To try and not censor myself, I'd like to say that Environment might not just be one of those crises that we face. It is the context in which all other crises take place. We can do something about all other crises only if we still have the livable temperatures, if we still have water to drink and if droughts, fires, floods and heatwaves don't destroy our crops. On the drawing Environment is given equal 'weight' as all other crises, but biophysically speaking, that is not the case - it is by far the most important if we still want to exist as living beings. It is true that it happens at the same time as all other crises, but it doesn't have equal weight with them. To my mind.
And another related thought: what happens when we replace the word 'environment' with web of LIfe? Does that change things in a person's mind or heart? Is there a difference between these two phrases: "industries don't take care of environment and its resources", and "industries don't take care of the Web of LIfe of which we, humans, are a part"? And we are those industries too... we work for them and we buy what they sell. So - does it reverberate differently if we think about Web of LIfe, or the (non-descript) environment? For me it does. Anybody else?
I really appreciate this perspective, and I think you've touched on something crucial - that the environment isn't one crisis among many, it's THE foundation on which all other crises unfold. Without stable ecosystems, every social, political and economic concern becomes ... well, less important. It deserves greater weight in how we frame the crisis. I'll be looking into adjusting my graphic for when I cover the metacrisis next.
"Web of Life" does shift perception and removes the illusion of separation. I think it will allow people to feel a deeper and more personal responsibility towards the environment that we, at most times, take for granted. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and well done for fighting the urge to not censor yourself :)
An insightful read Chusana. I write about the Metacrisis as well and am on the hunt for a playbook for change. Do you have any thoughts on how we might rebuild trust at scale given the pervasive nature of algorithm driven polarization and short attention spans?
Thank you so much, Akhil. I love that you're also diving into the metacrisis. It's such a huge topic so I always appreciate the many different voices and perspectives in how we can integrate this understanding into our lives. Rebuilding trust at scale is a big question, and I wish I had a clear answer.
In all my writings, I always come back to the self. Trust starts small. With real conversations, genuine listening, and the willingness to admit when we don't have it all figured out. Part of the problem is our society is the way everything feels like it has to be scaled instantly, but maybe the only way forward is through smaller, more honest interactions that gradually "tip" towards something bigger.
For me, I think people that are consciously more aware of what's going on need to become the catalyst within their own social circles. Even in my own experience, it took me almost 15 years to re-build the relationship I have with my mother-in-law. The relationship started off with her being 100% against me in every possible way, to today, she is now someone who I can pretty much be myself (able to say what's on my mind) and vice versa. Good things and good people are worth struggling for.
I would say, the goal needs to be clear. In my case, I didn't want to settle for a mediocre relationship with my mother-in-law, it was either we accept each other in full, or we don't have relationship at all. And in the process of accepting each other in full, you need to invest time and energy into understanding each other as well as keeping our hearts open to the potential differences we may have.
If people start choosing and prioritising the things that matter to them (it's always come back to relationships), we'll be living in a kinder more just world. Because then, we won't be so blind to our desires.
I also think we wouldn't be dealing with short attention spans if our brains were better stimulated on the things that matter. Like love and relationships, or peace and nature.
"Good things and good people are worth struggling for"- I love that.
I also love what you said about trust starting small. Since the time I asked you this question, I have come across the concept of liquid democracy. Have you heard of it? If not, TLDR is that a voter can nominate someone they consider knowledgeable about an issue to vote for them on that issue. And we would basically have different citizen committees to make decisions about all key areas that affect society. Since you only delegate your vote to someone you trust at your level- it can create a system where trust flows up. This might be one way of scaling trust in society. You can look up forby.io if you wanna learn more
And 100% yes to focusing on love, relationships, peace and nature!
Are you the same Akhil from the Plurality community on Discord? I have a feeling that I've seen your name before and when you mentioned liquid democracy, I had to ask! I've not well versed in the concept but from your tldr, citizen committee sounds like it's much needed. Reminds me of when I read up on Pirate Parties in Germany. Also, thanks for sharing Forby - very excited for an idea like this to catch on.
