Message-ID: <19960921153743735.AAA157@smtp.persocom.com.br> Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 15:37:50 +0000 From: Joaquim Moura <mailto:joaquim.moura@PERSOCOM.COM.BR> Subject: Re: Internet to save the world To: Multiple recipients of list DEVEL-L <mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
At 21/09/96, Dear Kerry and Gary have written:KERRY: >If we are so sure that global cooperation is possible, then maybe the place
to start is >right here at the "quantum leap". If the net is really as wonderful as our imaginations >persuade us it is, we should try to develop its potential according to the many >lessons we have learned about how not to 'develop' other wondrous parts of our world. >It seems clear to me that thinking globally means acting - yea, even talking - slowly. >It means (not in reference to this particular thread, and certainly not in reference to >Joachim's decade-long campaign!) Quit Rushing the Job!
GARY: >****The place to start being mindful is at the quantum leap. Yep. I
>couldn't agree with you more...
_________________________________________________________________________Dear Friends,
about the "lessons we have learned about how not to 'develop' other wondrous parts of our world" refers to older times, when "development professionals" (from priests to Peace Corps young volunteers, from sanitation engineers, teachers and medicine doctors to International Monetary Fund-World Bank economists and nuclear plants vendors) arrived before "developed" commercial culture to the "wondrous parts of our world". Then, underdevelopment also meant cultural virginity (I mean: without TV and its main features: ads, "canned" movies and soap operas).
But now - at least for most "developing" countries - the problem is really very different from those old times (more than 10 or 30 years ago). Now even the poorest urban boy or girl (from an urban population parcel that increases every day) knows what an NIKE shoes mean for their group, as longs for an L&M cigarette or for a crack pipe, a Coca-Cola, a spray ink can or a M-16 gun. So this is the current situation: the "underdeveloped" populations of the "developing" countries know and long for the gadgets of the "developed" world (mainly American gadgets). And this fact menaces their peculiar identities and specific contribution for human cultural diversity and future development. In this scene, we - the people involved in community/international development and already participating in the World Wide Nervous System - should "Rush the Job", because (1) we are no more so "ingenuous" and unaware about the facts that prompted you to kindly alert us; and (2) "time is the critical factor" (Peter Drucker), and you would agree with me if you see what is happening here in Brazil with nature, with society, with culture. Mindfulness cannot be the same as Actionless. Of course we shall be mindful - with everything - but not paralyzed. And from this southern point-of-view, I perceive that the collaboration that should exist between us is still very incipient, slow and inconsistent.
Yours, J. ____________________________________________________________
Below, the latest message from GARY BERLIND
>Kerry wrote:
>
>>Gary:
>>
>>> ... my ocean-polluting and
>>> mercilessly time-sucking computer appears finally to be good for one thing
>>> that I'm not ashamed of, i.e., letting like-minded souls find each other so
>>> that efforts and thoughts may proceed towards solutions. Of course, it
>>> might have been better if problems that were caused by our technological
>>> and earth-plundering societies had never occurred, so that we didn't need
>>> to network together to solve the problems, but I guess c'est la vie...
>>>
>>Here's a thought experiment: if this siliconized epitome of high
>>technology can reveal its better side, then any other tech might also
>>have its _appropriate_ use.
>
>**Kerry: I was surprised that I was able so easily to acknowledge the
>"upside" of my "STS" (silicon time sucker). And you raise an interesting
>question regarding the appropriate use of other technologies. For one
>thing, most of them are here already, so if positive uses can be found for
>them, then it may be a best choice to try to use them to help improve
>things,if we can, being careful that the benefits outweight the
>risks/costs.
>
>However, the same silliness and temptations that made us misuse them in the
>first place somehow remain attached to the beasties, whether they be five
>pound newspapers or Nukes or even computers. So I agree with you strongly,
>that haste is not a a good thing, nor are the other stupidities we've shown
>ourselves to be prone to as a species. And I for one get bad feelings when
>I see people trying to use technology, willy-nilly, to solve economic and
>social problems, because it seems intuitively to me like throwing kerosene
>on a fire to put it out.
>So everybody certainly needs to be careful, which is like asking for the
>moon, in many ways, because most people hardly know what careful means.
>Consciousness would be helpful too.
>
>> Now, looking back over the battlefield of Nukes,
>>and PCBs and SSTs and 8-lane highways and 5-pound newspapers and TCPs and
>>so on, one has to ask: On what basis did we get so polarized that we had
>>to be 'for' or 'against' such innovations, as if there could not
>>possibly be any mitigating aspects?
>> Obviously the fault lies not in the machinery, but in ourselves.
>>Their development was _rushed_, in the specific sense that noone waited
>>for consequences to become evident before 'progressing' to a yet
>>higher, more intricate, more interfering _less understood_ achievement.
>
>***You sound like a bit of a Jerry Manderite yourself, so hello. Mander
>(cf. "In the Absence of the Sacred", 1991) makes a very strong arguent that
>virtually *all* technologies weren't worth getting involved in *a*t*
>a*l*l*, because the downside costs were sooooooooo big. Since he's made a
>believer out of me, I feel that it's a shame we got polarized about being
>for or against such innovations. I'd rather have everybody _against_ 'em!
>And I think it would be of value if *everybody* had a chance to hear his
>(Mander's) viewpoints. I think a large part of the problems we face in all
>of this are educational issues. Education may come from communication.
>And that's one of the ways that I think the Internet can help. May the
>best ideologies/philosophies (note that I use the plurals here) survive!!!
>>
>>> >
>>> > But I think these issues will be soon concerning the developed
>>> > countries as well... And I hope that the dominant attitude of
>>> > using Internet just as a mean to exchange resource information or
>>> > job opportunities will soon change to some kind of interactive
>>> > interchange between us, promoting this "quantic leap" we and our
>>> > children need so much!
>>>
>>> *** I think this quantic leap is happening as we speak. And it's happening
>>> on more levels than just the Internet. But the Internet may really be key,
>>> because it has the potential of being the communications glue that holds it
>>> all together, at the grass roots level, i.e., the people.
>>
>>Might it therfore be possible to make our haste in this particular
>>revolution somewhat more slowly and deliberately? To take some of this
>>oh-so-preciously-overvalued time-stuff and spend it on understanding and
>> thoughtfulness, even as one _had_ to do in the days of pen and ink (even
>>as then one regretted not walking a mile to visit face to face...), to
>>contemplate before 'communicating'?
>> If we are so sure that global cooperation is possible, then maybe the
>>place to start is right here at the quantum leap. If the net is really as
>>wonderful as our imaginations persuade us it is, we should try to
>>_develop_ its potential
>>according to the many lessons we have learned about how not to 'develop'
>>other wondrous parts of our world. It seems clear to me that thinking
>>globally means acting - yea, even talking - slowly. It means (not in
>>reference to this particular thread, and certainly not in reference to
>>Joachim's decade-long campaign!) Quit Rushing the Job!
>
>****The place to start being mindful is at the quantum leap. Yep. I
>couldn't agree with you more...
>>
>>
>>kerry
>>mailto:astingsh@ksu.edu
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>Gary Berlind (Berkeley, CA)
mailto:>gberlind@crl.com >Q: "Why was the Creator able to build the Universe in only six days?"
>A: "Because he didn't have an installed base."
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Joaquim Moura - Partners of the Americas Youth and Citizenship Development Commission SHCGN 713 - Bloco I - apt. 202 - Brasilia DF - 70760-739 - Brasilvisit our site and meet us, our efforts and results: http://webwrite.com/partners.bsb-dc Environmental Education + Health + Culture + Income Generation +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++