As we plan into the future, are we considering the path of the trajectory?
Case in point. The pendulum swings both ways. The farther it swings one way, the farther it swings back.
Globalisation: Will the path of globalisation eventually lead to a path of isolationism.
Information: Will the information that we are relying upon so heavily, eventually become a curse that will lead people to retrench? An information overload can make the information virtually worthless if too much stuff cannot be accepted as reliable.
Technology: Will the technology that enhances our efforts become so "intrusive" that we are paralysed by its intrusiveness?
Politics: Will the politics of globalisation lead to "Superpower Centers" with a detente between ie: The Asian Center, The African Center, The Middle Eastern Center, The European Center, The Latin American Center, the North American Center?
Regards,
Slim
Mail: tilden9@yahoo.com
Copyright (c) 2010 Slim Fairview
2 comments:
Dear Slim,
Following your blog comments and questions.
Globalization
I see that we become closer rather than isolated. Whether one likes it or not we are interdependent.
These points are taken from my published article “Cultural Diversity and Interdependence”:
We need to seek unity in diversity by respecting and recognizing our freedom to develop our own identities, respecting and celebrating our differences.
Jungian psychoanalyst Eugene Pascal wrote: “Human dignity is by and large a product of a naturally spontaneous expression of who we intrinsically are.”
Every individual, ethnic group and country has a unique contribution to make on the levels of personal, local, national and global in perceiving, evaluating and solving life's challenges. Understanding this reduces longstanding mutual conflicts, frustrations and risks.
Comprehending the affect of typology in the human family, allows one to move beyond arrogant tolerance. We can then see that we all are a part of global consciousness, each with our distinct contributions.
One of the primary methods of managing interdependence is intercultural dialogue. The need for this communication and intercultural competencies is evident. Skills are needed to manage differences creatively.
Information:
Of late, many call this “noise”. I find this to be work, although well worth the effort. Today, there is a lot of information. It’s a personal choice. For a long time I have understood that it is necessary for me to be open to all kinds of information and sources of this because I am a life-long learner and am interested to be aware, understand and share with others because it makes living rich, vibrant and interesting.
Technology:
I very much like and resonate with the recent agenda of Clinton’s Global Initiative around technology. The more accessible the more we can work together / collaborate and bring about better access to developing countries that enables the access to information, education and knowledge sharing to solve our most pressing issues; I use our in a “global” human family sense. For details, one can see the following link to the agenda of the Clinton Global Initiative’s recent conference in September 2010. Here is link to the agenda:
http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/ourmeetings/2010/meeting_annual_agenda.asp?Section=OurMeetings&PageTitle=Agenda&day=1
Politics:
Quite frankly, I don’t see “Superpower Centers”. Specific to this, one ought to view Prof. Garelli’s IMD Global Competitiveness Yearbook 2010 and his discussions on debt. While some might like to retain the idea of “Superpower”, it appears to me that the era of such rhetoric is over, and we are evolving towards a more sustainable system and a level of unprecedented cooperation and collaboration. It seems that the laws of nature and the mistakes of the past are driving us towards such an environment. To evolve and create something new requires an ending of the old which allows for the progression to a new way.
My best regards,
Maureen Kelsey
This calls for an analogy.
For the purposes of this discussion only:
You have brother Jack. He is married to Suzie.
You invite Suzie and Jack to your home. Soon, Suzie thinks she is entitled to invite herself to your home. You want to keep peace in the family, you say nothing.
Soon, Suzie starts taking the liberty of inviting people to your home when she visits. You want to keep peace, so you say nothing.
Now, your husband's sister, Charlotte, whom you invite to your home, but who never takes the liberty of inviting herself, now find that she cannot visit you without Suzie showing up.
Charlotte wants to keep peace in the family, so she says nothing. Soon, Suzie takes the liberty of inviting herself to Charlotte's house.
The next time you invite Charlotte, she declines. And the next time. And the time after that.
Soon, Suzie shows up to tell you that she "dropped by" Charlotte's house (invited herself to barge in) and Charlotte said, "I'm sorry, I have other plans for today, I can't invite you in."
Now Suzie starts going through the family telling people how rude your husband's sister (Charlotte) was when she visited Charlotte's home.
Now your husband is not pleased with this. He says, "Can I invite my sister Charlotte and her husband to dinner without your brother Jack and his rude wife, Suzie, barging in?"
On the surface, all seems well. Everyone is getting along. At least that is the way it first appears when my wife and I accept your invitation to dinner. That is until Suzie asks my wife for our phone number so she can call us up to invite herself to our home.
Technology is great. At least it was until someone invented the extension line. Then, every time one of your boyfriends call you up, your little sister picks up the extension. In a more literal frame, the townsfolk outside Innisfree (Cong) where The Quiet Man was filmed loved having electricity brought in. After the filming was over, however, the people found out they had to pay for the electricity. They told the power company to take it out. They didn't need it.
As far as politics, the utopian view of a world community seems great. Until people find out that utopia doesn't mean people will do things their way, but rather that they will be asked to change their ways to conform to the ways of others.
There may be a moved to cooperative efforts, however, a one world government is hardly praticable. And some countries might see "economies to scale." For example, the European Common Market, or the European Union or the Organisation of African States.
OPEC is an example though more along economics than geography. Or, how about the GCC or the CCASG?
Then there is the G20. While you may see cooperation, there are those among whom the cooperation must exist.
On a positive personal note, my wife and I have invited family throughout the years, however, in my family, no one believes in the right to invite oneself.
Regards,
Slim
Post a Comment