← Back to overview
The Inevitable Dossier · Chapter Three

Grassroots, Elite & Control

Society is a fragile agreement, held together by faith – between the grassroots who hold the only true power, the elite who are chosen to wield it, and the control built to keep both honest.

Society

Society is by definition a companionship or association with others, or friendly or intimate fellowship mand company. It is a voluntary association of individuals for common ends; especially an organized group working together or periodically meeting because of common interests, beliefs, or profession. It also pertains to the human race considered in terms of its complex structure of social institutions and organization and its mode of life. An enduring and cooperating social group whose members have developed organized patterns of relationships through interaction with one another. It is a community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests.

Since the dawn of the human race there has always been a need of some kind of order and control. The “If you don’t hurt me, I won’t hurt you” -thesis is of course the basic idea of organic development which we today call society. As soon as we do not hurt each others, we begin to share thoughts and resources with each others. The organic development and refining process of western democratic societies of today is based on one fundamental and basic principle: – “We are all equal”. This can seem untrue, as we can see different treatment of citizens. To understand the impact on individuals from a refined and developed society’s point of view, we also must possess a refined and developed understanding of the complete structure of society. At this level of analysis most individuals lack in knowledge and understanding and the whole structure of society is placed in the hands of faith. Faith in the society itself is vital! The society can not survive if its citizens do not have faith in its society.

A very common negative discussion about modern society is why it has to regulate unimportant issues. A good example on this matter is the European Union and size regulation of strawberries. Of course it can seem unimportant for most people to regulate size of strawberries at EU Level, but then as mentioned above; to understand society, one must understand the structure. Otherwise the argumentation will be sorted into tools of manipulation or just not having faith in society. Conclusion: the individual with such argumentations with negative influenses lack of faith in society or has other intentions than what the subject reflects.

Of course the society does not want regulate size of strawberries? If it would, how many other things can you come up with that also could be regulated. There are no limits. So why choose to regulate size of strawberries? The regulation was of course refined and established thru organic development. The initiating argument was a struggle between strawberry dealers about packaging that was raised above country level up to EU Level. At EU Level the argument was settled using a regulation of size of strawberries. But to get the whole picture, you must also understand why there was a struggle, how it was solved, who it affected and how. With this knowledge in possession an objective analysis is possible. And as you understand objectivity isn’t very common as its very complex to be honestly objective when argumenting against a highly developed society.

There are two alternatives to handle such arguments:

None of the above is easy to accomplish. The later is the easier one, but includes the need of mind skills. It’s possible that the argumenting party does lack in faith of the society and therefore have inherited the subject of argumentation from others, without deeper understanding or any intention of generally being negative to the society. In this case you will serve both parties by making the argumenting part realize its own mistake. Everybody have the rights to loose faith in society, but everybody also have a responsibility not only to restore their own faith, but also others faith in society, to make society better. If the argumenting part is using the subject as a tool to make others negative to society, things can become complicated. The mind is a tricky tool and the best way to handle this is to present the argumenting parts aims (hidden agenda) before him/her. Normally such an individual present the society as the destructive entity and put his/hers own ideals as the better alternative. Nobody wants to be associated with destructive forces, so presenting his/hers hidden agenda is most often the turning point for this type of individual.

We all have seen these types of individuals. They normally call them selves Socialists, Feminists, Vegans, Realists or what ever. The common thing that identifies them are their ability to follow and enhance the negative movements that unites major parts of society against the elite + they change ways to attack elite no matter what successful movement they use as disguise.

Grass Roots

The greatest of all powers are the power of the masses also known as the grassroots. One might think that individuals in the society elite are not a part of the grassroots, but they are. We all are. As soon as we’re not active in our profession, we are sorted into the great masses of grassroots. And as soon as someone acts in the name of others, he/she is acting outside the grassroot level. Grassroots are the great masses were all are equal by definition. If one manages to start movements at the grassroot level no one can tell were it will end. Playing around appealing to the great masses is a dangerous game.

The power of the grassroots is the only true power of society.