It’s a movement led by Audrey Tang (former Taiwan’s Digital Minister) and Glen Weyl (former researcher at Microsoft). I think you will find lots of fascinating and useful information over there!
Wow. I just saw the short film on Audrey- "Good enough ancestor" that was linked on the plurality website. So powerful. Thank you for pointing me towards this
Thanks Chusana! I just joined. Lots to dig in to. It's crazy how many great people are working on different pieces of the puzzle, yet the public at large remains unaware of it due to lack of mainstream media coverage. I am more convinced than ever that we have the critical mass needed for change, we just lack the critical connection
Very thoughtful. Great advice. Questions are wonderful ears to engage with others and I appreciate the reminder, as it is easy to forget.
I am curious, you framed your piece around oppression. I think of it oppressions individually, for instance. Meaning, everyone can be oppressed, and it is heroic to push back against one's oppression.
What oppression(s) do you have in mind in your piece?
Matt, thank you for the kind words. When I wrote this, I was thinking about oppression in both the personal and collective sense. There's the overt, systemic oppression from governments, institutions, economic structures that keep people 'trapped'. But there's also the quieter and more insidious forms of oppression that we internalise. From our fear of speaking up, the pressure to conform, the self-doubt that keeps us from trusting our own instincts. Like the following piece I wrote ("Why Are We Losing Trust?") outlines the breakdown of trust in oneself, trust in information and trust in each other.
For me, I think a lot about cultural and societal oppression, especially growing up in a hierarchy-driven society like Thailand, where questioning authority or 'elders' weren't encouraged and very much frowned upon. I've also felt the weight of emotional suppression, the expectation to "be agreeable" rather than rock the boat (like, why would I know any better?), especially as a woman. Also, there's the invisible kind, the one that comes from the stories we've been told about ourselves, about success, about our worth, and about who gets to 'have power'.
For this piece, I wanted to explore how oppression isn't always something done to us and sometimes, it's something we unknowingly uphold in ourselves and others, unconsciously even. So I wanted to rally people to take the first step to push back... and that's simply from recognising where it 'lives' in our lives.
On a very personal front, three of my close family members are highly narcissistic so I would say that I think about them a lot when writing this piece!
I know, me too. I worked in HR capacity for over ten years and I have always believed in people's potential to do right by themselves. Interestingly that most of what I talked about to colleagues and teams back when I was working in corporate, is encouraging the ability to 'unlearn' the bad habits they've picked up. The bad voices that kept people anxious and negative. That is always the number one barrier to performance in anything in life.
Again, I am struck with how much our thoughts overlap. Excellent piece right here, really. Concise, yet so precise.
While I am the first one to point out that the following is somewhat of an oversimplification, we are first and foremost great apes, *primates,* just with a bit of extra cranial architecture overlaying that of our closest relatives. In primatology, examples abound that explain the shift towards embracing (self-proclaimed) “strongmen” that we can observe all around the world right now. For instance, when a band of chimpanzees encounters a threat while moving through their territory – be it real *or perceived* – they run towards and *embrace the alpha male* for comfort and a sense of security. On some level, that’s exactly what happened with Trump. More and more people *feel* the uncertainty & fear creeping up their spine (even if they couldn’t articulate it or point to its origin), and as a result they metaphorically embrace the guy who says that he’s the best possible person to navigate the myriad problems, he has everything under control, and actually there aren’t even that many problems, so don’t worry. Oh, sweet safety and security!
Our brains evolved over millions of years – remember, our species is around 300,000 years old – to encounter a reality that’s not only at odds with the modern world, but often diametrically opposed to it. And now that we start to gain a better understanding of how the human psyche works, those insights immediately get (ab)used for the worst possible causes.
Teams of corporate psychologists diligently work to exploit our brains’ “weak spots” and vulnerabilities, for no other purpose than to create more value for their shareholders (and turning us into addicts in the process through the hijacking of our brain’s reward system).
