REALISTIC SOLUTIONS FOR A CO-CREATED FUTURE

Many individuals from a variety of political affiliations voice concern about cultural or economic trends. They recognize the unsustainable nature of current systems and institutions. Yet there are competing ideas about how to improve the situation. Some seem to want to "burn it all down" to start over. Some want to restore "the good old days." Some fervently envision a technologically sophisticated utopia. Many on both political extremes are terrified that democracy is over (or will be with the next election, whichever way it goes), while others are convinced we will keep muddling through and that our challenges are no greater than at other times.

Likely none of us know how to build an ideal society, even for people like ourselves, let alone build a society that works for everyone. Below are links to some who advocate for principles that seem a trustworthy guide for what we could co-create as families and in human-scale communities. These authors discuss how to adapt as culture, the economy, and ecology continue to evolve.

The Potential for Economic Collapse

Why civilization will self-destruct unless it shifts to non-rivalry (11 min video, with audio of Daniel Schmachtenberger) 

In Disaster Economics, Nick Hanauer and David Goldstein explain how the current structure of the U.S. makes it vulnerable to economic collapse, as corporations privatize their profits and socialize their losses. The podcast Pitchfork Economics has full transcripts and links to references. While these authors unfortunately indulge in some snarky comments, Nick does have class traitor credentials. He advocates for policies that would reverse unfair wealth concentration.

The following authors discuss pending economic collapse:

the Challenge of a Polarized Democracy

“Authoritarians, almost by definition, favor the subordination of the individual to the demands of the collective,” says Karen Stenner in The Authoritarian Dynamic. As a former assistant professor of politics at Princeton and Duke, she is now going solo, which many academics find necessary when they want to counter the prevailing official opinions. Daniel Jeffries writes the following in a review of her book: 

It posits an unexpected theory: that authoritarianism is a natural response to threats. Democracy is always under threat because it’s unnatural. Tribalism, fear, and hatred of others have been the natural order of humanity for much of its existence. The Founding Fathers saw democracy as the great experiment, but Professor Stenner discovers that many people will never be comfortable in a modern democracy. In every era, in all times, there are people who feel that only “right thinking” people should be allowed to express their opinions. They prize conformity, and want to stamp out offensive ideas. Even worse, the book theorizes that many people hold these opinions secretly. Their unease lies dormant for years until a threat activates them.

It should be obvious that those wanting to allow only correct opinions to be heard are found both on the political right and left. Many have noted that these emerge as the loudest voices, because they make for sharable clickbait. Some fear that populism, both right and left, is increasing the potential for authoritarianism in government. The solution that Stenner's work might present is that by understanding tribalism as a temperamental tendency, not an evil to be stamped out, we might be able to rationally fold it into a workable society.

Charles Eisenstein discussies similarities between the anti-establishment left and right: see time mark 18:18 in this podcast. See also the political compass highlighting similarities between the anti-establishment groups. These groups have some legitimate gripes. Some believe in resolving with a win-win or a compromise. Other believe only win-lose is possible.

Government Mandates and Personal Choices

Several speakers on systemic complexity point to a tension between those who feel government has too strong a hold and those who yearn for a strong leader to push toward their version of utopia. 


Nora Bateson believes the combination of fragility in the economic system with “situated cognition” leads to entrenched developmental pathways. Speaking of "the existing system" and "the people who have profited from it," she asserts, "We're at a moment when there is a loosening of the threads of old system patterns, but believe, they want to tighten up” (Rebel Wisdom, 2020, 29:00). 

Professional mediator Julia Menard states, "What is most important is what happens after the social tipping point happens. Will each of us be able to continue our own small social tipping points in the direction of social good, peace, love, connection? Or allow our lower selves to predominate, in the direction of fear, hatred, isolation and disconnection?"