DocWatts

How about the scam where companies which rely on the ruthless exploitation of labor try to sell employees on the idea that if they work hard and apply themselves, they'll be taken care of. On several occasions I could have been killed (or been very seriously injured) during a few year stint as a low wage, non-Union Utility worker who regularly had to access people's property in rough, low income neighborhoods. Quickly learned that if one is in a disadvantaged socio-economic position, you will almost certainly be exploited unless you take deliberate steps to prevent that from happening. Not my story, but the shameful way that this Frito-Lay employee was treated also seems relevant here.

As far as things an ordinary person can actually do in the face of global systemic problem, putting pressure on governments to treat this problem with the seriousness it deserves (as an existential threat to human civilization), is a start. Which means that high consciousness people need to do more to take responsibility for societal problems, and work to shift the center of gravity for thier societies towards Green as quickly as possible. In places like the United States, it means working to fix a faltering democracy that's been severely weakened by Bad Actors who are eroding democracy to further thier self interests, so that the system can become functional enough to deal with systemic issues like Climate Change. While buying an Electric Car or switching to a Vegan diet are great, if you actually want to have a societal impact that means by necessity become engaged in politics and interfacing with the rest of society.

Might be in the minority here, but 20 minute meditation sessions for an absolute beginner who's just learning the practice might be a little much. For my part, I might not have stuck with it if I had jumped in to 20 minute sessions from the very beginning, rather than starting with short sessions and adding a minute or so every week. Whatever session length you decide to start with, just make sure that you're consistent about it, and make it part of your routine (working out is a good analogy).

@mandyjw It's more about each Stage having thier own transcendent Truths, which are informed by a particular meta-ideology, that can speak to people from beyond the context it was created in. Which is why something like The Brothers Karamazov, created close to two centuries ago from an SD-Blue paradigm, is still a powerful work that speaks to people to this day. But at the same time, being able to actually understand the work requires some knowledge of the context it was created in (18th century Russia), so knowledge of Spiral Dynamics can still be very informative. Obviously using Spiral Dynamics as the only lens to look at a work would be highly reductive, but for putting a work in to some sort of a broader context it can be highly valuable. And it's also undeniable that certain works can also be looked at as embodying certain worldviews or meta-ideologies. Something like the Illiad or the Oydessy is a good example of this, as it's almost impossible to make sense of the work in a modern context without knowing the system of values that were present in the Classical Greek world.

Could you imagine if the Republican Party were forced to try to market itself on how its political platform would somehow make life better for ordinary people, or on any policy accomplishments whatsoever. The idea itself is laughable

While the notion of Holons certainly comes from SD-Yellow, Yellow thinking itself can be characterized by the internalization of dialectical thinking (Spiral Dynamics itself being a dialectical model). With both systems thinking and developmental thinking being applications of this dialectic. Or more broadly, Yellow can also be thought of as a successful integration of dialectical thinking to the pluralism and relativism of Green, in a way that makes room for other wordviews by dropping Green's claims to exclusivity and completeness (while at the same time holding on to the compassion that emerges at Green).

Tricky situation. Short of a vaccine mandate (which is a non-starter here in the States), coercive measures which make proof of vaccination a requirement to travel or participate in civic life will likely be the only way to get though to a significant portion of vaccine hesitant people. The rub being that such measures are possible only when and where Republicans (who could care less if their constituents are dying) do not hold political power, and that the upcoming 2022 and 2024 elections are looking incredibly tenuous for the slim majorities that Democrats hold in Congress and throughout much of the country. With the unintended side effect that any sorts of coercive measures to incentive vaccines (or mandate basic safety measures during a pandemic) likely to galvanize more low consciousness Voters to go out to the polls in 2022 and 2024. That's of course in addition to the widespread Voter suppression efforts that have been taking place since the Orange Turd was booted from the White House.

To add to that, it's absolutely possible for a superficial veneer of Green to be co-opted by Red, like a Wolf in Sheep's clothing. And while this isn't nearly as prevalent with contemporary Green as it is with Blue (Trump being the perfect empowerment of Red co-opting naive Blue), someone like Jim Jones and The People's Temple Cult is an instructive case study of example of how a similar sort of dynamic can play out among Green.

Even something like Dungeons and Dragons knows enough to separate Intelligence and Wisdom in to two different stats

Also keep in mind that China is a society with 1.4 billion people (nearly a fifth of the world's population), so it's quite natural that in such a large society that development is going to be spread across a wide spectrum. So it's not at all unexpected that Purple, Red, Blue, and Orange would all be represented in such a large sampling of the human population.

