Agreed. Many hopeful paths. But Little overall evidence of the collective us following. Regardless, the 'useful way' appears to be the actively hopeful one.
While pushing forward a actively hopeful path, I'm very depressed about where the herd seems to be headed and the set of probable, almost-certain futures. Lots of people seem to be concerned about our mood instead of creating a healthy future. Lots of people seem to be involved in helping push forward an actively hopeful path toward a good future, but not one that will get us there in time. It seems like we're substituting feeling good and acting positively for developing a real plan to succeed. People are settling for what they think is possible instead of doing the hard work of designing a path that'll have a high chance of success.
Hard to disagree with this in a general sense. The grieving process is deeply confronting, and few seem to have integrously engaged with it (for myriad reasons). With that said, many have grieved, and continue to do so. Many of us are metabolising the complex emotions that relate to such probabilistic knowledge (i.e. the overwhelming likelihood of collapse, which can of course means many things). Part of that, however, has to be a return(ing) to active hope. Active hope is not naive. Active hope doesn't lead us to just 'stay positive' and act as if 'it's all good'. Active hope embodied radical acceptance, which enhances our agency.
I have a new analysis of our political system. Our problems are based on a root cause, an errant assumption and lack of design. It can be fixed relatively easily (without passing any new laws or electing anyone in particular.) I've talked to hundreds, there's no support. There's very little ability to hear about it, little ability to be curious about it and learn.
It's going to be difficult fixing anything without fixing our political system. If we fix our political system, fixing many things will be much easier. I guess what I'm saying is that active hope is naive if the big problems are ignored or assumed to be impossible to fix. #LetsMakePeopleCount
Absolutely. I'm arguing for a very grounded 'belief in the possibility of better' (i.e. hope) that results from real, integrous and critical relation to world (past, present and trajectory).
Yes, it looks like we'll all burn together.
There are hopeful paths, but we're not yet following one.
The troubling part is that almost no one is even open to one, much less supportive.
I'm hopeful that my actions for creating a following for a workable path will succeed.
But I don't yet see grounds for optimism.
Agreed. Many hopeful paths. But Little overall evidence of the collective us following. Regardless, the 'useful way' appears to be the actively hopeful one.
While pushing forward a actively hopeful path, I'm very depressed about where the herd seems to be headed and the set of probable, almost-certain futures. Lots of people seem to be concerned about our mood instead of creating a healthy future. Lots of people seem to be involved in helping push forward an actively hopeful path toward a good future, but not one that will get us there in time. It seems like we're substituting feeling good and acting positively for developing a real plan to succeed. People are settling for what they think is possible instead of doing the hard work of designing a path that'll have a high chance of success.
Hard to disagree with this in a general sense. The grieving process is deeply confronting, and few seem to have integrously engaged with it (for myriad reasons). With that said, many have grieved, and continue to do so. Many of us are metabolising the complex emotions that relate to such probabilistic knowledge (i.e. the overwhelming likelihood of collapse, which can of course means many things). Part of that, however, has to be a return(ing) to active hope. Active hope is not naive. Active hope doesn't lead us to just 'stay positive' and act as if 'it's all good'. Active hope embodied radical acceptance, which enhances our agency.
Agreed, active hope is not itself naive.
I have a new analysis of our political system. Our problems are based on a root cause, an errant assumption and lack of design. It can be fixed relatively easily (without passing any new laws or electing anyone in particular.) I've talked to hundreds, there's no support. There's very little ability to hear about it, little ability to be curious about it and learn.
It's going to be difficult fixing anything without fixing our political system. If we fix our political system, fixing many things will be much easier. I guess what I'm saying is that active hope is naive if the big problems are ignored or assumed to be impossible to fix. #LetsMakePeopleCount
Absolutely. I'm arguing for a very grounded 'belief in the possibility of better' (i.e. hope) that results from real, integrous and critical relation to world (past, present and trajectory).