Many have tried to tame this power in history. But it can’t be tamed; it can only be delegated by the grassroots. When it happens, society elite is initiated and the first step in a turn of the repeating history, which we learned earlier in this dossier, also is initiated.

Faith in society is vital, which I have mentioned a number of times. On the boarder between faith in society and anarchy one can find societies greatest enemy. An enemy which for own reasons appeal to a lesser faith in society. History has many times proven that the masses will follow when strong individuals speak up for changes in society. The reason is simple; society is a structure which foundation can not and should not be changed to easy. The idea behind the built in slowness for changes is to be able to analyze the changes before and while they occur, as changes may get dramatic effects. However, this also creates an opportunity to use for the enemy of society. An opportunity to identify something that is important for the masses, that needs to be changed and then complain about the elite ability to change it. Such an act would most possibly create a lesser faith in society among the masses and the one who uses this opportunity will most likely be liked by the masses until he/she is exposed as having another agenda than the one he/she appealed to. It is important to understand the above and also to understand that changes in society are vital for the future of the society. This is how the society evolves and the structure how to change it is also a part in this evolution. Changes are Gods constant (mentioned later) and in some cases, as in history, history has to take another turn to make us realize our bad judgments.

If one are about to decide to decrease ones faith in society, one really owe society an extra thought. If words before the masses are that great, they really are not against society because the masses are the society. To appeal to a lesser faith in society is to divide the masses, to unite under created ideals, which are not built upon society or the masses, but upon own ideals. Its here one can identify the great enemy whom in many cases haven’t realized his/hers own misunderstanding of society. Many had good intentions, but did not understand how grass root movements evolve when initiated. Names such as Lenin, Hitler, and Mao are just some of numerous historical examples. Martin Luther of the 16th century must also be counted as one even if he is seen as a liberator from Roman Catholicism. History does not care about who is right or who is wrong. History just evolve and the effects onto society if Hitler had won World War II or if Luther had been executed by the Catholics etc, etc are interesting to think about, but why? It is more interesting to look at the similar forces that exist today and analyze their aims deeper.

Take a look at the Italian philosopher Antonio Negri and his appeals for anti-globalization. He is just a nutcase and should be treated as such. Globalization can’t and shouldn’t be stopped; it should instead be used to create a better world. This cannot be done without globalization, which all individuals with a working brain would understand if he/she used it. Of course there are a bunch of good intention individuals within the anti-globalization movement, but as a whole, it’s a complete joke, which builds its movements on individuals more appealed by personal power and unification with look-a-likes than global good. No, drop it and be a part of society elite instead and stop those bad forces that of course exist in a free society. Why not become the Luther of the modern world? There sure are similar problem out there to solve.

Anarchy exists before and after the existence of elite that run the society. Anarchy by definition means that the grassroots themselves run the society. This isn’t possible as there are many shared resources in society that needs to be maintained. Beside resources there are order, laws and regulation that would not work if no one would maintain them. Anarchy is a utopia for those who think they can survive without using the shared resources of society.

The Elite

The word elite came to English in the 18th century from the past participle of the French verb elire “elect”. The French acquired the word from Latin eligere “pick out, select”, which is composed of the prefix ex- “out” and the verb legere “gather, choose”. Etymologically, then, elite means “those who are elected”. A modern definition of “Elite” would be: “those who are chosen by either the grass roots directly or by its representatives (Elite) in a democracy and by the ruler or by its representatives (Elite) in authoritarian regimes or dictatorships.”

Thru history the elite, as well as individual members of the elite, always have had problems with the grass roots. The only parts of history were the elite have been extra liked has been after great disasters, conflicts or alike. It then seems like the masses understand than order cannot be re-established if no-one take the lead role, but as soon as order is established again, the dislike of the elite starts to increase. Well, now it may sound like everybody dislikes the elite. That is of course far from true. The elite is very accepted and liked normally, but as soon as problems in society rise, it’s easy to blame the elite. To be able to give our elite better hope for the future, we must learn to understand that members of the elite are normal people who are apart of the grass roots as soon as they leave their work.

They are no better humans just because they are apart of the elite.

