My previous blog (‘the more we have, the more we fight change’) made me realise that the opposite is also true: The less you have, the more likely you will embrace Change.
Some political parties actually leverage on that thought. Unfortunately, the have-nots assume they vote for Change, and then see that they just voted for someone to claim Power.
Although communists, socialists and social-democrats are usually among the first to call for Change (read: Power), they fight Change like any Conservative party – or Trade Union.
Essentially, any political party is a ‘conservative’ party as its main goal is to gain, maintain or retain Power.
The current refugee crisis is another example of fighting and embracing Change. The German Chancellor may be very right that Germany needs to embrace Change as it needs cheap labour in its “near” future. However, that labour could easily have been sourced from neighbouring EU countries of which many have high unemployment.
Her embracing of genuine and economic refugees has now created a human drama. It also created a backlash – or fight – of Europeans afraid to lose houses, jobs and welfare towards immigrants. Essentially, the same pie needs to be shared with many more people and thus everybody gets less and “loses”. Except for the newcomers: the less you have, the more you embrace Change.
Current unemployment may be peanuts compared to our jobless future society. Many people will have enormous difficulties to embrace that Change: workers, families, trade unions and politicians. It may not be a topic to win the hearts of voters: “expect less”. Our society is mostly built on MORE = BETTER.
To some extent, future politicians may be able to sell a future of LESS = MORE. One side of the equation – LESS – hardly needs any explanation. Embracing this kind of Change will be very difficult for the “haves” in our societies.
Future societies are likely to elect parties into Power that promise to fight this Change even when its future is inevitable.
Centuries of taxing labour rather than machinery and/or capital will finally result in a nearly total ousting of labour and a replacement by 24/7 robotics. No more trade unions negotiating more pay and less working hours.
It’s likely that such Change could cause decades of Chaos before an Equilibrium is found. It makes sense to assume that Earth’s population would decline significantly, either mandatory or voluntary or both (eg, subsidies). Only then the individual slice of the pie can increase again.
To some extent, I’ve already embraced this future of Less = More although not wholeheartedly as there is still no monthly tax credit coming my way. Moreover, I’m blessed and fortunate that I’m able to spend my time in a meaningful way. Not having a goal in Life is devastating. Not having a future in Life is even far worse. I count my blessings with 30,000 page views on 10 March 2016.
A decade ago, my personal equilibrium became unsustainable. For years, I have fought the pressure to change. Some inevitable events finally enforced my change. Since I stopped fighting this change, my life has become so much easier. Embracing change has brought peace of mind and resulted in accepting Life as it is: full of Change.
Change (1991) by Lisa Stansfield
artist, lyrics, video, Wiki-1, Wiki-2
If I could change the way I live my life today
I wouldn’t change a single thing
‘Cos if I change my world into another place
I wouldn’t see your smiling face
Note: all markings (bold, italic, underlining) by LO unless in quotes or stated otherwise.