Must freedom always come at the expense of something else?
If freedom continually comes at the expense of something else, then what is the net regressive impact on the system down the line?
Throughout the course of history, humans have tried many different variations, as in forms of governance. And there really is no ideal system of governance. Perhaps, it is a kind of system that has seen very little innovation in thousands of years.
Here my sense is, that, that which is important is sometimes forgotten and often overlooked.
It is also my sense that, collectively, we as a species focus too much on security and not enough on innovation.
What I am about to suggest, does not entail that we must now sacrifice security and defense, so that more innovation can be had. I am not asking for sacrificing objectivity.
But, we must think deeply and objectively about:
There really is no such thing as absolute security. In the words of a previous American president, Dwight D. Eisenhower:
"If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom."
"We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security."
I think, we, as a species are making the grave mistake of thinking/believing and acting upon the notion that our collective existence begins and ends at being able to sustain civilization.
I think, that a core focus on security is coming at the expense of enabling the future. As this phenomenon continues, we will always think of security first and everything second. This will place severe limits on our growth prospects.
Growth cannot be had without innovation. And so if we are to safeguard our collective future, then we need to focus that much more on mechanisms by which more innovation can be had.
Source for image above: Research done by Geoffrey West link
If you have absolute security, then it is not something tangible that you can do with. If on the other end, you do not have any security, then you also cannot do anything.
But security is supposed to power a medium whereby all can come and play.
The need is to have more of our efforts, many more of our systems architected in such a way, so that more innovation can be had.
The need is pretty clear for many reasons.
Right now and according to some estimates:
So imagine the possibilities, the opportunities that lay hidden in the collection of and merger of different research in the 99% category.
I've been working on a blogpost, that is going to be a bit more detailed. In this blogpost, I will be focusing on the need for what I refer to as 'true innovation' and the pivotal role eco-systems will increasingly play (working as platforms). If anyone is interested, then I plan to post this blogpost by the mid of December 2015.
Going through the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin.
The autobiography is really interesting and I’m already 1/3 into it.
To quote from wikipedia: “A noted polymath, Franklin was a leading author, printer, political theorist, politician, postmaster, scientist, musician, inventor, satirist, civic activist, statesman, and diplomat.”
Clearly, Benjamin Franklin was an interesting fellow. A very accomplished fellow and I’d say, a great role model.