competition – Gladz

Competition in the modern world Pt II

We have these social perceptions that the business (corporate) world is ‘cut throat’, that it is ‘dog eat dog’, and ‘you have to look after number one’. When you stop to analyse these images they are really horrific, slitting throats and eating other members of your species just to survive – and it is this emotive positioning which drives much human behaviour in a business (corporate) setting (resulting in, more than most people would like to admit, lying, cheating, backstabbing, bribery, blackmail, and murder). What kind of enlightened, intelligent, animals are we that our very model of social interaction (economics) is so good at eliciting the types of isolating behaviours exhibited by animals unable to form meaningful (conceptual – formed within mind) social relationships?

Many people may believe that it was our competitive drive, competition itself, which enabled us to evolve how we have; in fact, the opposite is true. Cooperation, social bonding, is what made our species so great; the ability to utilise our individual minds toward a common, collective, goal; to catch that mammoth, grow/collect a sustaining range of food, or provide the various specialised skills needed to assist a community to thrive. It was cooperation that enabled a nomadic species to survive for thousands of years and to eventually settle down from the nomadic lifestyle and develop small communities. Over time some small communities developed into cities; and once cities developed, well, things began to change.

It is interesting, this topic, because nothing changed, and yet everything changed for our species. When you get down to it, all human beings inherently wish to be loved, to connect, be part of something bigger than our individual self. This is because that is the natural state of things. We are all eternally loved (in that we are part of THE ALL), we are all inherently connected though our connection to THE ALL, and we are all part of something bigger than our individual self (family/species/life/THE ALL). Socialisation, like all things in existence, has polar opposites. It can be used to control individual humans, to suppress their creative expression through convincing them of a story which limits the imagination (human nature, blah, advertised ideals, blah, terror, blah – it is hard to be creative when focused on fear and consumption). In the other pole, socialisation can be used to assist all individual sparks of consciousness to understand the natural world and universal principles, the golden rule, and how our cooperation results in abundance for all with minimal work/time for each individual (freeing us to experience this heaven above the ground). We remain fractals of the underlying consciousness, eternally loved. Although a social structure has developed in which living humans are socialised into disconnection; to erroneously believe we are of limited power, that other people (corporations) have the right to judge how we live our lives under universal guidance. Nothing changed, and yet somewhere along the way, everything changed for our species.

Over the last few hundred years cities have come to hold the majority of the world’s population, with increasing amounts of people being born and raised within the city environment; advertisements from every wall, (corporate) state education, and Hollywood entertainment. We are forced into competing in an environment where our access to resources is almost totally dependent on our ability to obtain money (which is ultimately owned by a few families hiding behind a network of corporations, and based on debt). This human competition is contrived, is the product of human minds, and so the solution starts with ideas in our mind (out with the old, in with the new mental structures – then it is easy to shape the physical world).

It was briefly previously noted that social competition is tied to our economic beliefs. So to question, and change, these beliefs is a good point of action for those who want to partake in the evolution of our social environment from competition to cooperation.

Even in a competitive environment, such as a sports team involving many people, or a work group, cooperation is needed for best success. So why do we even need our society to be one big competitive environment (especially given the negative psychological and social impacts they are proven to facilitate), wouldn’t a cooperative social environment be better for all?

Competition in the modern world Pt I

We are socialised into believing that competition is good, that if humans never competed we would never excel, never drive to produce that great thing. This is utter rubbish. While, on the surface, it may appear that competition is driving new developments and achievements, the reality is that competition only just happens to be the setting in which these things are taking place. If there is an achievement to get, some goal that humans have thought of, we will get there eventually (this has been proven time and again – we will, one day, achieve every idea we draw into mind). It doesn’t matter if some rich philanthropist puts up a sizable prize, or if multiple corporations are working toward the goal for financial ends, or if different groups of scientists are trying to prove a theory. There could be no money offered, only one corporation with the idea, one scientist with a theory, and the goal, if it is achievable, will be achieved eventually.

What our socialisation doesn’t show us is the dark side to competition. First of all in order to compete you must be in a state of fear (simply the fear of losing). It is ultimately this fear which drives the behaviour of all human beings in competition – the only other thing human beings can be driven by is love (and love doesn’t compete). While love doesn’t compete, it does play; this is reflected in the idea we learn as children that it doesn’t matter who wins, what matters is the enjoyment of the experience, of the play. Unfortunately our economic system, the fabric of modern society, is based on competition for success (and if you don’t succeed you suffer economically). Quickly children are socialised into adults perceiving competition from a place of fear; this is because the competition of modern human economic life is filled with real physical consequences that easily stimulate the emotional response of fear (not eating, paying rent, or ‘keeping up with the Jones’s). We forget the love behind play, behind sports and games, and allow fear to drive our competitive edge (often resulting in negative mental states and behaviours, such as general depression and anxiety, excess greed/arrogance, and violence when we lose, or the team we support loses).

In this state of competitive fear there needs to be other human(s) who are not on your side; so competition by nature divides human beings, and therefore divides, or diminishes, human potential. From here we move to the more specific types of behaviours, and perspectives, which competition, by its very nature, demands from human beings. These include things such as paranoia (of competitors, agents for competitors, tying to steal ideas), and tunnel vision (where the goal monopolises the attention of the individual(s) to the detriment of other things humans need in life – such as close relationships with other human beings, and in extreme cases food and personal (physical and mental) health). Of all the things competition demands from humans beings, that which most affects society as a whole is a human being’s perspective locked into, and driven by, ‘the competitive edge’.

Most of us will view the idea of a ‘competitive edge’ as something positive, and, most of us will view this term in relation to sports. Like all things in this reality, the idea of a competitive edge is a spectrum with its good and bad, positive and negative, points (or attributes). We may view the competitive edge of a sportsperson as good when they dedicate themselves to their pursuit, train hard and stick to the diet they need, to excel in their sport to achieve what no other humans (or few humans) have done before. Although we may view the competitive edge of a sportsperson as bad, or negative, when it leads them to certain behaviours; such as sabotaging their competitors efforts or using things to gain an unfair advantage (such as drugs).

Now in sport, the negative effects of human beings driven by this idea of competitive edge (at all costs) is relatively small, in that few other humans are really harmed (sure, some people may have lost some races/games, bets may have been lost, but the overall social impact is quite small). Let us now contrast this sports based competitive edge with the competitive edge which our social (economic/legal/political) system fosters in many human beings (in particular, what is the social impact?).