They are ultimately put into their roles just because we have chosen them for it. We must put ourselves into their position and view problems with their eyes. A modern society is a complex organism and in many cases there is no easy solution – and even if one would find a solution to one problem, it most likely will mean problems for some other part in society.

And of course, we should not drop the critical eye on the elite as when they make bad judgments it will affect lots of people. The elite must both accept it and understand its importance.

Corruption

There are many definitions on the word “Corruption”. My own definition is simple: “Actions or gifts, normally in business and politics, which favor one part for a specific purpose”.

Probably the most common and by many accepted type of corruption is to be petitioned with gifts and dinners by vendors just because ones company is about the buy products. The more advanced and complicated corruption take place in personal networks were deals are made up between people who in the personal network promote a deal which favor later can be paid back on a similar way.

However, before we begin to scream about our view of corruption, we must understand that corruption itself have close relations with culture. Before the civilized world, modern corruption was a way to survive and wasn’t seen as something negative. It was a normal way to trade. In many cultures even today, this type of trading still is common. The phrase: “If you scratch my back, I’ll scratch your’s” is derived from this background. However, in a world were equal opportunities for all parts is the basic platform of economy, this type of helping each others becomes a problem.

If one hear about or experience this type of actions, I say its ones responsibility to inform involved parts that the actions may be seen as corruptive. And if someone is proceeding after received such a notification, he/she is deliberately making an act that may be seen as illegal. Deliberately or not is often the main separator between high or low sentences in the court of law, if convicted. So, a few simple words may be enough to, by time, reduce corruption in the world.

Structure

The foundation of a society is based on a common statement that ensures order within the society. Normally a modern society has a founding constitution and a set of laws. On top of that there are rules and regulations which are easier to change and cover smaller but important things. Example: You break the law if going faster than a speed limit, but it’s just a regulation that specifies the speed limit of the specific road.

A society need order to ensure equal treatment of the citizens. However, were there are gaps between laws and regulations, judges are needed. And if a new type of crime occurs judges will create a presidential case which may turn out as the standard treatment when same type of crime occurs again. The order of the society is evolving organically and this is something we all need to understand. It’s easy to be negative about laws, rules and regulations, but they are apart of the same giant organism which we all are.

Ok, we understand that order is needed. To be able to maintain the order system a number of roles need to be filled with people. Without the people in the correct roles, the order would not be maintained. Within an order system, there are no dependencies to specific individuals, which one may believe. In an order system, there are only dependencies to roles. Roles are create by the elite and are filled with ordinary people.

A society always will contain those who can’t take care of themselves and those who do not have the equal possibility to use society shared resources. Therefore a society structure also needs to maintain a social care system. Normally one can tell about the health of the society itself by looking at the social care system, as its within this system were grass roots share resources the most. A majority that show positive attitude about the social care system within the society of course tell much about the society itself.

It’s important that a society structure also contains aims and goals. Well, this is not the standard grass root headache of aims and goals I mean. I mean aims and goals with the society as an organism. Sitting elite/rulers must have an official agenda that point out the aims and goal of the society. The more advanced they are, the more attractive the society will become. This is important in the modern world of globalization were for example research facilities must attract researchers from the whole globe. If the society has an elite which has other aims, no resources will be reserved for such and no researchers will come. This is a complex and risky game to play. A lot of money is involved and normally spending money mean bad publicity, which may lead to new elite in next election. And a change in elite may also change aims and goals, which may end up in a roller coaster ride of money loss and bad society leadership in general.

A society structure also must include a disaster recovery system. It’s impossible to predict things like earthquakes, plane crashes etc. Such an institution gives the society safety to concentrate on other things.

The structure of a modern society has evolved to such a complex organism that most of us living in it just take it for granted. In general we don’t have to think about the existence of personal safety, care, water supply, sewers, education, food and a trillion other things. It’s like in the movie “Life of Brian”, by Monty Pyton, were someone asks: – “What did the Romans ever do for us?” and they begin to count things like: Aqueducts, Roads, schools, order, laws etc. We have to think about this when we address existing problems in society. If we do not balance our aggressions against non working things with the things that are working, we will just boost an indulgent aggression – making the aggression itself a bigger problem than the problem the aggression was directed against. You see, society structure is balanced by resources from within society itself. It’s impossible to finance and handle everything. This focus the overall responsibility to priority itself which to be correlated to politics and every individual’s responsibility to be a part of society evolution. To vote, speak up, share thoughts, gain trust and to have faith in society.

