Scientist working as software adviser. German. I knew WS for its ISGP archive and later came across Robin (Upton) at 23C3 in Berlin, with his talk "A short history of plutocracy".
Interest in Deep Politics to help understanding what I see and hear around me from a systemic POV.
Quote: "A network of people who are, elsewhere, powerful, is per se a powerful network." (David Teacher)
All external documents from the web I cite are available as local copies. Feel free to drop me a line to obtain them.
Update: I no longer engage in NVC. I do group training according to principles of Frank Farrelly's Provocativ Therapy and Brad Blanton's Radical Honesty.
Although I have some spare time, my full power goes to social change projects and
training people in NVC now encouraging assertive behaviors. I stay with you and check this site once a week. I see this as a long term engagement and sooner or later I'll contribute actively again. My perfect appreciation for the people who are running the show here and thats mainly you, Peter and Robin. Keep going!
- Thanks for that Urban - It is indeed intended as a long-term project. whatever you can. Best wishes. --Peter P (talk) 20:37, 30 July 2015 (IST)
Being a designer of complex DSP networks my aim here at WS is to raise awareness of the new science of complexity as applicable to our society.
If powerful people or networks are analyzed as emergent properties of complex systems they no longer appear as evildoers or psychopaths. Instead, the mechanisms, forces and rules that govern society are seen as common ground for those with no money and power and those who exercise power over others, thereby stimulating a great deal of pain. The common ground which makes violance acceptable is the way we have been educated to think, in particular the concept of debt, guilt and punishment. On these grounds society as a whole accepts a monetary system which defines success as a measure of violence.
I am convinced that a new awareness among those who thought to be the winners of the current economic system arises: it's the awareness that on the long run everybody looses if violence is the primary strategy for resolving conflict.
Marshall B. Rosenberg
In a recent post I said that 'there might be a permanent strategy or knowledge about how to stay in power.'
A profound and sincere analysis of such a 'permanent strategy' was done by Marshall B. Rosenberg (as a first step before suggesting a way out in his research about 'Nonviolent Communication'). He concludes that we have been trained to think in a way that helps perpetuate domination structures for at least 5000 years. In my words this social conditioning cuts off the connection between our heads and bellies. People who are mutilated in this way during their childhood and later education make for good slaves or masters (two sides of the same coin). The sad thing about this upbringing is that it makes violence enjoyable or at least the first choice (war profits included) and these people may have severe difficulties seeing others as equal.
The resulting mechanism is quite simple: if you think you are in a superior place in an imagined hierarchy (or a subordinate wants to rebel) you may think you are entitled (or have the right or even duty) to punish and reward others. This - and other similar rules - led to a very complex status quo during the centuries it perpetuates itself. One of the lesser understood phenomena are self-fulfilling prophecies, which make it not easy to break out of the loop. They stabilize the domination system and help spread its way of thinking much like an infectious disease.
"cuts off the connection between our heads and bellies"
What you write makes good sense to me. I think there is a deep pattern here which is seldom remarked upon. The phrase I cite above reminds me of a talk I first heard a long time ago on Unwelcome Guests, and which particularly impressed me - even though it requires a lot of concentration and is not easy listening. I decided to repeat the whole talk in UG#537. Robin (talk) 16:24, 28 June 2015 (IST)
- Well, first let me thank you for pointing me to Marvin Bram. NVC made it easier for me to guess what he is talking about. BTW ug602 was my first contact with NVC, sort of a missing link, so thank you for all the work you put into UG.
- Marvin Bram is speculating on how violent thinking and language developed over 6000 years in the West. First he talks about horizontal and vertical split of our brain and thinking, or a cut (that can be healed quite easily he tells us) or a degree of separation. When shifting from physiology to psychology this may refer to a separation of thought (left hemisphere), intuition (right hemisphere) and their respective connection downwards (spinal cord) to feelings and needs (guts).
- He gives several examples of consequences when these links are broken to variing degrees in history. He mentiones the Greek phalanx, a then new uniformity where indivituality is suppressed marking a new level of violence. In language words are containers of meaning with some flexibility. With some bitterness he remarks that the equation of words and meaning led to a great deal of pain. He uses the term 'univocity' to mark that at this point - by telling what something 'is' in absolute terms - the connection between thinking, intuition and needs is actually broken. Another consequence is that judgements become absolute in a moral sense. People who agree 'deserve' reward and people who disagree 'deserve' punishment - that's the way schooling, burocracies, corporations, states, hierarchies in general and most families work.
- Healing takes place when our attention is brought back to what I call a need-conciousness: needs is something all human beeings have in common and on this level conflicts can be resolved without violence, breaking down hierarchies in the process. Healing a broken link to intuition may require play (music, arts, meditation, etc). Intuition helps us recognize what feelings and needs are going on in us at a given moment. Breaking these links in people makes for good slaves. No wonder in a domination culture needs are associated with something negative, beeing 'needy'. And of course having feelings equals beeing 'weak'. This conditioning erects a wall between different parts of ourselves (Bram mournes about the loss of wholeness) difficult to penetrate for our conciousness over time. But once the conditioning is understood it is easy to undo. --Urban (talk) 21:44, 28 June 2015 (IST)