The Vision Pioneers Blog

by Josef Garvi

Recently, somebody asked me for advice on how to improve the productivity of run-down cocoa plantations on the Gold Coast. My contact displayed a lot of good intentions, laudable and politically correct in our times: fair trade, biological farming, enhanced agricultural output. His concern was how to make sustainable cultivation systems that would solve a global supply problem and benefit the Africans in the process. The group he represented was foreseeing a sharp rise in cocoa demand on the world markets in the coming years. Yet if production levels did not follow suit, this would set off a price hike, making chocolate delicacies less accessible to common people in the rich world. Whilst the systems for upscaling production were at hand, the main problem faced by this group was how to build the necessary motivation amongst the people in Ghana.

This motivational concern highlights a question that is so easily taken for granted: is such a business ultimately in the best interest of the Ghanaian people themselves? Or is it simply projecting the wishes of a «developed» world looking for the necessary input to sustain its high-consumption lifestyle?

Cocoa, like most widely exploited crops in sub-Saharan Africa, is not originally native. In the early 20th century, large cocoa plantations were set up on the Gold Coast by the British as a means to cash in on their colony, and an export crop it has remained ever since. As with most Third World exports, its price on world markets has been unstable, and its cultivation for a long time unprofitable. When Ghanaians grow such crops, be it biologically and under fairer trade agreements, they are subject to the whims of the world economy and forced to import that other, life-sustaining commodity: food, which price is volatile as well. They are not trading from a surplus, but using their best lands that could otherwise provide for the fundamental needs of their people. Thus they are ensuring that richer people throughout the world can buy a luxury at a decent price - not that their own children and brothers eat well.

Ever since the Portuguese fathomed the immensity of the riches of the Congo, and the Arabs set up their trading cities along Africa’s East coast, the outside world’s view of Africa can be summed up in a single, enthralling word: resources. Be it human beings, precious minerals or agricultural output, focus has been on what those outside can obtain from her.

Today, the world’s approach towards Africa may be less brutal, but the fact that a politer tone is being used has not erased its fundamental aim. It is still about what the world can obtain from the continent, not about what is best for the Africans themselves. In the eyes of the world, Africa’s primordial duty remains to supply the outside world with resources, instead of ensuring that her own children may enjoy the benefits of their birthright.

As Henning Melber put it: «The plundering continues».

by Staffan Göranson

In Greek mythology, there was once a king named Midas. By Dionysos, god of fertility, wine and growth, he was offered the granting of a wish of his choosing. Greedy as he was, he cried out: Gold! Gold! Gold! And this was granted. Anything he touched became gold. He congratulated himself on all the riches within his touch. Everything around him - trees, bushes, palaces, servants - became gold. Never before had anyone had so much gold in their possession.

King Midas’ happiness was complete until he realized that he was hungry and thirsty. But as the cup touched his lips the wine turned into gold. When he put a grape into his mouth, his teeth cracked from biting into a grape of gold. Soon, the hunger and thirst became unbearable. His daughter reached out to help him get some food into his body. Foreseeing the danger, he tried pushing her away in order to save her. But also she was transformed into a golden statue. King Midas was distraught. He regretted his foolishness, begging Dionysos to make his wish undone.

In the last two centuries of industrialism, most of what we have touched has become gold. The generation of my parents bore in mind the poor, the oppressed - people in their immediate vicinity who had no social security when they fell ill or out of work. I was raised in a family business. My father’s greatest satisfaction was accomplishing good things together with his co-workers, where everyone contributed with their piece of a greater whole. In this way, the company grew into a larger organism. These are good memories that I carry with me still.

However, in the last 20-30 years, the flip side of industrialism has become all the more visible, as the drive for economies of scale leads to a mechanism of growth independent of the actual needs of people - a machinery driving man rather than the other way around.

In ancient times, there was another king who was offered a corresponding wish from his god; namely to wish for anything he liked and it would be granted to him. The king was Solomon and he was succeeding his father king David who had been a legend already in his own lifetime. Solomon wished for the ability to discern between good and evil so that he would be able to lead his people in a just way. Like king Midas, Solomon’s wish was granted. But unlike Midas, Solomon never had any reason to regret what he had wished for. He became the most powerful and the wealthiest man in his lifetime and his nation prospered in every possible way. And the legacy of his wisdom has outlived him.

