It's for sure that all species on earth find, driven by the full range of interests, their way to survive on earth. For most of them this is struggling for life.
We, human beings, developed by the time different concepts to live in balance with the environment.
Initially we practiced nomadism, then tribalism. Afterwards we saw empires with slavery, followed by feudalism. This last was a first step to more normalised relations between the haves and the Not haves.
We noticed also a few refinements of those models: for instance in India, where the society was organised in castes. Other example are the matriarchate societies. And let's not forget the theocratic onces.
The last years we have globally spoken three socio-economic models: islamism, communism and capitalism. With inherent to all three, free enterprise, marketing and competition as conditions for growth and welfare. With more or less gradations r.
Today most of the people are convinced that free enterprise, free market, competition and some regulation will solve most of the problems thanks to unrestrained economic growth.
But would we have avoid the climate change, the disasters with nuclear energy, the socio-political crisis, especially in the middel east, demographic issues, privacy constraints, increasing poverty by false trading techniques by "unrestrained growth"?
This is a delusion.
The root causes of a lot of problems mentionned herabove will not be solved by unrestrained growth.
But it is more:
On the other hand on microscale young people do not find work which is appropriate to their requirements, privately as well as professionally. And enterprising people often time
Let's be factual now:
Young people are also aware of those constraints and look for a significant life, privately as well as professionally. And because in the current enterprises different spans are not meeting their requirements, a lot of them starts own enterprises, alone of with soul mates. But with respect to a few basic principles which guarantee less oppression as there are: open source, equipotentiality, fair, .. and peer to peer in other words: as equals
Additionally they are conscious of the fact that competition, more regulated free market and free enterprise are key conditions to succeed. The communism before the '90s prove the contrary. And they know that capitalism gave birth to a lot of new technologies especially internet, facebook, internetapps, PC's, alternative energy solutions, ecologic insights, .... which are their means for change.
This combination becomes for break trough thinking entrepreneurs levers for new type of initiatives and organisations which can be the potential for more global solutions: Sociologic ecologic and economic solutions.
Currently different projects give evidence to this evolution. We see Wikipedia, Fairphone, Wikispeed, shared bikes and shared cars initiatives, free shops for unused goods, cradle to cradle initiatives, crowdfunding , swop initiatives , ....
But the initiators are also factual and cautious. Because they know that finding the balance beteen personal and common benefit is not easy.
But why explaining this journey in the context of facilitation and mediation ?