Unfortunately, sowing division and distrust is an effective (if rather short-sighted) business strategy.
I consider carefully where I focus my energy and attention. In general this means I focus on the change I'm trying to make by supporting others (and making a living from it!).
At the same time I find myself called to action by that quote about evil flourishing 'when good men do nothing'. Assuming this is for 'human', not 'men' I have realised the danger of seeking to understand which is motivated by the need to feel 'in control'.
This leads to reading different analyses of 'what is REALLY going on in America and individual motivations/intentions'. This leads to discomfort and feelings of fear. I've had recent discussions exploring this need to feel in control and recognising the significant challenge of accepting uncertainty and not knowing.
Putting this into words has been helpful for me.
Even the quote is problematic as it reinforces polarisation and simple narratives where people are good or bad.
I am still left wondering what action I need to take (if any) to "not stand by".
Alex, thanks so much for sharing your thoughts. You've definitely described something that's deeply human - this push and pull between the feeling of being in control. It reminds me of something I explored in my piece "Are You Curious or Are You Certain?". It's about the challenge of holding space for uncertainty without letting it overwhelm us. When we seek certainty, we usually end up reinforcing rigid narratives, whether it's politics, society or even ourselves. But curiosity helps us stay open, to question and to move forward without needing all the answers right away.
I also think that it's a very natural response to realising how our world really operates. Daniel Schmachtenberger outlined this really interesting explanation for how individuals respond to heightened risks.
1. Pre-tragic phase = denial of crisis, belief in minor fixes, lack of awareness of systemic issues
2. Tragic phase = recognition of severity of crises, feelings of despair and hopelessness, overwhelmed by systemic issues
3. Post-tragic phase = integration of awareness, finding meaning in action, commitment to positive change
I think we would all like to be in the third phase most of the time! Your reflection is lovely - a reminder to not let fear dictate our perspective.
This is a wonderfully composed and thought-provoking article, Chusana. Thank you for publishing it - and also thanks to Jesús for bringing it to my attention!
From my perspective, these are the key takeaways:
- Strengthen collective sensemaking initiatives to counteract fear-based propaganda.
- Promote narrative stewardship that connects stakeholders at local, national, and global levels through transformative, life-affirming stories.
- Empower societal changemakers to foster psychological resilience, equipping citizens and communities with the knowledge and tools to resist authoritarian control and cultivate critical reflection.
If these "What's" resonate, then we have important work to do. While we may already agree on the 'Why' behind these objectives, it is the 'How' that demands our immediate attention and action.
To that end, I propose that Dignity serves as the guiding "meta-value" at the heart of our collective agency and effort. Dignity is a meta-value because it underpins and elevates all other values essential to a flourishing life. It ensures that each individual's inherent worth is recognised and respected, fostering the trust, agency, and empathy needed for sustainable societal transformation.
At a more nuanced level, embracing dignity in our collective thinking, behaviour, and actions can help us achieve the following outcomes that are so relevant to how you describe our "metacrisis challenge" ...
1. Rebuilding Trust and Connection
Dignity affirms that every person is inherently valuable and deserving of respect. This creates the foundation for rebuilding trust across individuals, communities, and institutions. It promotes mutual understanding, countering the fear and division that fuel authoritarianism and social fragmentation.
2. Empowering Agency and Resilience
Recognising dignity fosters self-worth and agency, helping individuals overcome psychological oppression such as self-censorship, learned helplessness, and dependency on external validation. This empowerment is crucial for people to engage critically with their environment and assert their role in shaping collective narratives.
3. Human-Centric Solutions
Dignity ensures that societal solutions are people-centred, prioritising well-being, equity, and inclusion. By embedding dignity as a meta-value, we emphasise that systemic transformation should enhance conditions for all people to thrive, rather than serving the interests of a select few.