There is an old truth that says that we will have what our hearts desire. My generation was born during the peak of industrialism, but we are now facing the need for a deeper assessment of its consequences. We are not doomed to follow the flow. We have the opportunity to think our own destiny through. Why not learn from history and start thinking about the kind of society that we really want to see? About what will give a good and meaningful life - for ourselves, our children and our grandchildren.

May we be granted the wisdom that is needed to move in the right direction.

by Miriam Garvi

In When progress equals devolution, I wrote about how easily wisdom is lost in our pursuit of knowledge, as we discard the natural in favor of the artificially modified that will allow for production and consumption en masse.

Lately, there seems to be a common understanding that in order for our post-industrial knowledge society to become environmentally, economically as well as morally sustainable, we need to see some kind of change occur. How deep this change should go, however, is not clear: whilst some are talking about replastering the capitalistic system to make it more palatable, other voices are calling for a more profound and complete transformation of our way of living.

Through the eyes of a child, what beauty would we be able to see?

As we start out, life is rewarding in its simplicity and beautiful in all that it promises. But the precious innocence and playfulness of the young child is lost as we are socialized into the imperatives of modern society. So many of those treasures that are so easily discerned through the eyes of a child, become impossible to see once viewed through the lenses of what is socially correct and normatively acceptable.

People working with strategic change know that achieving transformation includes allowing the taken-for-granted to be shaken at its core. Yet unless there is truly a renewed mindset, any such «unfreezing» technique will only serve to build new walls on the same foundation. And, like the leaning tower of Pisa, it will matter little what we do above ground, if we do not concern ourselves with the fundamentals underground that will hold it all together.

More than change, vision pioneering is about reclaiming that childlike eagerness where life is yet an open book waiting to be filled and where what we make of our lives truly matters. And with the playful why we can rediscover the freedom that is ours to envision what is beautiful, useful, and helpful to mankind.

Let us be young again!

by Miriam Garvi

In this age of technological advancement, so much that was once unheard of has come within our reach. Old barriers are broken as we venture into space or create clones of the living. The enormity of resources that are poured into making scientific progress and creating markets for technology is a testament to how strongly the world holds on to its belief in the power of knowledge.

This last decade is favoring growth-oriented strategies that rely on innovation, entrepreneurship and venture capital to generate such growth that will be valued on financial markets. Little is said, however, about what kind of ideas are brought about and whether we believe that they are actually doing good, not just promoting a strategic agenda. The questions that we do not raise are fundamental in their simplicity: what is the purpose, and whom is it all for?

Our belief in knowledge springs from the assumption that any added building block brings the world enlightenment. In our efforts to exploit and manipulate nature so as to satisfy the growth agendas of our times, the natural is no longer good enough. Instead, we welcome industrially-processed substitutes that are labeled «improvements». And so we put ourselves at the mercy of streamlining profiteers, buying frozen chicken that has been «neutrally marinated» in water and food conservatives simply because someone just realized that the artificial replacing the genuine was a profitable strategy. Less of the genuine; more of the artificial, even as more people around us suffer from cancer and we see our nature going down the drain.

Implications of knowledge, but what of wisdom?

The source of wisdom?

What good is technological advancement, unless it allows for meaningful progress and prosperity for mankind? Can we claim to be enlightened, if we consume what is at our disposal, with no concern for the legacy that we will be leaving behind?

Devolution tells us that everything started from a high and has been slowly deteriorating ever since. In this light, the need is imminent to move away from a foundation that is flawed, looking to discover a different source, one that will give rise to meaningful richness in all its diversity.

by Miriam Garvi

Ten years ago, as I was busy interailing across Europe, interviewing Scandinavians abroad for my master’s thesis, I was fascinated by how the Internet was providing new opportunities for people to settle down and work from a location of their own choosing. In my business studies, I had seen little or no room for the individual, and I embraced the idea of «quality of life» as something that would acknowledge the diversity of people’s driving forces.