Control

The most complex part of society is to handle control. To be able to maintain a society based on equality, control is vital. In a society were all get equal possibilities with many shared resources, some will always try to find and make use of weaknesses in the structure. Society control does NOT exist to monitor or trace grass roots movements. It exists because violations against society structure will by time collapse society if not stopped. As the society structure is created by equal people for equal people, those who violate the structure does not respect a society based on equality.

Supervision is by many seen as a “Big brother” tool within the society. To understand the good with supervision, you have to understand that the alternative is witnesses. If you compare both alternatives, you will find out that one of them is not based on equality. Supervision shows the real world and witnesses tell their experienced world. Of course outputs from supervision also need analyses, which can cloud equality, but it’s a lot easier than evaluate the memories of a witness. I predict we will se more types of supervision in the future. Cameras are just one of numerous ways to supervise society. However one also must understand the amount of administration and costs that follows such a path. In the short frame I don’t think we will se supervision of minor crimes. I guess supervision will get its real foothold within organized and economic crimes, monitoring everything from money transaction to behavior among for example criminal gangs. However by time I predict that supervision will become something for us to live with. As globalization unites societies, crime gets larger markets to excel in.

Parallel to the roll out of supervision, I predict that society intelligence will explode. Someone has to process all information and as this information must be treated as secret, due to personal integrity, the suited organization to handle it is the Intelligence. Some have problem to understand secrecy within a society based on an open democracy. Mark my words: “Don’t make the same mistake”.

Secrecy is the prime weapon against organized crime.

Without secrecy organized crime would be protected by the basic constitutions of the society. In those constitutions one can read a lot about each individual’s right to his own privacy and integrity. It’s very hard to keep up with criminals if it was no opening in the constitutions, which there are. And as the modern society finds its worst enemies within the society, this is a complex thing to handle. The old way of thinking, believed that protection is against outsiders. Many of the countries in the western world has just realized this and begun to make additions to easier find and process such crimes within society. US “Patriot act” is one of those latest additions to the society. Many other countries followed with their own versions of the Patriot act. I also predict that so called “Stay behind” activities will increase. An example of a stay behind activity is to read a document over the shoulder of a person without he/she knows about it. The information is later reported to a third party (society intelligence). Do not mistake it for squealing. It’s more like spying, but was an undercover agent has an assignment a “stay behind” individual is one of the persons within the crime gang or what ever. Example: US Pays Iraq individuals for intelligence reasons as they fit in society and has the personal network needed.

How hard is hard enough? In today’s western societies a common subject of discussion is the one about methods used by the law enforcement (police). This is the result of years and years of refining in the progress of the law enforcement itself. Back to the repeating history: In the beginning of a cycle, the need of order and control is the most vital part, meaning one leader with extremely hard rules. As the one leader has to deal with much, death sentence to crime is the simple solution. However, to gain trust, the leader must distribute his order and control as well as law enforcement to others. This evolvement will towards the end of a history cycle result in the crime being able to turn the law against the law enforcement. The individual has equal rights as the leaders. As this grow major threat against the open society builds up and may turn over to a new recycle of the repeating history. Of course now things get complicated and surely a thin sharp edged. In a growing society which include the ability to, if convicted, raise the case to higher courts outside own country borders, time is again the problem. The same short time frustration and stress, which makes the single ruler to use death sentences against crime to keep order and control. However, in a society without borders, were the single person has equal rights as everybody else an Iron fist law enforcement will not be tolerated. And because the single person has more time to gain public trust than the giant society law enforcement machinery has to process each individual case.

Therefore, yes. We all must understand that: as long as not the complete world have gained same understanding of the societies basic ideas of order/control and law enforcement, the society can not survive with out treating crime with same respect as the criminals treat society. And members of society must understand and tolerate that failures will be occur again and again and again.