4. Creating Spaces for Dialogue
Respect for dignity fosters open, compassionate dialogue, even across ideological divides. This supports your emphasis on meaningful conversations that cultivate empathy, reduce fear and disconnection, and foster cooperation.
5. Resisting Manipulation and Authoritarianism
Systems rooted in dignity are less vulnerable to fear-based manipulation. Dignity reinforces critical thinking, autonomy, and the protection of fundamental rights, enabling individuals to resist propaganda and simplistic narratives by engaging in complex, truth-seeking reflection.
I'm therefore proposing that, by anchoring our efforts around dignity, we can strengthen our capacity to navigate these turbulent times and build a flourishing world that we know is still possible if we work collectively with greater levels of alignment and coordination.
If this resonates with you, then let’s connect and get to work!
I had to google the term "dignity" just now for clarification. It's "the state or quality of being worthy of honour and respect". So I really like your idea of framing 'dignity' as a meta-value. It's a necessary ingredient for rebuilding trust, and one can only see the value of dignity over a long period of time. A skill that most of us aren't really good at.... seeing things in longer term perspective!
Your perspective will definitely challenge the short-term mindset that dominates so much of our world right now. And if dignity is truly a long-term value, then anchoring ourselves in it will require patience and willingness to resist the pull of instant gratification. It really makes me wonder how can we get better at embracing dignity when our world is heading towards speed, convenience and power... over reflection, nuance, and respect. I'd love to see how we can collaborate!
Thanks Chusana for your supportive reply comments. At the end of the day, in our complex society, with all the toxicity that pervades amongst our wonderful cultures, Dignity is the one value that can never be taken-away from any of us by any external entity. They might be able to corrupt other values - but we can always rely on dignity being able to consistently define and promote our identity, and demand respect, trust, empathy and compassion - and all other shifting values - for what we stand for individually and collectively in society.
I hear you, Jan - Schmachtenberger's insights and perspectives into what humanity is facing can be heavy. I took over three days to digest one of his 4-hour long conversation. To truly grasp the impact of the metacrisis, it's only natural to feel overwhelmed. But awareness, especially when it's painful, is the very first step toward agency. We are not alone in feeling this.... even a 40-year old Thai woman sitting in Bangkok is feeling the same. I hope you give yourself space (and kindness) to process it. Sometimes, the best thing we can do is to focus on small and meaningful actions in our own lives. Sending you my good vibes.
Thank you. I’m giving myself ample time to process what seems like the five stages of grief regarding the metacrisis, which I (like Daniel) cannot see a way to make it through. I’m writing about it, trying to spread awareness, because we need more minds on this.
I love that we are writing on very similar things and drawing insights based on science and logic. For me, one of the most important aspect in dealing with challenges as huge as the metacrisis, is the ability to have these daily conversations with my husband. And it’s in these interactions that have kept me sane and clear headed. I definitely have had my depressive moments - especially during last year - but I’m learning to get better at sharing. Thanks for writing about it - I have subscribed!
Thanks for the share. I agree with what the video covered. I actually wrote about similar effect like Daniel Schmachtenberger outlined in his essay on how individuals react to heightened risks.
1. Pre-tragic phase = denial of crisis, belief in minor fixes, lack of awareness of systemic issues
2. Tragic phase = recognition of severity of crises, feelings of despair and hopelessness, overwhelmed by systemic issues
3. Post-tragic phase = integration of awareness, finding meaning in action, commitment to positive change
Not surrendering to fear seems to be the takeaway message here.
To try and not censor myself, I'd like to say that Environment might not just be one of those crises that we face. It is the context in which all other crises take place. We can do something about all other crises only if we still have the livable temperatures, if we still have water to drink and if droughts, fires, floods and heatwaves don't destroy our crops. On the drawing Environment is given equal 'weight' as all other crises, but biophysically speaking, that is not the case - it is by far the most important if we still want to exist as living beings. It is true that it happens at the same time as all other crises, but it doesn't have equal weight with them. To my mind.
