the wise enter, the fools leave

There are two ways to take that title, and you will have to make up your own mind as you read this. Think of a building, think of people entering and leaving. Are we talking about the same man, the wise transformed to fool? Or different people, as the wise enters so a fool leaves?

I am going to write about my experience with The Next Edge, a facebook group curated by David Hodgson, but this could apply to any group that is exploring the frontier of self-organisation. Three caveats.

First, it may appear damning, a collection of complaints, a list of failures, but I trust the generous reader to align to the purpose of this post. Hence the formerly entitled "we're doomed!" has been replaced with the knife-edge title that the reader must decide upon, as s/he reads. Just like the observations listed below were experienced at the time, the opportunities lost or gained presently. What may be skim-read as yet another pseudo-intellectual paper of ideas, was actually experienced by people in real time, with plenty of opportunity to decide presently, consciously, as to what to do, simply. It is in these instances, as we read, as we listen, do we exert the power needed to align us and bring a better world from us.

Second, I had planned to leave this document at the end of my time at the group as way of explanation, but this smacks too much of adolescent behaviour, the scream of self-expression and immediate slamming of door without having the courage to face the response. This is not like that at all, though I risk the accusation by denying it. I am not afraid of response, indeed welcome it, even if it risks an immediate, knee-jerk response, a negative reaction to what may appear to be my rejection. The rejection, if there is any, is of the group dynamic, of the role I played, for I see all the participants as marvellous, well-meaning, insightful and powerful in many and different ways beyond my vista. So I post this one week or so before I leave, which coincides with the time I leave Madeira. And in case this is thought melodramatic (after all, who cares who enters and leaves a bar in some virtual town on the frontier of self-organisation?), it is a return to the respectful, slow way I entered the group.

Third, I know this will read too slow, appear to go into too much unnecessary detail for many, especially the younger amongst us. I am fully aware of the overwhelming "resolution" of awareness that comes with age, something which exasperated me when I was in my twenties when reading the extensive apologies and caveats in so many substantial texts. At least this is only a stand-alone chapter. Nevertheless, this material is useful for me to summarise and describes the kind of group we shall one day experience. Thank you for your patience, the timing of your attention.

a change of plan!

I started writing about various points... but when I returned to it, I found myself reluctant. They were less points and more overweight suitcases. And if I am reluctant to write, I can only assume it won't make for good reading. So -- bugger it all! I'm just going to write quite lightly. This is not to say the experience hasn't been significant or deep, only they don't transfer well to retrospective post writing.

So here are my points.

I am used to people making things heavier than they are. This stifles movement, it cloaks spirit, it obfuscates trust, reduces flow. So, keep it light!

If people respond positively, presently, continuously, then there is a chance of a "critical fantasy chain reaction", another description from another link on the wall. This is the beginning of it. If we enter too early into how and what, things get bogged down. So, the trick is inspiration, enlightenment, collective realisation, and *then* the practicalities. We need to have some shared sense of an ideal, close enough in time for it to mean something. For me, this means a week. We need to get skillful in achieving idealistic objectives in a week. This is the benchmark by which social movements progress. Otherwise, flash mob reactance will distract us, and blue-sky thinking will seduce us.

There is always opportunity within the collective present. Always. The trick is noticing it, teasing it out perhaps, or just pointing as quickly as possible when it appears, like a bird landing on the ledge outside. The trick is being present enough to listen, to look up from whatever concerns you chronically, to notice it. The trick is to avoid being numbed by people appealing for attention, pointing at this-that-thenextthing all the time.

Aha is the way I roll. Seriously. Kids hone your skill with their questions, their attitude, with their lack of history and knowledge. You can't rely on stock answers, because each inquiring mind is different and the situation too. You must deal with attitude, otherwise one has to enforce through "authority". You can't rely on previous experience because the kids are naturally present and future-orientated. And you can't rely on established knowledge because you end up talking to yourself, with a bunch of sheep following or reluctant wolves. We adults are made of the same stuff, though we tend to attach to repeated behaviours, accept status quo, rely too much on shared history, and often virtualise our engagement to an exchange of information. Ho--friggen-hum.