Humanity

“What we may be witnessing in not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government”, from “The End of History?” by Francis Fukuyama, 1989. Francis Fukuyama is an influential American political economist, author and also a profound man who possesses increased understanding in the basic needs of mankind. Were Karl Marx did his general mistake and connected materialism to the source of mankind’s most basic needs, Fukuyama increases this to the ideologies them selves. The core summery of Fukuyamas thesis is that ideologies of the world are evolved into one general ideology, which will put man kind in the position were all will agree with each others and there is nothing more of higher value to fight and argue for. As ideologies cease to exist, mankind will eventually end history. However, even if Fukuyama is one step closer to reality than Marx was a century ago, I must flush him down in the same toilet as I did with Marx. They are both wrong and most likely because both their thesis are based on to much digging into historical and political events without interacting with the broad masses.

I guess Marx would have rethought his thesis if he would live to see the effects it created. In the case Fukuyama who serves in the Bush administration as a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics, I can just point out that a bad thesis is worse than no thesis at all, referring to the afterworld of Marx. My own thesis is that humanity would not head towards the end of history until “the Light” is put out on the same basis as Marx’s thesis about materialism and Fukuyama’s about ideology. But to understand this, one also must understand the entity of the Light, which is presented later in this dossier.

During my own research and investigations about humanity I found out that Happiness is the greatest unique element that solves problems and unite individuals. Happiness can be achieved in many ways, but is easily suppressed. I found out that the three most vital fundaments of Happiness are personal safety, evolution and affinity.

I would address the last one as our world’s greatest problem of today. Our complex society makes people generally feeling lonely on the inside. However most individuals subconsciously suppress this and assume the problem is located on the other two fundaments. How can I say this? Well, just think of moments when you are happy together with others and feel the great force of affinity. This force feed energy into the other two fundaments. But it’s not the vice versa. Even if you are safe and your evolution is great, your loneliness may suppress your happiness.

Happiness is the most vital key to unlock the world’s problems!

Happy individuals spread happiness around them. Being near other happy individuals is a perfect way to restore happiness if lost. A happy person of course can be religious. Happiness is not about what he/she tells, do or believe. It’s about his/hers view of life and how he/she interact in life. Happiness does not shield out others, the society, the enemy, none. Music and sports are two examples were happiness is fundamental. Both are able to break barriers which otherwise would be impossible. Having the people of Israel and Palestine singing songs or doing sports together would probably help out their internal problems.

What happens if/when you begin to loose the basic fundaments of happiness? Subconsciously you begin to loose faith in life itself. Even if you do not identify that it’s the faith in life that is decreasing, you will try to sort out what’s wrong and possibly initiate a cause and effect evaluation, aiming to find some cause to blame. As you do not find the relation to happiness itself, you will blame other things, which instead most likely only will speed up the negative process that has been initiated. If you do not break this negative spin, which is a slow process, you later will find out that the main cause is the decreased faith in life and your reaction most likely will be to try to restore it. But there are no short cuts to restore faith in life. In this stage, you are very open for arguments used by those who use faith as a tool in their beliefs. Faith is very important, but you will commit your biggest mistake if you believe that faith is related belief. Religious and extremist individuals will try to convince you that faith is related to beliefs, just because it’s the essence of their life. To have faith in their beliefs is for them fundamental. Even if there is a God, you should not convince yourself that faith in belief is the correct path. Life is you and you have beliefs, not the vise versa. So the correct path to restore happiness is the increase faith in yourself, no matter what your beliefs are.

Within these two words we can find the root to the world’s biggest problem. Not the key to solve it, only the root cause for it. As I mentioned above, I address affinity, the lack of it, as the greatest existing problem today. Morale and Ethics are important, but far less important today than they were in history and they also differ a lot between cultures. Some cultures still act as if they existed in medieval history in terms of moral and ethics. Back in history moral and ethics were tools to keep order and control. Still today, one can identify places were there are a low level of order and control as a place were also moral and ethics are of increased matter. If you did understand my words about faith above, you will also understand that extreme and religious groups root themselves easier in these places. However, when a society gets under control and things begin to work well, moral and ethics should be a part of society, not taken as hostage by extremists or religious leaders, which I believe is what happens. Interesting is that the pope and his Vatican speak of themselves as the moral and ethic power of the world. I don’t and you shouldn’t believe a word of it! He/they have made a choice not to live a normal life and thereby disqualify themselves as judges of such. In today’s open and free global society, morale and ethics are built in to the society structure. If you do not possess a certain level of moral and ethics, which can differ in the world, you do not fit in and the result is loneliness.