And another related thought: what happens when we replace the word 'environment' with web of LIfe? Does that change things in a person's mind or heart? Is there a difference between these two phrases: "industries don't take care of environment and its resources", and "industries don't take care of the Web of LIfe of which we, humans, are a part"? And we are those industries too... we work for them and we buy what they sell. So - does it reverberate differently if we think about Web of LIfe, or the (non-descript) environment? For me it does. Anybody else?
I really appreciate this perspective, and I think you've touched on something crucial - that the environment isn't one crisis among many, it's THE foundation on which all other crises unfold. Without stable ecosystems, every social, political and economic concern becomes ... well, less important. It deserves greater weight in how we frame the crisis. I'll be looking into adjusting my graphic for when I cover the metacrisis next.
"Web of Life" does shift perception and removes the illusion of separation. I think it will allow people to feel a deeper and more personal responsibility towards the environment that we, at most times, take for granted. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and well done for fighting the urge to not censor yourself :)
Love this. Thank you
An insightful read Chusana. I write about the Metacrisis as well and am on the hunt for a playbook for change. Do you have any thoughts on how we might rebuild trust at scale given the pervasive nature of algorithm driven polarization and short attention spans?
Thank you so much, Akhil. I love that you're also diving into the metacrisis. It's such a huge topic so I always appreciate the many different voices and perspectives in how we can integrate this understanding into our lives. Rebuilding trust at scale is a big question, and I wish I had a clear answer.
In all my writings, I always come back to the self. Trust starts small. With real conversations, genuine listening, and the willingness to admit when we don't have it all figured out. Part of the problem is our society is the way everything feels like it has to be scaled instantly, but maybe the only way forward is through smaller, more honest interactions that gradually "tip" towards something bigger.
For me, I think people that are consciously more aware of what's going on need to become the catalyst within their own social circles. Even in my own experience, it took me almost 15 years to re-build the relationship I have with my mother-in-law. The relationship started off with her being 100% against me in every possible way, to today, she is now someone who I can pretty much be myself (able to say what's on my mind) and vice versa. Good things and good people are worth struggling for.
I would say, the goal needs to be clear. In my case, I didn't want to settle for a mediocre relationship with my mother-in-law, it was either we accept each other in full, or we don't have relationship at all. And in the process of accepting each other in full, you need to invest time and energy into understanding each other as well as keeping our hearts open to the potential differences we may have.
If people start choosing and prioritising the things that matter to them (it's always come back to relationships), we'll be living in a kinder more just world. Because then, we won't be so blind to our desires.
I also think we wouldn't be dealing with short attention spans if our brains were better stimulated on the things that matter. Like love and relationships, or peace and nature.
"Good things and good people are worth struggling for"- I love that.
I also love what you said about trust starting small. Since the time I asked you this question, I have come across the concept of liquid democracy. Have you heard of it? If not, TLDR is that a voter can nominate someone they consider knowledgeable about an issue to vote for them on that issue. And we would basically have different citizen committees to make decisions about all key areas that affect society. Since you only delegate your vote to someone you trust at your level- it can create a system where trust flows up. This might be one way of scaling trust in society. You can look up forby.io if you wanna learn more
And 100% yes to focusing on love, relationships, peace and nature!
Are you the same Akhil from the Plurality community on Discord? I have a feeling that I've seen your name before and when you mentioned liquid democracy, I had to ask! I've not well versed in the concept but from your tldr, citizen committee sounds like it's much needed. Reminds me of when I read up on Pirate Parties in Germany. Also, thanks for sharing Forby - very excited for an idea like this to catch on.
No Chusana, that is a different person. But Plurality community sounds like something I should join! Can you share the link plz?
I just looked up Pirate Parties and their emphasis on direct democracy does seem to have an overlap with Forby.
This is the link to the Plurality community - https://www.plurality.net/ and this is their discord invite - https://discord.gg/YWSDRqdW5n
It’s a movement led by Audrey Tang (former Taiwan’s Digital Minister) and Glen Weyl (former researcher at Microsoft). I think you will find lots of fascinating and useful information over there!
