Change
“Change is inevitable. In a progressive country change is constant”. 1
Which way do you turn to get the change you can believe in…
The 2008 Candidates for the US Presidential Election were surprised, it appears, to this outsider that the slogan ‘change we can believe in’ was adopted by one of the candidates Mr Barack Obama to underpin his 2008 campaign for the American Presidency. Their surprise led Mr John Mc Cain and Mrs Hillary Rodham Clinton to dismiss the idea as ‘simple rhetoric’, a rather fanciful idea, implying essentially that ‘things are always changing’, so what’s new. In a way and to an extent, Mr Mc Cain and Mrs Clinton are both right, change is on going in a progressive society as Benjamin Disraeli tells us. However, it is Mr Barack Obama who appears to see the holistic nature of the issue and its intrinsic link with education. In a democracy, more especially a ‘progressive democracy’ such as the USA, the people are at the very least entitled to ‘change they can believe in’ after all isn’t that the whole point of personal and social change.
On reading the book ‘Who Moved My cheese’ 2 one is struck by the way the writers invite the reader to consider, the daily anxiety and frustration associated with tracking this change. Indeed such tracking is futile unless it is associated with life long and life wide learning, and this is so even if one accepts Disraeli’s premise that change is a constant, and part and parcel of the human condition.
So how do we make the necessary choices, how do we know which way to turn, which road to take if unlearning and relearning is not and integral part of the ‘change’ process. It would appear that Johnson/Blanchard recognise that there is a link between personal development and corporate development as both go through a form of learning and developmental process. The corporate process is somewhat more complex not least because of the abstract and intra personal nature of the group dynamics involved. This scenario becomes more complex still when one considers the multinational nature of many organisations, and societal structures that make up the World and the United States of America today.
The management of this change raises at least three further issues or questions. The first relates to the ‘appropriateness’ of the manager, the self, and for the purposes of this paper, this involves an evaluation by the Citizenry of the holders of public office. The second issue relates to the readiness of those in charge of the ‘machinery of change’ and in most cases involving national interests this is questionable. It is a great many years since Leonard Cohen wrote the lyrics to the song Democracy, with its commentary on ‘the machinery of change’ and still America and the world waits.
‘It’s coming to America first,
the cradle of the best and of the worst.
It’s here they got the range
and the machinery for change
and it’s here they got the spiritual thirst.
It’s here the family’s broken
and it’s here the lonely say
that the heart has got to ope
in a fundamental way:
Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.’ 3
Isn’t this what Barack Obama is talking about and isn’t this exactly what all potential political leaders should be talking about. Thirdly the issue of the readiness of the citizenry (society) to accept the change envisioned comes into question. The difficulty here is that we often think that we have a clear understanding of the media, the printed press and the range of public and private systems that influence all of the citizenry but, unfortunately we do not. Clearly there are many things that one might well change if one had the power to do so but, if there was just one thing that could be changed first, it would need to be the ‘mind-set’ of the printed press and its editors. Without this change can we ever be sure that the change envisioned by Leonard Cohen, that a democracy ‘we can believe in’ will ever come about.
The Current political masters seem intent upon giving us ‘personal identities’, ‘National Insurance Numbers’ which has the planned negative outcome of deepening our sense of individualism and ambivalence toward national identity. Everyone is to blame of course but, if we consider what it means to be British, Irish or American in 2008 then it is fair to say that the education systems and the printed press have to carry their fair share of the blame.
Ambivalence about education and ‘change’ is costing western nations billions and stems in part from the foreseen outcome of 24% (average) of the population having a considerable difficulty with reading and writing skills. When you add to this percentage those who are experiencing difficulty with basic mathematics then the percentage rises to over 40% having a serious problem with literacy skills. 4 Recent press reports tell us how bad things really are and alerts us to the possibility of yet another looming ‘reading war’. After all of the investment in education and the ‘print press’, reading and writing levels are little better now than they were in the 1950’s and no country can afford the indulgence of ‘hand ringing’ in this matter.
So because change is a constant, we are obliged to constantly question if the change we are getting is the change that we need and want. Essentially one must question if it is the sort of change that the citizens can ascribe to generally. Print press editors as shapers of this ‘changing society’, like so many other political leaders appear to see ‘society’ looking back at them when they consult their morning mirror. They must become more proactive and move beyond the notional fear of ‘complaints’ or constantly ‘playing on peoples fears’ which, only serves to cultivate a more litigious society. No nation can afford such self indulgence and yet paradoxically the printed press must remain the guardian of our liberties. Education must become the bye-word of the press because without a meaningful printed press there can be no effective life-long education system. Should this be ignored it will become even more difficult, in time, to answer the question ‘why read’ at all for the 40% + of the population described above. Worse still, the different literacy skills necessary to evaluate and critically analyse other audio and visual information media such as radio, television, video not to mention the 24/7 news channels sharing the airwaves today this % will move way beyond 50% of the citizenry of most western democracies. How can this scenario be presented as change ‘we can believe in’, how can this scenario accommodate all of those people who are in one way or another a bit like Leonard Cohen in his outlook.
‘I’m sentimental, if you know what I mean
I love the country but I can’t stand the scene.
And I’m neither left nor right
I’m just staying home tonight,
Getting lost in that hopeless little screen.
But I’m stubborn as those garbage bags
that Time cannot decay,
I’m junk but I’m still holding up
this little wild bouquet:
Democracy is coming to the USA.’ 5
There can be no opting out or hand wringing with the education game. For the children and the Nations sake, everyone ought to stick their noses in, parents, politicians, teachers and editors alike because they are all part of that education and change system. The change envisaged by Benjamin Disraeli, one that is inevitable and constant requires as has been said a life long learning that goes way beyond the school. Peter M Senge, quoting the Physicist David Bohm tells us that…
‘we are taught to break apart problems, to fragment the world. This apparently makes complex tasks and subjects more manageable, but we pay a hidden enormous price. We can no longer see the consequences of our actions; we lose our intrinsic sense of connection to a larger whole. When we try to see the big picture…‘we try to reassemble the fragments in our minds, to list and organise all the pieces, but the task is futile – similar to reassembling the fragments of a mirror to see a true reflection. Thus after a while we give up trying to se the whole altogether’. 6
For those with literacy difficulties and the otherwise marginalised they want to share in their national cultural values whether they are European, British, Irish or American but these values need to be teased out and amplified in the printed press. Literacy learners as readers or consumers of the media do not want a dumbing down of the news, the use of slick headlines, or the treatment as fun matter which is a serious issue. They need the same interesting articles, and attention to cultural diplomacy that interest the rest of us. In substance they need the ‘audacity of hope’ to steal a phrase from Mr Barack Obama.
So, when you look in the mirror this morning don’t expect to see ‘society reflected back’ at you, instead try to see through ‘John Smyth’s’ eyes; because as any basic marketing course will tell you, if you could see through ‘John Smyth’s’ eyes you could see what ‘John Smyth’ buys, and he buys a lot. Think of the commercial opportunities for the nations of the world. What shapes all of us is education and life’s experiences. The daily grind combined with the possibility of responding creatively to the everyday new experiences that life throws up. This is what shapes most people positively and this is the change that lasts. In this context ‘who moves my cheese’ becomes secondary to knowing where it has been moved to, ensuring first that each one has had their fill before it gets moved.
Failure to recognise this will inevitably have an increasing number of people ask the question…
‘Why should I clasp the earthly Urn?
Or find the frittered fig that felt the fast?
Or chase the cheese around the churn?
Or swallow and pill from out the past?’
Queries or comments mailto: info@frankmonaghan.com