This understanding may seem sad. Do we all have to be alike, to be happy? Certainly not! To understand the complexity of this, one has to understand that there is impossible to measure exact how happy someone is. This is not a black and white thing. But you can relate the fact that the lesser you fit in, the more you risk loosing happiness. Thinking abstract on this, one get the results like these:

The last one should create thoughts in your mind. Think of it and you will realize that it is true. So even here you understand that the key is happiness. Using moral and ethic as tools to create order and control is history. Today moral and ethic is about takeing part, sharing and living in the global society. Once you understand this, you should divide religion from moral and ethics. It’s OK to be religious and living in the global society. But if you put your own moral and ethic values higher because of religion and not because of the life you live in the society, then you are not apart of society. You have created your own shield in between – just as the pope and the Vatican. Once you understand that moral and ethic works the same way as happiness. There are no limits. There are no ways to measure moral. Then you also understand that no one can use moral and ethics in a modern society to create order and control. This should be handled thru society structure, which itself has its fundaments in moral and ethic. Get the point?

What is love? Isn’t that what we all trying to figure out? What if I would say that there is a relation between affinity and love? It may be hard to understand my point but I mean that love has to do with how you value choice in the matter of affinity. If you have own children, it may be easier to understand. The relation with your own children is love in its best definition. Most parents agree on the extra boost in the understanding of love, when they think of their children. However, it does not explain my point about choice. Imagine someone who totally neglects the relation with his/her own children. It’s a choice made based on the level of affinity. As soon as someone begins to evaluate the level of affinity, he/she will begin to decrease love. Children in their early years show 100% love to their parents and the parents gets overwhelmed as they never experienced 100% pure love ever before. You wonder why they haven’t. Well, it’s easy. As it’s about affinity and choice, then by reading about faith, morale and ethics etc above, you must begin to understand some of the essence in life.

Love ↔ affinity ↔ happiness: the essence of life.

By just evaluating love within a relationship could according to me, be the source problem you are trying to find. The best way to increase love is to understand the fundaments of love (described above) and focus on those, not love itself. Love is gift, from you as well as others, based on how you live, how you are and how you interact. Learn from young children. They play, argue and fight with each others without thinking of background, culture, religion, politics, look, love etc. Their actions are based on fundamental life and their arguing and fights do not affect their love towards each others. It’s when we get older and start to evaluate and divide relations according to values, things become complex. Among those values are morale and ethics, but also many other things.

However, one must understand that love itself is not the source of the problem. Pure love overcomes everything. But as mentioned above, the truly happy and the true love is very uncommon. Therefore it’s more about how low levels of love you can accept before your own threshold is violated and you initiate the evaluation of the decreased love. By telling this, in a relationship, the involved do not have to love each others equally. Well, who can possible say they do or don’t, as there are no way to measure love. As long as they are both equally happy as individuals and together, why try to find out. Looking at it from my point of view, I would say they love each others as much, if they are equally happy as individuals and together. Love may exist in as many forms as there are peoples on this earth.

Reading the above one would understand that things are complicated. There are too many different triggers involved, in time, to be able to fully pinpoint a single root cause if society itself, a company or an individual is on the negative path. The so called “Core values” is a tool that can be used to make it easier to identify if things are changing from what’s expected. It’s a short list of values, which are carefully chosen and defined. These are the fundamental values of a society, a business, an individual or else. With published “Core values” anyone can tell what to expect from the society, the business or the individual and anyone could also tell if the values do not represent the truth. For example America has the “Core Values of American Constitutional Democracy”. The European Union just state: “Human rights, democracy and the rule of law are core values of the European Union”.