Wow. I just saw the short film on Audrey- "Good enough ancestor" that was linked on the plurality website. So powerful. Thank you for pointing me towards this
Thanks Chusana! I just joined. Lots to dig in to. It's crazy how many great people are working on different pieces of the puzzle, yet the public at large remains unaware of it due to lack of mainstream media coverage. I am more convinced than ever that we have the critical mass needed for change, we just lack the critical connection
Very thoughtful. Great advice. Questions are wonderful ears to engage with others and I appreciate the reminder, as it is easy to forget.
I am curious, you framed your piece around oppression. I think of it oppressions individually, for instance. Meaning, everyone can be oppressed, and it is heroic to push back against one's oppression.
What oppression(s) do you have in mind in your piece?
Matt, thank you for the kind words. When I wrote this, I was thinking about oppression in both the personal and collective sense. There's the overt, systemic oppression from governments, institutions, economic structures that keep people 'trapped'. But there's also the quieter and more insidious forms of oppression that we internalise. From our fear of speaking up, the pressure to conform, the self-doubt that keeps us from trusting our own instincts. Like the following piece I wrote ("Why Are We Losing Trust?") outlines the breakdown of trust in oneself, trust in information and trust in each other.
For me, I think a lot about cultural and societal oppression, especially growing up in a hierarchy-driven society like Thailand, where questioning authority or 'elders' weren't encouraged and very much frowned upon. I've also felt the weight of emotional suppression, the expectation to "be agreeable" rather than rock the boat (like, why would I know any better?), especially as a woman. Also, there's the invisible kind, the one that comes from the stories we've been told about ourselves, about success, about our worth, and about who gets to 'have power'.
For this piece, I wanted to explore how oppression isn't always something done to us and sometimes, it's something we unknowingly uphold in ourselves and others, unconsciously even. So I wanted to rally people to take the first step to push back... and that's simply from recognising where it 'lives' in our lives.
On a very personal front, three of my close family members are highly narcissistic so I would say that I think about them a lot when writing this piece!
Thank you for your deep, thoughtful reply. That resonates both with me and with your piece.
I love the sentiment of rallying people to pushback and care for themselves. I see that everywhere, in everyone.
I know, me too. I worked in HR capacity for over ten years and I have always believed in people's potential to do right by themselves. Interestingly that most of what I talked about to colleagues and teams back when I was working in corporate, is encouraging the ability to 'unlearn' the bad habits they've picked up. The bad voices that kept people anxious and negative. That is always the number one barrier to performance in anything in life.
Again, I am struck with how much our thoughts overlap. Excellent piece right here, really. Concise, yet so precise.
While I am the first one to point out that the following is somewhat of an oversimplification, we are first and foremost great apes, *primates,* just with a bit of extra cranial architecture overlaying that of our closest relatives. In primatology, examples abound that explain the shift towards embracing (self-proclaimed) “strongmen” that we can observe all around the world right now. For instance, when a band of chimpanzees encounters a threat while moving through their territory – be it real *or perceived* – they run towards and *embrace the alpha male* for comfort and a sense of security. On some level, that’s exactly what happened with Trump. More and more people *feel* the uncertainty & fear creeping up their spine (even if they couldn’t articulate it or point to its origin), and as a result they metaphorically embrace the guy who says that he’s the best possible person to navigate the myriad problems, he has everything under control, and actually there aren’t even that many problems, so don’t worry. Oh, sweet safety and security!
Our brains evolved over millions of years – remember, our species is around 300,000 years old – to encounter a reality that’s not only at odds with the modern world, but often diametrically opposed to it. And now that we start to gain a better understanding of how the human psyche works, those insights immediately get (ab)used for the worst possible causes.
Teams of corporate psychologists diligently work to exploit our brains’ “weak spots” and vulnerabilities, for no other purpose than to create more value for their shareholders (and turning us into addicts in the process through the hijacking of our brain’s reward system).