One common notion these days is that quality in life equals work-life balance, translating into expectations of success on all arenas including the professional, private/family, private/social and private/hobby spheres. And there are many consultants and life coaches out there offering their recipes for successful self-realization.

Juggling career and family, life for most really seems to be about give and take rather than balance. About choosing between the quality moment with the kids or the important meeting at work. About taking time for oneself, or investing in one’s closest relationships. Amidst all these internal and external expectations, we prioritize and we compromise.

Success has a funny way sometimes of leaving an unsettling aftertaste.

There is little life quality in conforming to the funky mold of successful being, when its achievement comes at the price of what may actually matter most. Finding a purpose that makes it all worthwhile will reveal a pathway that, though much less traveled-by, brings a meaningful dimension to life as we know it.

by Miriam Garvi

If one is to believe the media coverage lately, our world is being rocked at the core by a wave of threats ranging from natural catastrophes to terrorism, financial collapse, potential pandemics or the menace of climate change.

It seems that the comfortable life that we have been enjoying in the Western world is under serious threat.

A new way of viewing the world, yet what is it bringing?

Various voices of authority have long been endorsing the path of economic short-sightedness by proclaiming the virtues of self-regulated financial markets. Since the credit crisis, however, few are those who are still singing their praise. Instead of self-regulation, many are now favoring its opposite: regulation on the supra-national level, encouraged by hedge-fund mogul George Soros and others. Global controlling mechanisms are extending into a wider range of arenas, as they are seen as necessary measures in order to fight climate change (in the form of carbon taxes) and terrorism.

Some would call this a shift of paradigms, as we are witnessing how one way of viewing the world, of defining its problems and solutions, is giving way to another more in tune with the current economic and political agendas.

It is too easy to call for voices of authority to give us the answers, colored by their own particular political or economic interests. Facing the fallacy of institutions and beliefs of yesterday, the opportunity is ours to step back as if nothing existed and consider a world that is worthwhile.

If we dare take that leap, then we just might see the birth of pioneering visions that will bear fruit for the benefit of both ourselves and of others.

There is hope to be found for the future.

by Miriam Garvi

The past century has seen the rise of large organizational structures. For years now we have let ourselves be impressed by the resources and market dominance of mammoth organizations, be they Monsanto, the UN, or even the Red Cross.

Multinationals, global corporations and various institutions are swallowing huge amounts of resources, but what are they giving in return? Many of us invest most of our working lives in anonymous structures which have become powerful instruments in building a great distance between the real centers of decision-making and the realities of those who are living their consequences - including clients, employees and society.

People suffocating in this alienating process are unable to see the meaning of what they are doing, and are left at the mercy of the re-organizing whims of those in power looking to earn the approval of financial markets.

This greatest inefficiency of our time is slowly but surely snuffing out the joy of working and every little flame of creative potential within us.

Making structures even more rigid with the help of supra-national regulation is not the answer for our times. Nor does size give the strength that enables the astonishing. Creative and purposeful contribution can only be stimulated when people are free to see the meaning of it all.

Time has come for a new era:
Smallness in size, greatness in meaning.

by Miriam Garvi

I am one of those who have been following Barack Obama’s rise to power with interest. Especially, I am intrigued by how a simple electoral message consisting of one single word seems to be touching the right cord with so many people out there:

CHANGE

Thanks to the political and rhetorical strategy that has brought Obama to power, change is becoming synonymous with progress, i.e. with the belief that things will inevitably be better if only they are different.

But where is this change taking us?

It is quite evident that changes are occurring both on national and global levels. Climate change, terrorism, a financial system in collapse, massive unemployment on the way are all reports of threats to our existence. And amidst such perceived anxiety, a desperate call for strong leadership emerges.

This year’s G20 summit has been quick to respond, displaying an unprecedented spirit of global cooperation, coordination and collaboration, as the U.S. joins ranks with the EU, and even Russia calls for strong leadership on the global level. As emphasized by Obama at the press conference following the summit, “We all have responsibilities to work together.” And these days such responsibilities are summarized in a global deal to boost world growth, a tantalizing vision that should take us away from the insecurities of a «boom and bust economy» towards globally sustainable economic growth.

