MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE

What the Attacks in Paris show once again is how we tend to go into ‘maximum overdrive’ mode when we are suddenly, unexpectedly faced with a significant problem. There’s this sudden ‘rush’ of ‘we have to do SOMETHING’ – so if Facebook gives the option of overlaying your profile pic with the French flag, so many will just do it. Not because of understanding the entire dynamic of what happened in seeing: these were the reasons for the attack and this is the role that France did or didn’t play to get to this point – but simply because: I feel I am doing SOMETHING by ‘showing support’ for those who must have suffered tremendous fear. But once the initial ‘rush’ energy runs out – what gets done? Is there any follow-up? Do we do anything? Are there long-term solutions being formulated? We are now just a few days after the attack – consider: do you still feel the need to do something now? Or have you pretty much returned to your daily routine, thinking that ‘someone somewhere’ is probably stepping up to fix this?

The attacks themselves are an expression of ‘maximum overdrive’ – going waaaay out there to supposedly make a point/statement, to be ‘heard’. Obviously, in today’s world, an ill-considered course of action with mainstream media having the ability to highjack any event and write its own narrative before the real story/facts were even investigated. Then we can ask as well – what drives a person to such extremes? Why was the cause not picked up and addressed before it came to a point that people felt suicide bombing would be an appropriate way to deal with whatever issue is at the heart of this attack.

That of course is waived away by saying there is an extreme religion at the foundation of this extreme violence. I would say making such statements is once again going into maximum overdrive – taking one event way out of proportion and making conclusions about millions of people all over the world. Both the attacks and the response to the attacks exist in the same tendency of going into overdrive mode – moving too fast, taking things too far, not stopping to consider: wait – what am I doing? Why am I doing this? Does this make sense?

If you haven’t yet – I would suggest watching the live response hangout that was done on Saturday: [113] Paris Attacks: Is this How WW3 Begins? as it will support with slowing down, looking at the information with common sense and having grounded discussions on the matter.

With events like these – always check how you participate in creating them within the principle of ‘as above, so below’ – world events are reflections on a large scale of all the things we accept and allow ourselves to do and participate in, in our own lives. So – this is a good time to become aware of our own tendency to move too fast, of going into maximum overdrive mode and getting stuck in a mentality of ‘go go go’ – without stopping, taking a step back and actually considering whether what we’re about to do is really what’s best.

Read More

"Meconomics": ME-Economics

I’m sure everyone or most have heard of the words microeconomics and macroeconomics – where microeconomics looks at single factors/products/services and the effects of individual decisions (for instance what happens when I increase the price of the product I’m selling) and macroeconomics works with aggregates, looking at entire markets or the economy as a whole (what happens if the price of oil increases in the economy). However, in my economy studies I haven’t come across a single word that describes how we live economic decisions and apply ‘market logic’ in our personal lives – so here I am making one up: Meconomics, short for ‘ME-Economics’.

Sure – we can say ‘what you’re looking at is psychology – not economics!’ And yes – I am looking at psychology – but I’m looking at economics in the same extent as I am at psychology. Here is an example of how our Educational system enjoys fragmenting reality – breaking it up into bits and pieces so it can neatly fit in a particular box – and, apparently, what fits in the Psychology-box does not fit in the Economics-box. It’s mind-boggling to consider that economists may have never had any psychology course at all – that’s like a doctor not being trained as a nutritionist! (Oh wait, that’s the norm... case in point!)

If you take a moment to consider you’ll agree that psychology should be at the basis of our education – because everything we do, we do as a human being; How can we understand politics if we don’t understand human behavior? How can we understand economics if we don’t investigate our inner relationships with giving and receiving? How can we understand the function of the body if we don’t take account of the effect the mind has on it? How can we understand law if we don’t understand the law of our being? In other words: How can we understand the world if we don’t understand ourselves?

So – Meconomics will be a series of blogs investigating how we are maintaining the status quo of the economy on a micro and macro level through applying/living out the same logic, the same reasoning, the same models in every day life, whether it pertains to decision making, relationships, community living, self-image, socializing, parenting, siblings and so on and so forth.

If you have any ideas for topics to include in this series, feel free to leave a comment so I can dedicate a blog to it as part of the series. Let’s cover new ground, new ways of looking at economics, new ways of looking at ourselves – so we can become aware of how we are in fact, through the principle ‘as above, so below’ creating the rules of the game that determines human life on Earth in so many ways.

Read More