Replying to LO29180 --
Dear Organlearners,
Jan Lelie <janlelie@wxs.nl> writes:
>At, you asked us: "Ultimately, i think that it is all those
>who do not embrace the ROL who lead a society into
>anarchy.?" I think it is more complicated - comply-cated, ;-).
[Host's Note: "ROL" is "Rule of Law" ..Rick]
Greetings dear Jan,
Thank you for reponding to that PO (Provocative Opinion), a powerful
device which De Bono brought to the attention of creative thinkers.
I agree with you that understanding anarchy is far more complex than
keeping it at bay with the Rule of Law (ROL). I focussed in LO29166 more
on the relationship between anarchy and ROL as well as how a lack of
learning will destroy civilised conduct in a society .
>An anarchy - in my opinion - is a power struggle: an
>intermediate, transitional state were at least two
>(sub)groups, each with their own set of rules and laws,
>are fighting. These rules and laws are based in a set
>of values and norms. They might also have emerged
>from unconscious desires and wants, repressed feelings
>and emotion. During this anarchy period other rules rule:
>the rule of force, power. When elephants fight, the grass
>suffers. This period of transition might be caused by
>leaders that do not embrace a ROL or by a ROL that
>will lead to transition.
What you have described I can use as example for the dynamics of human
social systems in terms of LEP (Law of Entropy Production). It will employ
concepts such as free energy, the entropy landscape, the bifurcative and
the digestive phases. Prolonged digestive phases cause a small section of
society to become extremely rich and powerful and a large section of
society to become poor and weak. Prolonged bifurcative phases cause a
small section of society to remain fit while a large section of society to
burn itself out. Laws have to be promulgated in an orderly fashion to
prevent this by harmonising disgestions and bifurcations to maintain a
rugged entropy landscape for each member of society. These laws then have
to be respected by all, i.e, the ROL.
There is a serious MM (Mental Model) that a complexer interpretation of a
regular phenomenon replaces a previous simpler interpretation. If
physicits ever could teach anyone something of physics, it is to become
aware of this MM. For example, people generally think that Quantum
Mechanics (QM) and Relativistic Mechanics (RM) replaced Newtonian
Mechanics (NM). It is not the case. NM is as valid as ever before for the
macroscopic world in which Newton discovered it. What QM and RM really
did, were to point out its limitations -- spareness ("quanity-limit"), one
of the 7Es (seven essentialities of creativity). QM showed that NM failed
in the atomic world. RM showed that NM failed in the cosmic world.
It is the same with ROL. All the new kinds of abstract thinking do not
undo ROL. They will merely help us to discover the limitations of ROL. One
of the limitations of ROL is that it needs authentic learning to be kept
alive and embraced in the heart.
I think self that society has become so complex that its law makers, its
law applicators and its law abiding citizins cannot cope any more with it
by simplistic thinking. The ROL is of utmost necessity to prevent anarchy,
but society cannot understand it any more with simplistic thinking. It
forgot to catch up on ROL by its learning. Let me use myself as example.
As a young man since 1965, during the height of apartheid, I heard a few
members of the opposition parties sometimes critisising the ruling
apartheid party for not minding the ROL. I myself had no education on the
ROL so that I had only a vague perception what it meant. I did not think
ROL to be essential to the social dynamics of humans. This kept on for
some dozen years until I studied the very autobiography of Anwar Sadat. He
explained the ROL and its importance in such a clear manner that it hit me
like a hammer in front of my eyes. He wrote that he himself came to this
insight after dozens of years in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, REFLECTING deeply
and originally on anarchy versus proper government. I think it was eaxctly
the same with our past president, Nelson Mandela.
The heart felt rule of many cowboys are not that of ROL, but that of the
Rule of Guns (ROG). ROG is no substitute for ROL. ROG is based on an
offense to counteract offense -- an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth
(according to Moses) and a bullet for a bullet according to modern legend.
It is indicated by "thumbs on the belt" body language, the hands close to
the guns. Sweet talk cannot disguise the offense pending, nor can it make
ROL into ROG.
During the hearings of the TRC (Truth and Reconcilation Commission) headed
by the chairmen bishop Desmond Tutu, Nobel laureate for peace, South
Africans heard for the first time what gruesome anarchy existed "under the
blankets" in South African society. That this did not boil over the
blankets in total anarchy, was by the grace of God and not the
international sanctions leveled against South Africa. That only caused
untold misery to the millions who could handle it least.
South Africa is known for its apartheid escapades between 1948 and 1992.
The TRC brought an immense healing in our country by learning some of the
truth. Consider two countries, the one known during most of the twentieth
century for its imperialistic escapades and the other for its
corporalistic escapades. Imagine the shock of the nations of those two
countries when some of this "anarchy under the blankets", whether for
imperialistic or corporalistic reasons, becomes known by TRC hearings in
each like in South Africa. Do these nations have the guts to face such TRC
hearings?