There is nothing new about the human mechanism that turns towards strong leadership in order to dampen anxiety. Our responsibilities, to paraphrase Obama, are not to abdicate our own freedom of action, placing our salvation in the hands of those people behind the scenes pulling the strings of influence on the global arena. Our responsibilities are not to buy into an enticing vision of a New World Order, putting all our trust in the panaceas offered by our world leaders without considering what costs will have to be paid in the process. This has been done before, and the result was oppression, genocide, and world war.

What good is change, if it comes at the cost of freedom? We cannot sell out our freedom to a change agency as it promises to take us out of the crisis, only to realize the price of it once there is no turning back.

As change agents, the opportunity is ours to bring about the kind of change that leads to meaningful prosperity. It is time to recognize that greed as a motor for prosperity has faltered. No longer can prosperity be narrowly defined as economic wealth. I have seen leprous people in Africa much happier than people in the West. Meaning, not dollars and cents, is the currency that motivates people to change the world for the better.

by Miriam Garvi

Today’s recession is bringing back the rhetoric of greed to the forefront, both among politicians and journalists, as a way of condemning practices now deemed excessive by the electorate, whilst keeping such practices at a comfortable distance from those who have long been in the position to influence the way we view the world and our own role within it.

It has long been held that greed, or self-interest as philosophers and economists endorsing this position would prefer to call it, is the supreme driving force behind enterprising, growth and development, and as such, the very motor of society.

But for those less fortunate who are now paying the price for enacted self-interest, as they find themselves laid off from businesses where top executives are cashing in additional bonuses, or left with mortgage loans that they have no means to service, this economic as well as moral rationale of a self-focused society is a far cry from the reality they are living.

Yet in the spirit of Ayn Rand, defenders of this rationale would argue that we owe nothing to the weak, who have only to opt to overcome their weakness by way of reason.

It is interesting how quickly societal thinking turns elitist when we who are doing the thinking are part of the fortunate few. The idea of «natural selection» and of the survival of the fittest is flattering indeed as long as we are the ones surviving. And if the purpose of it all is to be the last man standing, having beaten all contestants in the short-term, profit-making chicken race, then success is becoming rather void of meaning.

It is high time we wake up and see things as they really are, not as the dominant rhetoric, or the dominant logic, would want us to believe things to be. Let us be greedy, greedy for meaning! Let us engage in that which can bear fruit to the benefit of ourselves and others. Let us make a profit, but not a fortune. And let us reinvest for the benefit of mankind.

by Miriam Garvi

With the on-going financial crisis affecting major financial markets all over the world, even Alan Greenspan, one of Ayn Rand’s most devoted followers, has admitted to finding a flaw in his/her ideology.

A set-back for those who profess that greed will make the world a better place?

The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, however, are keeping their mantra: Liberalize, Deregulate, Privatize. Come to us for capital and we will help you reform your economies. Open up domestic markets to foreign investment, roll out the red carpet for the multinationals, remove all the brake pads in order for capital to flow freely.

To whose benefit?

Paul Wolfowitz, former World Bank director, illustrates how anybody can claim to be passionate about «helping the people who have less than one dollar a day». But these mammoth institutions are pressuring for reforms that will streamline such markets according to Western standards. And so their intention is not to empower Third World populations but to subject them to a regime where they are denied the right to exploit their own natural resources whilst being burdened with increasing debts.

Governments of Thirld World countries are not free to choose a path that they believe would be good for their people. In the past, leaders who have come in the way of foreign economic interests have had a macabre tendency to end up dead. We remember Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso, Jaime Roldó of Ecuador, Omar Torrijos of Panama. With the invisible hand of the CIA or of a former colonial power lurking in the background.

As entire populations of poorer countries find themselves eating out of the hand of the IMF and the World Bank, this is the enslavement of our times. Liberalization, deregulation, privatization have become synonymous with neo-slavery. And there are penalties to be paid for those who struggle not to be trapped in this system.

When greed threatens our future pensions or the college funds of our children, we feel compelled to react. But who will stand up for other people’s right to choose their own direction?