{"id":3063,"date":"2020-05-30T09:16:36","date_gmt":"2020-05-30T09:16:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/?p=3063"},"modified":"2020-05-30T09:23:49","modified_gmt":"2020-05-30T09:23:49","slug":"motivating-us","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/open-leadership\/motivating-us","title":{"rendered":"Motivating ‘Us’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Again and again, people stick together in the formation of \u2018us\u2019 that gets its identity from not being \u2018them.\u2019 Can we not all together become \u2018us\u2019?<\/h3>\n

At any level<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

People find an \u2018us\u2019 at many levels. The \u2018us\u2019 generally comes with a \u2018them.\u2019 For instance, it may be highly valued to be patriotic and, in wartime, kill the enemy. But why? Viewed from afar, it\u2019s utterly weird. Being born somewhere \u2013 a complete coincidence \u2013 makes any person belong to one or the other group. Thus, being \u2018the enemy\u2019 is also a complete coincidence. It\u2019s disconcerting. There is no internal logic.<\/p>\n

Does this mean that it\u2019s a natural human phenomenon?<\/p>\n

Genetically?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I have a strong \u2018no\u2019 to this. Very probably, we have a number of us-genes, but we are also a very flexible species. [see: \u201cIt\u2019s Just the Way it Is<\/a>\u201d] We have flexibility-genes. Surely, we can belong to \u2018us\u2019 without waging war to \u2018them.\u2019 In my view, fighting against \u2018them\u2019 is a trap that we may easily avoid.<\/p>\n

The problem lies in the use of our us-genes.<\/p>\n

The enemy is not made by \u2018them\u2019 but by how we manage \u2018us.\u2019<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019s an identity issue. What motivates us towards \u2018us\u2019? Crucial in this is something like the distinction between mere-ego and total-person.<\/p>\n

In other words, if there is an internal dissociation within \u2018us,\u2019 an external enemy is readily found. Also within what may otherwise be \u2018us,\u2019 starting civil war or a violent aberration of identity politics.<\/p>\n

How to avoid this?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In my view, the main path is the quality of in-depth motivation that positively changes \u2018us\u2019 from inside out. For instance, a country \u2018lives\u2019 through the deep motivation of its citizens to feel involved with its \u2018good cause,\u2019 which is to bring people together, not the opposite. The quality of this makes the country whole needing to annex another territory, and without any need of violence against \u2018the other\u2019 for eventually just being \u2018the other.\u2019<\/p>\n

If the citizens of the country feel internally whole, there is no need for international aggression. In such a case, any politician or army leader who would come up with the idea would be brought down readily. The country itself would be stable, with people cooperating for the good of each other.<\/p>\n

You might object that the other may start the aggression.<\/p>\n

Then look into the why. Does the other feel threatened? Does the other need you to feel whole together with you? What are the real needs at play in all this? Here lies the actual task of diplomacy!<\/p>\n

The motivation of broader groups<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This can only be done with deep and broad messages. Easily said, surely. Crucial is the insight that the sincere communication itself, touching many people inside, is compelling as well as challenging. It doesn\u2019t come for free.<\/p>\n

There is much work involved.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Moreover, this kind of work is not straightforward. Compare it to what it takes to become a genius violin player. There\u2019s more to it than wielding a stick.<\/p>\n

In my view, here lies a wasteland. Neither the importance nor the challenge of developing truly motivating conversation is appreciated well enough in the broadest sense. This way, we see those wielding a stick get the most of it: the simpler, the more influential.<\/p>\n

It is abominable<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

and deeply related to a rampant lack of leadership. Open Leadership is essential in this respect. [see: \u201cOpen Leadership: not I, not I and also not we as you and me<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, the world is becoming smaller. More people living closer together (off-line, online) brings more stress in general. This stress is not necessarily bad, but it can become so immensely.<\/p>\n

We should be living in a world of \u2018us\u2019 without boundaries.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Each can work towards that in one\u2019s chunk of the world.<\/p>\n

Open Leadership is needed at the top of formal decision-making.<\/p>\n

Especially in what calls itself a \u2018democracy\u2019 (primary purpose: inner strength to all), it is needed at any level.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/a>
<\/a>

Please login to bookmark<\/h3>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t<\/form><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Again and again, people stick together in the formation of \u2018us\u2019 that gets its identity from not being \u2018them.\u2019 Can we not all together become \u2018us\u2019? At any level People find an \u2018us\u2019 at many levels. The \u2018us\u2019 generally comes with a \u2018them.\u2019 For instance, it may be highly valued to be patriotic and, in Read the full article…<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/a>
<\/a>

Please login to bookmark<\/h3>\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t<\/form><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3064,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","jetpack_publicize_message":""},"categories":[5,23],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/458.jpg?fit=961%2C564&ssl=1","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9Fdiq-Np","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3063"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3063"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3063\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3067,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3063\/revisions\/3067"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3064"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3063"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3063"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3063"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}