Unfortunately, sowing division and distrust is an effective (if rather short-sighted) business strategy.
Well written, insightful, and most importantly, helpful. Thank you!
What a wonderful comment - thank you so much!
Thanks for writing this helpful peace.
I consider carefully where I focus my energy and attention. In general this means I focus on the change I'm trying to make by supporting others (and making a living from it!).
At the same time I find myself called to action by that quote about evil flourishing 'when good men do nothing'. Assuming this is for 'human', not 'men' I have realised the danger of seeking to understand which is motivated by the need to feel 'in control'.
This leads to reading different analyses of 'what is REALLY going on in America and individual motivations/intentions'. This leads to discomfort and feelings of fear. I've had recent discussions exploring this need to feel in control and recognising the significant challenge of accepting uncertainty and not knowing.
Putting this into words has been helpful for me.
Even the quote is problematic as it reinforces polarisation and simple narratives where people are good or bad.
I am still left wondering what action I need to take (if any) to "not stand by".
I hope my reflections help others.
Alex, thanks so much for sharing your thoughts. You've definitely described something that's deeply human - this push and pull between the feeling of being in control. It reminds me of something I explored in my piece "Are You Curious or Are You Certain?". It's about the challenge of holding space for uncertainty without letting it overwhelm us. When we seek certainty, we usually end up reinforcing rigid narratives, whether it's politics, society or even ourselves. But curiosity helps us stay open, to question and to move forward without needing all the answers right away.
I also think that it's a very natural response to realising how our world really operates. Daniel Schmachtenberger outlined this really interesting explanation for how individuals respond to heightened risks.
1. Pre-tragic phase = denial of crisis, belief in minor fixes, lack of awareness of systemic issues
2. Tragic phase = recognition of severity of crises, feelings of despair and hopelessness, overwhelmed by systemic issues
3. Post-tragic phase = integration of awareness, finding meaning in action, commitment to positive change
I think we would all like to be in the third phase most of the time! Your reflection is lovely - a reminder to not let fear dictate our perspective.
Embarrassed by the piece/peace typo
It's ok - no one needs to know..... :D
This is a wonderfully composed and thought-provoking article, Chusana. Thank you for publishing it - and also thanks to Jesús for bringing it to my attention!
From my perspective, these are the key takeaways:
- Strengthen collective sensemaking initiatives to counteract fear-based propaganda.
- Promote narrative stewardship that connects stakeholders at local, national, and global levels through transformative, life-affirming stories.
- Empower societal changemakers to foster psychological resilience, equipping citizens and communities with the knowledge and tools to resist authoritarian control and cultivate critical reflection.
If these "What's" resonate, then we have important work to do. While we may already agree on the 'Why' behind these objectives, it is the 'How' that demands our immediate attention and action.
To that end, I propose that Dignity serves as the guiding "meta-value" at the heart of our collective agency and effort. Dignity is a meta-value because it underpins and elevates all other values essential to a flourishing life. It ensures that each individual's inherent worth is recognised and respected, fostering the trust, agency, and empathy needed for sustainable societal transformation.
At a more nuanced level, embracing dignity in our collective thinking, behaviour, and actions can help us achieve the following outcomes that are so relevant to how you describe our "metacrisis challenge" ...
1. Rebuilding Trust and Connection
Dignity affirms that every person is inherently valuable and deserving of respect. This creates the foundation for rebuilding trust across individuals, communities, and institutions. It promotes mutual understanding, countering the fear and division that fuel authoritarianism and social fragmentation.
2. Empowering Agency and Resilience
Recognising dignity fosters self-worth and agency, helping individuals overcome psychological oppression such as self-censorship, learned helplessness, and dependency on external validation. This empowerment is crucial for people to engage critically with their environment and assert their role in shaping collective narratives.
3. Human-Centric Solutions
Dignity ensures that societal solutions are people-centred, prioritising well-being, equity, and inclusion. By embedding dignity as a meta-value, we emphasise that systemic transformation should enhance conditions for all people to thrive, rather than serving the interests of a select few.