I don't like to repeat myself -- who does? This turns me into an automaton, my grip on an idea becomes tighter, I become deaf to genuine response, and I find myself contributing to an escalation in the overal noise level. Not good.

I do not like when I object to another person's singular item. An item is merely a point in the constellation of their thought, and I would prefer to engage the whole system of who they are. This might be impossible in the fast moving stream of The Next Edge facebook wall, then I must trust that it shall take me further to where we need to be. I like white-water, I like the speed, the uncertainty, but not if I end up in a lake when I want to end up in the sea.

I would like to be willing to risk change, even deep personal change, for the betterment of all. This might be possible in significant one-to-one meetings, or master-students relationships, but for mixed collectives, it is feasible to reflect upon one's own ideas only in the result of a social manifestation. A conversation stream is not enough. That is, for the social-self feedback loop to inform us individually, we need to induce a social effect beyond the immediate participants. Thus, action beyond writing to one another. But what do I know? Very little.

If I remain in the stream, I shall become distracted, as I follow the constant stream of links, and attempt to engage where people are at the moment with their theory and lives, which are all too often, abstract, heavily doused in organisation thinking and/or tied to such specific here and now uniqueness elsewhere in the planet I can do nothing about.

At a base level, I have no way of making a living; I assume many participants have alternative means of income. Or at another level, most participants may be satisfied with their efforts in the real world, whereas a few wish to inject urgency into the stream. I do not want to be such a person that puts words to an urgency that is beyond words. I must wait for the level of urgency to rise, which I must dryly admit, will be too late.

I suggested intensive techniques that could accelerate social results. I then shifted from offering complete processes to little games that might alter the means of discourse to some little effect. I am not satisfied with personal influence, none of us should be, but in social result.

I look forward to being part of a "group" whose living edge grows into the space of the newcomer, rather than absorbs the individual into itself. Such a collective may move in the direction of the newcomer, simultaneously spreading its network by the genuine engagement of the perspective and skill and wisdom of individuals. For this to occur, the freshness of engagement with newcomers is essential, and those who listen constitute the living edge of such a collective. Not the talkers, of which I am one. This is one way for wisdom to come to the fore; the alternative is unthinkable.

Even when people volunteered their time, it was not taken up. I suspect this is an indicator of the strong practice of independence, however much the talk of interdependence. Interdependence is not linkage between discrete entities, but the sharing of the same of which we are constituted. I look forward to experiencing the same sense-quality as I have when I engage family, where the beings and doings happen within the "family" and not between discrete units.

Experiments in following the follower, thus making the follower leader, failed. The leading follower dithered, their word and deed mismatched, and I ended up bumping into them. I attempted to take the next step for that person, towards the goal they had set themselves, but I felt like a nag. Subsequent reminders, or attempts to help that person fulfil their word, met with no response. Having gone mad with it when engaging people in the real world for a year and a half, I only wish to engage others where word and action meet. Here is honour! Here is a target for our respect!

There is a lot of talk of whole systems, global economics, or pervasive systems which could effect many people if adopted. But I need to have scalable solutions, from present conditions with the people I am engaging now, so that a contiguous subjective experience can stretch from now to some distant future, from the few to the billions. Detached systems thinking is bad for my soul. I need for it to be practical now, for it to make sense now, for me to see the social results now. It is only in the now that it happens. Not later, not at some larger, disembodied, social scale.

Leadership is a very strong meme. A lot of contributors see themselves as leaders more than followers. This sucks. I think the same people might align a lot easier if we thought of ourselves as followers. Pioneers are different from leaders.

A lot of future-orientation, which for some reason is termed future thinking, when of course any kind of thinking, or doing for that matter, is happening now. Yet despite this, the heaviness of reputation, of those we know, blunt the leading edge. It is who we know, not what fits current conditions. I consider this an indicator of a lack of self-discipline.

