most impact on communities you live in?
To join email wcbn007@easynet.co.uk putting 007 in the subject line and telling us of a context you want help in mapping first, or join in editing global village weblogs below.
30 PRENEURIAL YEARS OF CHANGING TRANSPARENCY OF ECONOMICS
-Freedom of access to being productive; happiness demands communal sustainability
1976 Entrepreneurial Revolution, Norman Macrae , The Economist 1976
1984 The 2024 Report â a future history of networkingâs death of distance timeline whether globalization empowers or destroys social and human relationships, by Norman and Chris Macrae published in 5 languages
1991-2004 A trilogy of books valuing purpose, branding, learning systems and leadership purpose co-authored by Chris Macrae
The Biography of John von Neumann by Norman Macrae
Our vision of transparently connecting together 2 million global villages waves through the meta-disciplinary practices of the most open leaders, mathematicians, system mappers, conflict resolution facilitators, preneurs, community networkers and future history journalists. There are many ways you can help correspond cross-culturally and around practical missions â see how we all co-edit timeless weblog examples at project30000 or Club of Village, City, Country.
Yours aye, Chris & Norman Macrae
Over time every major investment's sustainability in being better for people worldwide is a story of exponentials
⢠is the trust-flow spinning around the system's greatest human compounding virtuously or viciously?
⢠does this system have transparent impacts wherever its boundaries critically interface neighbouring systems be these societal ones or business ones?
UNSEEN WEALTH 2000
Given this patterning, economists at Brookings and lawyers at Georgetown were the first to refelct how perverse it was that valuation, accounting, economics has in 20th C days seldom analysed exponentials as the number 1 transparency of governance and leadership. Such failure bankrupts pension plans, inhibits economies from developing compound benefits for all, multiplies risks, and in a networked world- where systems exponentials multiply each other - determines whether globalisation will set sail as humanity's best ever era connecting all localities of 6 billion beings to openly trade value exchanges through, or the most terrifying one.
SECTOR DEBATES -THE PEOPLES MAPS FOR SUSTAINING 21ST C GOALS
Although maths is now available to investigate the exponential valuation crisis, the simplest way for all people to participate is to nominate sectors of concern because they impact both worldwide and local choices simultaneously and debate which way their value multiplication exchanges with all people are curving - up, down or...? Let's do this at this weblog and through any links you can tell us about that provide deep sector insights or connect multicountry debates.
Click to Discuss: If being human values health and what we can communally develop, why do so many monopolies of organisational measurement blind leaders by only looking backwards at historical performance?