Dear Jan, the colonialistic escapades of the Netherlands came to an end
with the beginning of the nineteenth century. There are no eye witnesses
any more to attest to the "anarchy under the blankets". The only thing
which we can rely upon, are historical documents such as directives,
reports, letters and voyage descriptions. Would your own nation be willing
to subject itself to TRC hearings and its dealings with South America,
South Africa and East Asia, letting historians present the case of those
who suffered? I wonder.
Peace and healing cannot be obtained where forgiveness cannot be given.
(Thank you Dan Chay for bringing up the topic of forgiveness in our LO
dialogue.) Forgiveness is impossible where ignorance to "anarchy under
the blankets" reigns. Humans have to live by rules and not instinct since
they are thinking beings. Intelligence overrides instinct. Humans can
easily distort the entropy landscape of society. Laws created by human
thinking are intended to maintain its ruggedness. Human thinking makes it
even possible to disregard such laws, i.e., to sidestep the Rule of Law
(ROL).
I feel such an ass that only in 1977 I began to see the essence of ROL in
social conduct. But I will be forever thankful to Anwar Sadat that he made
me aware of my ignorance. After that I began to learn from many other
biographies how great leaders of nations and other organisations kept them
on track of lawfull and orderly conduct. Thank you Don Dwiggens for
sending me the rare and valuable autobiography of Benjamin Franklin (BF)
as a gift (the only copy now in South Africa I think!) From it I learned
once again why BF was such a great founding father of the US. The respect
in his heart for the ROL is like that of later comers like Sadat or
Mandela in Africa.
One of the unsung heroes of ROL is the late Jan Smuts, South African
premier who lost the general elections in 1948 to the ideology and policy
of apartheid. He became the "father of holism" when he introduced it by
his epic book "Holism and Evolution" (1926). Already in the early twenties
of the 20th century, as a trained lawyer and also as a military general
playing a pivotal role in WWI, he warned the politicians of victorious
countries that they were playing with fire. The peace treaty of Versailles
would resulted in only one thing -- increasing anarchy. As a statesman he
pleaded with the political leaders of these countries to avoid WWII.
Minding the laws of their own country, but ignoring the laws of other
countries, would trigger the anarchy of WWII. But it fell on deaf ears and
thus WWII came.
WWIII will be the same because of sidestepping the ROL. Whoever thinks of
ROL as sidestepping the deeper values of the human condition is playing
with fire in a huge depositary of explosives. The resulting explosion and
anarchy in society have the same destructive effects, hurting too many far
beyond descriptions by any words. I am not sidestepping the question who
leads an anarchy with a passionate plea. I am merely representing the
viewpoints of wise leaders who brought their nations great fame.
>If these situation are not well managed, controlled - or
>should i say - lead (and i mean that the leaderships are
>aware of the paradoxical and self generating nature of the
>processes. In a way, the powerful move closer to the fire,
>thereby increasing their own shadow on the wall and in
>this movement, the small shadow of the power poor merges
>and seems to grow) it will terminate in a short period of
>anarchy, were power is distributed by the use of force,
>power. The energy, the tension is released.
Dear Jan, it is a pity that i could not quote all your descriptions
between the two which I have quoted. It is most supportive of thinking
anew in terms of the dynamics of LEP (Law of Entropy Production).
But as in LO29166 i want to bring this reply back to learning. I think
that our society has become so complex that the days are gone for ever to
rely on leaders with leadership like Franklin, Sadat and Mandela to keep
anarchy at bay with their commitment to ROL.
Many more people of society need to know about ROL as well as that the
less people know about ROL, the closer that society moves to the abyss of
anarchy. Formalised learning in an educational institution of this will be
pretty much worthless, if not aggrevating. They just not provided an
environment conducive to authentic learning. Or as Einstein once
exclaimed: "Thank God that schools no not kill the creativity of all the
pupils."
Where will we find an environment conducive to authentic learning? Within
a Learning Organisation (LO). In other words, in the complex modern
societies we are in great need of LOs to prevent our societies from
slipping into anarchy. Zimbabwe has slipped into anarchy. The signs were
already there 20 years ago. When a leader (like Mugabe) lets willingly
some 20 000 innocent people be murdered to further his own interests and
that of his cohorts, that man will do it again, sooner or later.
>From eye witnesses i heard that there are still some small "safe havens"
which give support as quietly as possible to victims of the anarchy, but
the load is far more than they can cope with. We pray for them that they
will outlive this anarchy. What struck me about these "safe havens" upon
further questioning, is that they all seem to be "tacit LOs".
It makes me think. Who leads a civilised society?
With care and best wishes
--At de Lange <amdelange@postino.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.