I've said it before. Such venues still emphasise the talkers, not the listeners. This is the toughest one to crack. We need a means of drawing attention to the silent, unlock the wisdom of space and peace. I know, because I fail at it so much! I started off very respectful and gentle, but as things became clear, I took on the form of a fool, making more noise, attempting experiments that of course would fail. I end up howling at the moon!

If a new contribution repeats something known, then guide the newcomer to enter that stream, but if it is new, this *demands* attention, the *newness* demands attention. And by association, if we are interested in whole systems, the person who came up with the newness, to see if it forms part of a larger system or if it happens to be a single lucky shot in the dark. Both are good. The former might reveal an integrative wisdom.

Plenty of motivational compasses, plenty of private navigation charts, but not enough actual lighthouses, shared points of reference for our future navigation. Lots of knowledge, lots of look-outs, links, and I am meant to make sense of it all. Too exhausting by half! Not enough time to swim! Dance tango! Play Go!

There's a hairbreadth response in our reading which leads to frustration or inspiration, presently. I either read openly, which leads to distraction and spin because there is too much, or I make a judgement. Judgement sounds good, but it leads to the non-reading of an individual's comment in the numbing cast of familiarity OR I attribute it with success *before it is even read*. The collective result of individuals making their own judgements tends to "reputation" in that field (in this case words on a virtual thread). Is there any way out of this? A paradigm shift, a social hack: change in the conditions of that field; in this case, the way people engage in the virtual thread as it pertains to conditions externally, ie manifesting social result. That's our choice: to either succumb to judgement, or we hold ourselves accountable to social result.

A buddhist might say that relativity to self is entirely and equally valid, indeed, subjectively true, and the dialogue proceeds with mutual respect. The problem of our communication gets wicked, when we evaluate one another's evaluations, a comparison of values. What tends to happen is attraction, exaggeration and super positivity, or evasion, again exaggeration and negativity which results in parting. The current movement consists of positive disruption, which is just an elevated description of interruption, which is pretty far from the dynamics of inspiration and real social construction, cohesion, surge, and transformation. More like a hiccup.

One of the worst effects I feel arise in me, is that I appear to be part of a conversation, of a flow, but only when I talk. Although my comments get a "like" here and there, I don't feel enough feedback. This is definitely my problem, because I expect an immediate response from people, throughout my childhood, my young adulthood, and especially my experiences in school as a teacher. This goes for the whole cycle of engagement, whoever is talking or listening, whose-ever line of thought we are following. I am not used to the lack of engagement. And I hate the feeling that arises that I am missing something. It is something that I do not want to be motivating me in my contributions, and I already see it leaking through. Nope, don't want to be "pushing" or "complaining". I must exhibit the self-discipline to be a nobody, regardless of how "important" the thought or feeling within me appears.

A collective can't escape from momentum of current practice, so the social patterns repeat themselves. I have seen little that would avoid the same kind of catastrophe that occurs in any revolution. The replacement by another set of elites, even philosopher kings. There is not enough death, end, completion, job done. Endless multiplication of opinion, constant growth, endless "more". Opinions are encouraged, the are just too "more-ish". And this is leading edge. I was inspired when I joined, to meet so many with similar pieces in our heads, and a lot of good practice. I even thought by 2015, this kind of thinking could be mainstream. But, like everything that is unformed and is in the process of becoming formed, it looks like it will take the form of the institution, of capitalism, ownership, leadership, egoship, individuality, and so on. It does not look good, ladies and gentlemen.

where am i now?

I have edge, that's the truth of it. Perhaps too much point, and not enough edge. Too pointy, too challenging. Not me, per se, but where I am. Anyone experiencing what I have experienced, would make them challenging.

If the Next Edge is a watering hole, I am a crocodile. I got here through the water, not over land.

I have edge, but it only works if people appreciate what is left, not grab on to what has been cut away. They enjoy lean.

I am sticking to the methodology I learned from my school experience: not known, not expert.
1 not known, not standing on letters, on reputation, but drawing attention...
2 not expert, just pointing out the obvious, which does not bear repeating...

The wise man speaks but once. The fool repeats.