Replying to LO27989 --
Dear Organlearners,
Greetings to all of you.
This contribution is a sequel to my previous essay
"The silent backlash of war. LO27989"
Some of you fellow learners may have noticed that in that essay I
took 5 leaders of Africa as examples: Jan Smuts, Anwar Sadat,
Nelson Mandela, Robert Mugabe and Sam Nujoma.
Perhaps some of you also noticed that I did not mention our present
president Thabo Mbeki at all. It was not necessary because in that essay
my focus was on the openness ("paradigm- open"). It is, like wholeness
("unity-associativity") one of the 7Es (seven essentialities of
creativity).
Sadat and Mandela were isolated much from warfare and its destructive
creativity. We can do so ourselves, not by going to prison, but by
avoiding to see and hear information with a destructive character in it.
It means that we ought to close ourselves to such information while
deliberately opening ourselves up to information with a constructive
character in it. Furthermore, to protect others, we ought to refrain from
creating information with a destructive character in it and to pass such
information on to others. This is only possible if we know what gives
information either a constructive or a destructive character. For me self
the 7Es play a powerful role, even when merely "between the lines"
(tacitly) in that information, to determine its character.
For example, consider otherness ("quality-diversity"). Information has a
constructive character when it presents two or more viewpoints or at least
allow for the presentation of information from a different viewpoint.
Information has also a constructive character when it presents the
relationship of qualities from different orders in a phenomenon.
Furthermore, the more a person tries to know as much as possible of a 7E
like otherness, the more that person will learn tacitly about the other
six 7Es too. This amplifying effect will help that person to promote
information with a constructive character and avoid that with a
destructive character.
When Mandela was freed from jail after almost thirty years, he was
subjected to immense public pressure, locally and globally. Suddenly,
almost like Rip van Winkle, he had to deal with an explosion of
information of which much had an immense destructive character to it. As
leader he could not avoid it. Then how did he manage to deal with it, and
especially to overcome the hidden backlash of it? I personally think that
it was his immense focus on otherness. He strived to become informed by
all sides, even from his greatest enemies. He also strived to inform all
sides with many-sided rather than one-sided information. He would not
merely shake hands with young and old alike from the many cultures of our
nation, but actually stopped to talk with them to the frustration of those
who had to protect him and keep him on schedule. He had no case for these
protectors and ushers because his case was the otherness of our nation.
The silent backlash had no effect on him.
What about his successor, president Thabo Mbeki? Will he be able to
prevent the silent backlash of destructive creativity or will his
personality begin to disintegrate gradually like that of Robert Mugabe
north of us? I think that Mbeki has indeed a focus on one of the 7Es like
Mandela on otherness and Smuts long before on wholeness. But his focus is
on one which has become extremely difficult to maintain in the win-lose
politics of our western democracies. I think his focus is on sureness
("identity-context"). Again I have to warn that what I dare try to
articulate here, is operating only tacitly in Mbeki. Furthermore, I may
even be completely wrong.
For example, what I find extremely frustrating of many Western leaders,
especially from the English speaking world, is how they pressurise Mbeki
to make decisions in favour of Western cultures. He is the leader of South
Africa and our country has Western, African and Eastern cultures. He has
to make decisions for our country and all its peoples. South Africa is his
"identity" which is not like the UK or the USA.
What is even worse because of his focus on sureness, he also want to make
decisions which will be good for Africa since his immediate "context" is
Africa. But these Western leaders think of Africa as a no-good continent
so that any decision in favour of Africa has to be bad. The rest of his
"context" is globally which goes beyond Western cultures to include Arab,
South Asian and East Asian cultures, economically rich and poor. Many
Western leaders and their spin-doctors are making his job very difficult
for sure expecting from him to dance according to their ropes.
In win-lose politics a dual party system is followed in a culture which is
homogenous for the majority. The one party is the winner whereas the other
party is the loser. But as soon as the culture is heterogenous resulting
in more than one minority cultures, say N of them, a dual party system
becomes a drawback rather than an advantage. Almost invariably some
cultures have to vote for the one party whereas the rest have to vote for
the other party. For N cultures, there should have been 2N parties and not
merely 2 parties. Thus a dual party system quenches the minorities in each
culture. It quenches otherness and thus promote destructive creativity.
Look at countries like Spain, Israel, the former Yugoslavia, Columbia or
the Philippines. The suppression of the many by win-lose politics has
resulted in several terrorist factions. Can the many minor cultures not
wanting to conform to the dialectics (win-lose politics) of the major
culture be depicted as terrorists? Does this win-lose politics not also
sow terror?
The dialectics of win-lose politics in the major culture of a country sets
up entropic force flux-pairs. The entropy so produced may be favourable to
the major culture, but it is seldom favourable to the minor cultures in
that country. To inundate these minor cultures with entropy rather than
letting them produce their own entropy which they need causes them to
experience immergences at bifurcations and consumptions at digestions.
They feel tacitly how they become less without being able to articulate in
a sensible manner what is happening to them.
In my opinion entropy production is necessary for any advancement in any
culture. But this entropy has to be produce by the culture itself rather
than to be inundated by it through a major culture. For any system to
produce sufficient entropy for its own purposes, it has to operate at a
sufficient level of the 7Es since the 7Es even determine the ability of a
system to produce its own entropy. Thus, if any major culture wants to
improve its own advancement as well as that of minority cultures, it has
to improve all of the 7Es.
When a Smuts try to produce entropy in terms of wholeness, a Sadat in
terms of spareness or a Mandela in terms of otherness, we ought to have
respect for what they want to accomplish. The same applies to a Mbeki in
terms of sureness. As a leader he often has astounded me in how much
effort he places in his personal research of topics of national concern.
Take, for example, the issue of MIV-AIDS. The reductionistic linear
thinkers are quick to claim that AIDS is caused by a virus, transmitted by
bodily fluids. But who are those to practice promiscuous sex? Is it not
the workless who have to much idel time? When the poor and needy have to
use sex to stay alive, conditions for sustaining constructive creativity
have declined to the bare minimum. Creating spiritually has been reduced
to creating physically,
The 7Es are the difference between win-lose and win-win politics. In
win-win politics every side has to become (liveness), every side has an
identity (sureness) and every side is connected with the rest (wholeness).
Every side has to be made contact with (fruitfulness) and every side has
to develop to its full potential (spareness). Every side has to give its
own unique input (otherness) and every side has to listen to all other
sides (openness). In win-win politics the whole is more than the sum of
the parts because of emergences. In win-win politics no parts have to lose
so that one part can win for the sake of the whole. In win-win politics
the silent feedback is constructive creativity. People become awake to
their divine purposes in life.
With care and best wishes
--At de Lange <amdelange@gold.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.