4. Creating Spaces for Dialogue
Respect for dignity fosters open, compassionate dialogue, even across ideological divides. This supports your emphasis on meaningful conversations that cultivate empathy, reduce fear and disconnection, and foster cooperation.
5. Resisting Manipulation and Authoritarianism
Systems rooted in dignity are less vulnerable to fear-based manipulation. Dignity reinforces critical thinking, autonomy, and the protection of fundamental rights, enabling individuals to resist propaganda and simplistic narratives by engaging in complex, truth-seeking reflection.
I'm therefore proposing that, by anchoring our efforts around dignity, we can strengthen our capacity to navigate these turbulent times and build a flourishing world that we know is still possible if we work collectively with greater levels of alignment and coordination.
If this resonates with you, then let’s connect and get to work!
I had to google the term "dignity" just now for clarification. It's "the state or quality of being worthy of honour and respect". So I really like your idea of framing 'dignity' as a meta-value. It's a necessary ingredient for rebuilding trust, and one can only see the value of dignity over a long period of time. A skill that most of us aren't really good at.... seeing things in longer term perspective!
Your perspective will definitely challenge the short-term mindset that dominates so much of our world right now. And if dignity is truly a long-term value, then anchoring ourselves in it will require patience and willingness to resist the pull of instant gratification. It really makes me wonder how can we get better at embracing dignity when our world is heading towards speed, convenience and power... over reflection, nuance, and respect. I'd love to see how we can collaborate!
Thanks Chusana for your supportive reply comments. At the end of the day, in our complex society, with all the toxicity that pervades amongst our wonderful cultures, Dignity is the one value that can never be taken-away from any of us by any external entity. They might be able to corrupt other values - but we can always rely on dignity being able to consistently define and promote our identity, and demand respect, trust, empathy and compassion - and all other shifting values - for what we stand for individually and collectively in society.
Schmactenberger’s message to humanity re the metacrisis (not in that video) plunged me into severe depression.
I hear you, Jan - Schmachtenberger's insights and perspectives into what humanity is facing can be heavy. I took over three days to digest one of his 4-hour long conversation. To truly grasp the impact of the metacrisis, it's only natural to feel overwhelmed. But awareness, especially when it's painful, is the very first step toward agency. We are not alone in feeling this.... even a 40-year old Thai woman sitting in Bangkok is feeling the same. I hope you give yourself space (and kindness) to process it. Sometimes, the best thing we can do is to focus on small and meaningful actions in our own lives. Sending you my good vibes.
Thank you. I’m giving myself ample time to process what seems like the five stages of grief regarding the metacrisis, which I (like Daniel) cannot see a way to make it through. I’m writing about it, trying to spread awareness, because we need more minds on this.
I love that we are writing on very similar things and drawing insights based on science and logic. For me, one of the most important aspect in dealing with challenges as huge as the metacrisis, is the ability to have these daily conversations with my husband. And it’s in these interactions that have kept me sane and clear headed. I definitely have had my depressive moments - especially during last year - but I’m learning to get better at sharing. Thanks for writing about it - I have subscribed!
Well … there’s a META-metacrises —- of which all you describe are symptoms of.
We are in the “great acceleration” phase of our industrial civilization’s inevitable collapse. This explains it simply:
https://youtu.be/5QeYM1L0FfY?si=m-xHqt_BNC98sBsF
Thanks for the share. I agree with what the video covered. I actually wrote about similar effect like Daniel Schmachtenberger outlined in his essay on how individuals react to heightened risks.
1. Pre-tragic phase = denial of crisis, belief in minor fixes, lack of awareness of systemic issues
2. Tragic phase = recognition of severity of crises, feelings of despair and hopelessness, overwhelmed by systemic issues
3. Post-tragic phase = integration of awareness, finding meaning in action, commitment to positive change
Not surrendering to fear seems to be the takeaway message here.