Libertarian ideas

This video is presents some interesting libertarian ideas from a guy called Stefan Molyneux.  I really liked his ideas of volunteerism vs violence and that his emphasis for changing the way the world operates is to live according to the principles you believe in yourself and let others follow if they like the results they see.

He also points out that we have made a lot of progress towards freedom in our thinking and living as a society.  I agree.  While there are lots of things that aren’t working fantastically in society right now, in general I think we have progressed hugely over the centuries and millenia.  I don’t think we need to be negative about our societal institutions, for the most part I think that they have done a lot of good, the question is how can we do even better.

I don’t think this guy necessarily has all the answers, and neither do I.  But I think it is great that there are people out there discussing these ideas and thinking about our next step forward as a society.  I also like that he seems to practice what he preaches – he even makes his books available for free.

Extrinsic vs Intrinsic Rewards

Wow wow wow wow… great video about extrinsic vs intrinsic rewards and how they relate to business practices.  Basically when dealing with complex problems, intrinsic rewards are far more effective.  A powerful case for us to try to take money out of the equation as a motivator if we want better results and to solve the complex problems each of us face in our lives and as an entire world.

Pure risk reward motivation seems to only be effective for the most rudimentary or mechanical of tasks.  For anything requiring higher thinking (in fact the terminology used in one of the studies discussed is “even rudimentary cognitive skill”) it is in fact detrimental.  Want to be like a machine or a robot – base your thinking and life around a risk reward philosophy.  Want to experience a truly rich, truly ‘human’ life – you’re going to want to look towards intrinsic value as your primary motivator.

The guy in this talk even gives some really excellent examples of how people are using this concept in the world of business and getting great results.

I think GFRF is another way that implicitly removes the extrinsic rewards from the equation and focuses instead on the intrinsic value of work and achievement while still providing a way for us to exchange with each other – and if it works properly each have what we need and collectively be far better off.

If you want a happier more successful life, you’ve got to check this talk out – its FANTASTIC!

 

The battle between labour and capital

I just read and article in the paper about a groups push to establish a ‘living wage’ in New Zealand.

It was an interesting read and you can see it here

I liked that the approach they are taking is about appealing to the conscience rather than relying on legislation to enforce their aims.  Underneath the whole issue though is this idea of capital and labour each struggling against each other to get the most they can.

I read things like this and it makes me sad.  Sad that we have organized our society in such a way that this opposition and struggle is inherent in almost all our relationships.  I don’t think it has to be that way though.  I think that collectively we can re-imagine how we relate to each other and reconstruct our society so that co-operation is this norm.

Moving in this direction will require fundamental change in not only our societal institutions, but also in each of our individual attitudes, habits and ways we see the world.  Things that we take for granted as obvious ‘truths’, particularly in how we need to interact with others, would need to be discarded and a new point of view taken up.  This might be scary at first, as it would mean moving from what we know – and while it is problematic – has become ingrained in us, to something that will probably seem strange and unfamiliar to begin with.  I think making the shift will be worthwhile though, and I think there are a lot of people leaning in this direction and trying to find how they can make a change.

I think if not GFRF itself, at least some of the ideas behind GFRF could be part of this change towards a happier, co-operative rather than competitive society.

 

A couple of interesting recent experiences

I’ve had a couple of interesting experiences recently related to GFRF.

First, in the clinic last week I had an appointment with a client who was new to the clinic but had previously come to some of my qigong classes.  At the end of the session she said “How much do I owe you, I know you’re going to say its by donation – but how much should I give you”.  Obviously a little uncomfortable about it.  I told her that she was paying me, she could just choose how much to pay.

This simple explanation seemed to make her much more comfortable and she quickly decided how much she wanted to pay for the session.

Second, I went and watched some acrobats performing on a yacht in the viaduct in Auckland.  It was billed as a free performance or by donation.  Quite a few people turned up to watch and it was a pretty good show.  At the end of the show the female performer talked to the crowd and explained how long they have been doing what they are doing and that the way they are paid is by the money that people give, she then tried to describe that maybe people should think about how much they would pay for a ticket to a show and give that.  It was a little bit awkward.

I don’t know what proportion of people gave money to the performers afterwards, or how much.  I suspect quite a few just left without giving anything, but at least a fair few did donate (including myself of course).

Both of these recent experiences made me think about the challenge of helping people to understand GFRF.  I think people often have an idea around donation that something should be very cheap.  This makes them uncomfortable if they feel that something is of significant value (such as treatment in a clinic).  Also if something is free or by donation, often people seem to assume that perhaps someone else or an organization is paying for it – so their contribution does not matter/there is no real expectation that they should contribute for the benefit that they receive.  This was evidenced by the performers need to explain that the donations are how they are paid.

I think this is resolved by people understanding that what they give is actually payment for what they receive, they just get to choose how much that is according to the value they perceive, what they can afford and so on.  This seems to take quite a lot of explaining for a lot of people – and even then it doesn’t seem to fully sink in for a lot of them.  I think this is simply because it is so different from what they are used to experiencing in their other interactions with people around them.

On the bright side though, I continue to see more and more examples of people doing things in this way.  As this continues, more and more people will be exposed to it, and become comfortable with it.  They will not need long explanations and will understand it more readily.  This will make it easier and easier for people to operate Give Freely Receive Freely.

Also on the bright side – the acrobats I mentioned have been travelling the world doing their shows like this for several years.  So even now while it takes a lot of explanation for people to understand, it is inspiring to see people managing to operate in this way anyway.

An interesting local initiative

I particularly like these quotes from the article:

“Money has become the middleman” (when talking about how we have become disconnected from each other)

“We were taught that people were innately self-sacrificing, not self-serving, and that for true happiness, not these sort of fluctuating high/lows, but for true happiness, you have to be self-sacrificing and if you do that you have other people who are self-sacrificing around you and it starts what they call a spiritual movement in regards to the idea of giving instead of trying to take.” (talking about how her father taught her to see the world).

Heres the article

When Bankers Were Good

I just watched an interesting documentary which looked at some historical bankers who took rather a different approach to their industry than a lot of what we have seen recently.  I would like to think that there are still some, maybe even many bankers that are good – but the documentary provided some interesting food for thought.