An hour in I'm thinking 'yes, of course, isn't a lot of this rather obvious?' That is of course until I stop and remember that the vast majority of people do not think dialectically as a matter of course, and that the ontological and epistemological assumptions which underlie one's worldview are invisible to most people. And that a dialectical modality itself is highly privileged way of looking at the world, whose availability hinges to a huge extent on getting Lucky when it comes to the Birth Lottery. Not sure where exactly I was going with this, but I do appreciate the obvious effort that Leo puts in to his work, and the craft that it takes to take quite complex ideas and present them in approachable ways.

I think Dostoyevsky's forward in Notes From Underground (which was also quoted at the beginning of American Psycho) seems prescient on how sick social structures and maladjusted cultural values create sociopathic people. "Nevertheless it is clear that such persons as the writer of these notes not only may, but positively must, exist in our society, when we consider the circumstances in the midst of which our society is formed. He is one of the representatives of a generation still living. In this fragment, entitled "Underground," this person introduces himself and his views, and, as it were, tries to explain the causes owing to which he has made his appearance and was bound to make his appearance in our midst."

The fact that this isn't obvious to everyone to everyone on the Progressive Left hurts my brain... Brings to mind something equally silly from a few years back when some outspoken Greens accused AOC of "co-opting" the Green New Deal by trying to include it in the policy platform of Democratic Party, because the Green Party came up with the idea first.

And to add to that, the ability to empathize with forms of mistreatment that one hasn't experienced themselves is directly tied to one's ability to adopt other perspectives. So it's not at all surprising that someone who's at a level of development that's quite limited in its ability to take in other perspectives would find it inconceivable that the nice police officers in thier town are somehow part of a system that treats people who are of different race and socio-economic class very differently than how they themselves are treated. Since they've never had any sort of negative interactions with the Police or the Criminal Justice system, it's quite natural that someone with a limited ability to take on other perspectives would assume that anyone who is mistreated by the police must have done something to deserve it. Either that or the bad behavior is caused by one or two "bad apples", rather than as symptom of a systemic problem (since systems thinking only emerges at later stages of development). Add to that, in the minds of people at this level of development the Police and Criminal Justice system are thought of as a shield to protect one's group from the Other (ie thr scary parts of society that exist outside of one's in-group).

What I was referring to wasn't his depiction of Dominator vs Growth Hierarchies (which is completely on point). Rather, I was referring more broadly to some of his perceptions of contemporary Green outside of an Academic context, which are somewhat biased by his experiences in Academia. He basically admits as much (that he's developed a bit of a Shadow from his experiences in Academia), during an Interview when the subject of Jordan Peterson was brought up, and how they have some of the same criticisms of Green.

While I have great respect for Ken Wilber and largely agree with much of his philosophy and ethics, I do think that his negative experiences within Academia (who were resistant to many of his ideas) created a Shadow that has prevented him from fully Integrating SD-Green, which is why he demonizes it to some degree. In particular, one gets a sense that he conflates a specific form of somewhat extreme Academic Postmodernism as broadly representative of contemporary Green. Not that this is unique to Wilber, it's a common prejudice among Intellectuals who project an exaggerated importance to Academia on the broader Culture. While Ken Wilber's analysis of Hierarchies is on point, using confusion about Hierarchies as the primary focal point to view the Culture Wars is a highly Reductionist way of looking at such a broad issue. It also overlooks the fact that much of the Culture Wars is something that is intentionally being stoked by Bad Actors who have an interest in exasperating social and cultural divisions to further their own Political or Economic aims.

On the whole, while many of the points that the video essay brings up are fair and valid critiques of Steven Pinker and The New Optimism paradigm, it also shares many of the same limitations that nearly all postmodern deconstruction of Grand Narratives fall in to at some point. Namely that by failing to think Dialectically and Developmentally, and by overlooking the interior aspects of development that gave rise to its own worldview, deconstructive postmodernism is ultimately self undermining. It's only because of the qualitative changes in development that the Enlightenment and Modernity brought about (including Industrialization and Globalization), that the Pluralistic worldview that the video essayist is espousing is even possible in the first place. (To be fair, he does briefly address some of these points in the conclusion of the video). That's not to say said criticism isn't Valid; only that it's partial and perspectival evaluation of the legacy of the Enlightenment and Modernity.