After going thru Core Values, it’s perfect to take care of Loyalty. The reason is that Loyalty should of course primarily be directed towards the core values of a society, a company and the individual. What is loyalty? Good question. In history, loyal was something that you were towards your leader and ultimately towards the king, God or what ever. If you were not loyal, you could be sentenced to death. The primary idea that Martin Luther had when he published his 95 thesis and translated the new testament back it the 16th century was of course to prove before the masses that the Roman Catholics wasn’t loyal to it. Why? Because the bible itself is a set of values and if a priest does not follow them, should you trust him/her? Having this in mind, you hopefully would understand that you as an individual have not two, but three obligations in terms of loyalty:

What if you assume that your leader does not follow the core values? Well, then you can use the so called “Grandfather’s principle” and present your view before the leader above him. The “Grandfather’s principle” also include the ability to go further up in the hierarchy if you assume that even higher leaders in hierarchy do not follow the values. In response to one using the “Grandfather’s principle”, the treatment would be mutual respect. Its hard work to identify and present inside hierarchy problems and if someone help the upper management to eliminate corrupt midlevel leaders, he/she should be treated with great respect.

Integrity is probably the most complicated part of humanity. Integrity is all individual rights to their own privacy without anyone being able to take advantages of it. What is privacy? If you seek a new job using your present jobs email system, is the email a private mail? Per definition no, if else isn’t stated. It’s important that you as an individual know the boundaries of your privacy. In a modern society more and more things get logged, stored and used. You as an individual are being monitored electronically every day thru creditcard transactions, phone calls, hospital visits, etc. The boundaries of privacy within all types of organizations should be official and easy to understand. As well as it’s important that you know the boundaries of privacy, it’s also important that the society structure also do. If for example a credit card company sells addresses to traveling companies, because they can identify those individuals that travel a lot, then we’re on the edge of privacy. This is most likely legal today, but if for example a certain company buys lists of addresses from same credit card company, were the individuals on the list are customers at a competitor. And if the company then mail the individuals on the list with a special offer if you become their customer instead of the competitors. Then I guess the line is crossed.

If a health insurance company would buy information from hospital databases, to be able to customize insurance for each patient. Then we definitely crossed the line. What about person to person integrity? Is it okay to build you own database with information about persons, that you could use when you make decisions in personal matters. Well, of course it’s OK, as long as you do not share, sell or publish the information. One thing about privacy and integrity is sure. The more you learn about it, the more you understand that you need to know. Integrity is fundamental in a modern society. If the society can’t guarantee the citizens integrity, faith in society, future and life itself most likely will suffer from negative impact.

Health is interesting. I find no relation between happiness and health itself. I however see the possible impact on faith, if health problems occur. I say “possibly” as it has to do with how happy and how mentally strong the individual is. Even the happiest individual can loose faith in bad health situations. Health problems may also impact love and affinity if faith in the future is lost. This may evolve into really complex problems, were precious love and affinity may become reversed powers. Health support is a fundamental part of society. I would say that one can measure the health of a society by looking at the alternatives, the quality and the costs for health with in the society. A well working health support system within society will make the citizens friendlier against the elite of the society.

Chapter Conclusion

First of all, it’s very hard to describe modern society as it’s so complex. My idea with this chapter is to make you as a reader enlightened about the existence of this complexity, not the complexity itself. My conclusion is modern society is a good place to live in. It can be a lot better in many areas, but generally it’s a good society. I have identified a growing movement against society, international economy, globalization etc, which I define as the one’s who instead of trying to understand, being a part of and help evolve society has chosen the path of being a constant critic against it. In many cases the critisism has become a uniting force, which itself give the individuals more than the factual matter. We must learn to understand and to have faith in society; otherwise we will fall in the hands of extremists and eventually another turn in the repeating history. Radical movements, even if highly trustworthy, will just create more ill then good. Don’t think that extreme movements like Communism, Fascism, Nazism, Nationalism etc are far away. Such movements can easily grow to be strong under other names. The name is just a name. It’s about society power, nothing else. Today, we, the citizens are in control of society. Our modern democracies have problems, but work rather well. We are all responsible to make society better, without overturn all that we have built up.

We are the elite, all of us.