Sometimes I think that the creation of groups is a false need. Standards, papers, discussion- yes we want the same thing. But why is it like this all the time, that we need so much information before we do something? If we want to change the politics, we create a group and discuss it, and in the same time we show that we have boarders to others. In politics for instance it can be a little bit silly when all parties certainly wants to have a good school, safe traffic, healthy citizens. But instead of working about it, they have to discuss where to take the money.
We are stuck in our way of making things. When we create groups, we also exclude other people. And show that something is wrong, which can make other groups "upset", like military forces, police or just--other groups.
Instead of working with what we want to do, we use our time to spread information and discuss the problem. MOST TIME WE TALK TO PEOPLE THAT ALREADY THINKS LIKE OUR SELVES.
I can see that the strict business people have another tactic, they sell their ideas, they do something about it. They learn new methods to make others to like their products.
I have this crazy thought sometime in my head; that there are only two
groups of people. A caring but a little bit messy one and the business,
strict one. Over and over again this thought comes to my mind, sometimes
when I try to work (messy one) and often when I run (strict one). Can
we make it so easy and look at just the extremes and see why some people
make it and some don't. Make it in what? Success with what you want to
do, but also everything else to life; keeping friends, keeping money for
Can it be that the caring, a little messy
one also wants to make it a little bit more, "if only..", and the
business, strict one does it and, did it. Which one is more happy? Which
one have more time to do other things? And can it be that we are both
of them, as I said in the beginning, I can be very messy when I write
but very strict when I run, and no problems to keep money (just to get
I also always go with the question, how to make the not interested people interested? We as humans, can not care about everythings. But some people mean that like environmental issues, everyone SHOULD BE interested in because it is everybodys concern. But that is the same reason for joining the group "assossiation for ufo research" or "our city need more balett classes for small kids". We can not put them in our group by force, or yell loudest as; you will die from climate change, or have you seen the big plastic island on the ocean?!!!
Can we use both ways of thinking? Messy, dreaming one and strict, in reality one? Open up groups, work interdisciplinary and see what we really wants? A lot of groups works in the same area, but never goes longer than to talk in their own small group.
What if we know how to put this small group to work together with a solution. And also to not forget the people outside the group??!
Just a perfect picture for the text. In a festival we had a friendly meeting on the street, festival in Leipzig, 2006. Me on right, some curious citizens and Alexander from "my group" to the left
Sharing some essays from different interesting university classes over the years. This one is from Human Ecology, translated from Swedish- ...
THE TRANSITION TO A SUSTAINABLE SOCIETY -A DISCUSSION ABOUT ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION Anna Rosengren Society, nature and change, 2009 De...
. Got a tip about the comic The long tomorrow from a close friend after reading last post. The comic was made by Dan O'Bannon in 1975. ...