Problem is, that's a straw man characterization of SD-Green. What the vast majority of SD-Green actually wants is actual (rather than empty lip service towards) Equality of Opportunity. Which involves creating Support Structures so that people who are born in to highly inequitable circumstances both have a chance to participate in society and live a life of dignity. Just creating a Meritocracy without mechanisms to give those born in to an unfortunate circumstances a chance to catch up so that they can compete is not true Equality of Opportunity. A good analogy is a game of Monopoly where one player starts the game with ten thousand dollars and a bunch of properties in thier name, and another player starts twenty turns in after most of the properties on the Board have already been bought up by the other players. In no way can the remainder of the game be said to be an actual Competition in any reasonable sense of the word, since who is going to win and who is going to lose is a foregone conclusion based on the differing conditions that each player started the game with. While some degree in Inequity in starting conditions is inevitable because people vary in thier intelligence, wisdom, abilities, and work ethic, much of the inequity is Socially Constructed and self perpetuating because of the way our social institutions are arranged. And that aspect of it we can and should change.

Half of all jobs in America pay less than a Living Wage (less than the $15 an hour Minimum Wage that labor advocates are fighting for). No surprise then that the Median Wage for American workers is around $35k a year. And little wonder why younger generations that are bearing the brunt of this economic austerity aren't buying homes and starting families...

A large portion of the Root Causes behind this resurgence of White Nationalism can be traced to the demographic and economic anxiety of a dominant group whose privileged status has been steadily chipped away at over the last half century. The implicit motivation behind contemporary Right Wing populism stems in large part from whites no longer being shielded from the types of economic deprivation and social exclusion that have been prevalent for communities of color throughout most of American History. Combine a declining standard of living in the US with whites no longer monopolizing all of the economic opportunity within the country, and the result is an undercurrent of alienation and anger, as a subset of white Americans feel that thier country has somehow drifted (or was stolen) away from them. "This isn't supposed to be happening to me. I'm white!", is a decent summation of this mindset.

I meant in the sense that by transcending a merely ego-centric (Red) and socio-centric worldview (Blue), it became the first Stage capable of a adopting a global (or non ethno-centric) perspective. The two most prominent ethical paradigms of the Enlightenment, namely Utilitarianism and Deontology, were couched in an ethics which treated human beings as moral agents with intrinsic value, regardless of thier nationality, race or gender. Compare that to the moral systems of the previous stage, where moral concern was only extended to one's own ethnicity or religion, and it's not hard to see the Orange systems of ethics as a huge advance over thier predecessors (even if it was the case that in many ways Orange fell far short of actually living up to these lofty ideals). Hence why this is the first developmental stage where the notion of Human Rights is conceived of, and where we start to see Liberation movements (such as Women's Suffrage and the Abolition of Slavery). All of which would later be taken up and be more fully realized in Green.

Because the excesses of toxic Orange are all around us and obvious to see, it's easy to conflate the worst aspects of excessive Capitalism and gross Materialism for all of Orange. It's worth keeping in mind that the essence of Orange is that it's the very first genuinely world-centric developmental stage, coming as it did from the Enlightenment. And as the first truly world-centric stage, it laid the foundations for so many advances that we take for granted today, such as: Human Rights, Representative Democracy, and a more than doubling of human life expectancy as a result of the Scientific Revolution it unleashed. Deconstructing Myths from SD-Blue that were being used to prop up oppressive Power Structures (such as absolute monarchies) was another genuine accomplishment of Orange. Just because Orange has introduced new problems that can only be solved at the next Stage (like every other SD-Stage), doesn't rob Orange of its many important contributions.

For as much as I appreciate Japanese art and culture that's made its way over to the West, actually living in a country with such a dysfunctional work/life balance seems at least as bad as some worst aspects of living and working in the US.

Assuming something written in the last 20 years counts as 'recent', Ken Wilber's Sex, Ecology, and Spirituality is an easy recommendation

@Leo Gura Agreed. I found Ken Wilber's take on the German Idealist school to be compelling: Namely that they were on the right track, but because they were lacking a contemplative method to verify thier insights, their ideas were reduced to 'mere' metaphysics, and thus they were unable to build the credibility necessary to turn thier ideas to a new paradigm. I would also add the fact that they were unable to communicate thier ideas in a clear, non-convoluted way also contributed to this. Seems like they were sorely lacking what we would call today public intellectuals who could present these ideas in a straightforward way to the public.