Doug Rushkoff on the Technologies of...
Jon Lebkowsky: In my recent Worldchanging interview with Paul Hawken and Bill McKibben, we were talking about how to transform the way people think. Some want to do this through policy, others through culture. I think the idea of "rewriting the rules" is what we were getting at, what a lot of us are thinking about, and an important theme here at Worldchanging. It's hard to change the rules when they both emerge from and reinforce a particular context – we assume a real and inflexible reality and don't necessary see, past our blinders, what we can transform. In closing, can you point to any successful instances of transformation by "changing the rules"?
Doug Rushkoff: The Israelites vanquishing the Egyptian gods, escaping a death cult, and using the new medium of text to write their own laws. That was a great example. It worked really well for a while, too, but literacy was much too limited, and its implications didn't really trickle down to the entirety of the people.
Reality Hackers (the early Mondo 2000) attempted to show people how tools like computers, networks, and plant hallucinogens are also capable of opening the rule sets to tinkering. Even just recognizing that there are rules in place is a huge step in the right direction.
But then the object of the game is not simply to scrawl graffiti on the existing rules (Adbusters style) but to get in there and change the very premise of the game. And this takes some myth-smashing.
The easiest way to start is to socialize with real people in real spaces. When it's just you and other people, many of the existing rules no longer apply. It's not about buying and selling, or "getting what you need" from someone. It's a real encounter from which an entirely new awareness can emerge.
Sep 29th
More Health Care Professionals Involved...
DOUGLAS JOHNSON: I think it’s important to understand -- and this is an example of it -- that currently in today's world there are more healthcare professionals involved in the design and structuring of torture than there are those who are involved in providing care for survivors.
AMY GOODMAN: Say that again.
DOUGLAS JOHNSON: There are more healthcare people involved in the design and the instrumentation of torture than there are involved in providing healing for the survivors.
AMY GOODMAN: In this country.
DR. STEVEN MILES: No, around the world.
DOUGLAS JOHNSON: In the world.
AMY GOODMAN: Around the world.
DOUGLAS JOHNSON: In the world. And it is, in many times, because healthcare people get engaged and confused by the same ticking time bomb theories that fuel 24 and other fantasy programs, which have unfortunately seem to be the basis of learning for many of our policymakers. It’s fantasy-driven, and it causes people to do stupid things.
AMY GOODMAN: Dr. Miles?
DR. STEVEN MILES: About 130 countries torture, but of the survivors, somewhere between 20% and 50% report seeing a health professional directly involved in supervising the torture. And that doesn’t count the ones who never see the physician who falsely certifies the cause of death as natural causes. So it’s actually around 40% of survivors actually see the health practitioner involved in the torture. And, you know, as Doug said, about 1% of the torture victims in Minnesota are actually getting treatment.
Sep 28th
Alan Greenspan vs. Naomi Klein on the...
AMY GOODMAN: It’s good to have you with us. You worked with six presidents, with President Reagan, with both President Bushes. You worked with President Ford, and you worked with Bill Clinton, who you have called a Republican president; why?
ALAN GREENSPAN: That was supposed to be a quasi-joke.
AMY GOODMAN: Talk about it.
ALAN GREENSPAN: Well, Clinton?
AMY GOODMAN: Yes.
ALAN GREENSPAN: Well, I stated that I’m a libertarian Republican, which means I believe in a series of issues, such as smaller government, constraint on budget deficits, free markets, globalization, and a whole series of other things, including welfare reform. And as you may remember, Bill Clinton was pretty much in the same -- was doing much that same agenda. And so, I got to consider him as someone -- as he described it, we were both an odd couple, because he is a centrist Democrat. And that's not all that far from libertarian Republicanism.
Sep 24th