PDF
History- Is the world driven by idealism (or pragmatism), by reasoned power and greater wisdom (or by money power and consensus wisdom)?
- How much money power can ever be engaged by giving things away for free, or by non-profits, or by open source software?
- Is there some midpoint between maximal profit capitalism and minimal profit philanthropy?
- If the numbers were 1% of all corporate profits were channeled to/operating towards philanthropic or progressive ends (responsibility-advancing, or irresponsibility-correcting), and the other 99% of profit were retained with half (or 49.5%) behaving irresponsibly, and the other half (or 49.5%) behaving responsibly (ethically, but not necessarily focused on looking out for the irresponsibility of the 49.5% irresponsible), then would irresponsibility have responsibility outfunded 49.5% to 1%?
- Is it possible that just as we have transitioned from an era of dominance in physical power to dominance in economic power (which transition both maximized and transformed physical power), that we are now transitioning from an era of dominance in economic power to dominance in reasoned power (which transition will both maximize and transform economic power)?
- Is power good or evil?
- If we looked at the systems of human collaboration and interrelationships with corporate, philanthropic, non-profit, and social enterprise organizations as having three segments (inputs, processes and outputs); what is our approach to considering how well current human systems are doing: do we just consider outputs of collaboration? or do we consider both collboration outputs and the process used to obtain them? or do we consider all three (inputs, processes, and outputs)?
- If capitalism is structuring human interactions with legalizing the private ownership of the efforts of others in order to create incentives for industrious efforts, is it possible that sometimes the process is bad while the output is good, or that the process and output is good but the inputs are badly treated (e.g. unjustly exploiting humanity and the environment)?
- Do new metrics like TBL create the needed change, or must corporations be the change they (their leaders and other constitutents) wish to see?
- Is capitalism fully matured, and if not, is its maturing involving a choice between changing how capitalism operates and an alternative of major social or ecological catastrophes?
- How does capitalism mature?
- Might it be one corporation at a time?
- Have folks read The Soul of Capitalism by William Greider?
- Is profit maximization at odds with social goals (or advancing them) if it brings to the table the lowest cost laborors of foreign countries, hence including them perhaps for the first time in current world economic power structures?
- Is the current world economic power structure more powerful not only when more are included, but when they are also included more fairly?
- If there is not equal protection for workers' rights, is that a problem (especially given the greater likelihood of unjust exploitations with those at a great distance who we do not know)?
- If workers' rights globally is a problem, how big is the problem, and does it get fixed?
- How does it get fixed?
- How much political power is engaged by money power over democratic voices?
- How much consensus wisdom through media is engaged by money power over democratic voices?
- When humans are collaborating at a global level (Kevin Danaher suggests that 51 of the 100 largest economies are not goverments but global corporations), can we rely on social and environmental protections generated at national levels against global social or environmental problems?
- If corporations are extremely powerful, do they perhaps do both the most good and bad in the world?
- Is the social entrepreneur with a world-changing business idea perhaps most world changing if his/her world-changing business idea is embodied in a progressive business vehicle?
- Do entrepreneurial systems support social entrepreneurship?
- Have the corporations that exercise both minds and hearts today been celebrated and analyzed in a coherent fashion to provide a model (and systems) for world-changing through business?
- If not, how does this happen?
- Is it possible that a new model of a corporation, with a new Magna Carta, is also in order - following the logic of not just turning some portion of profits towards reason/progress, but turning the mind and heart of the business towards reason/progress?
- Is a world dominated by money power generated by corporations that focus narrowly on profit oft' to the exclusion of social and environmental responsibility the world we want to live in?
- Is Frank Dixon correct that public corporation executives today really don't have much choice to be responsible because of the system they operate in?
- Is there a way to grapple with the money power (sometimes greed, sometimes fear, sometimes tradition) that drives world powers today … grappling in order to advance reason/progress/joy/sustainability instead of solely monetary profit?
- Is it possible that this is already happening in small ways?
- Does the energy-redirecting martial art of Aikido give any clues?
- Is it possible that the world is already being changed not so much "one person at a time" but instead "one corporation at a time", Aikido style?
- Is it possible that such, "Aikido Activism", when celebrated and advanced could accelerate a behavioral shift at the origins of power, to radiate and diffuse more aware and progressive activities throughout much to all of business - hence to government, media and society?
- Is it possible that Aikido Activism is pragmatic enough to empower progressive change?
- Is "giving it away" idealism sufficiently relevant to where the world is today to truly transform it, or is it possible that transformation will come by joining the current game and winning it, with the goal of transforming the game to an evolutionally advanced game in which winning aligns economic reward with environmental and social responsibilities?
- If copyright and copyleft ( http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/copyleft.html ) are extremes akin to maximal and minimal profit, is the right money-power-grappling mind-cum-heart copyrights approach somewhere in the middle?
- Will someone patent a process of worldchanging and hold worldchangers hostage?
- Would an "Aikido Copyright" (embracing the concept of Aikido Activism) be helpful for online discussions about transforming the world?
- Have you found the ideas shared on Omidyar Network's website ( http://www.omdiyar.net/home/ ) as interesting as perhaps those in the most recent book you paid for? (I have)
- Can collaborative world-changing discussions be enhanced by targeting central themes of future power that emanate from both mind and heart, vetted through democratic criticism, inspired collectively from the personal challenges and success of many?
- Can a Magna Carta for wholistic social enterprises (responsible in ouputs, inputs, and processes) be written collaboratively with ideas shared under such an "Aikido Copyright", and so establish/evolve a more common model and system of social investment and entrepreneurship?
AikidoActivism.xwiki.com Web Home. Content subject to the Aikido Copyright.
