We are in the midst of a transformation from one set of global values and habits of mind, called here, "control culture" and the other, "integrative culture." The first is in the process of dying, exhausting itself in an attempt to stay alive and dominant, the second, integrative culture, is still in the process of being born. Naturally, this is a disorienting and disconcerting time.

::::::::

This essay can, again, be considered a "meta-view" -- in the sense that one can apply these overarching cultura perspectives to specific dilemmas nationally and across the globe.

Generally, a culture provides a common definition of what we see when we look at or hear something -- mediated and pre-digested by our cultural "lenses". Every cultural system comes with a price attached.

Likewise, Lewis Mumford suggested that such a system crams the complexity of life into an ideological straightjacket, causing us to be aware of certain things and not others. It has been said that cultural assumptions and beliefs are like glasses; if you don't change the prescription once in a while, you're probably not seeing the world very clearly.

After reviewing a few of the many conundrums presented by the old culture, we turned to the idea that individuals, species, and whole cultures evolve. There's no stopping the force of life. Jared Diamond in his study of failed cultures concluded that whether a society survives or not depends on its willingness to reconsider core values. History is full of species and societies that failed to adapt to change. The assumptions underlying present human culture have relied on coercion or threat and have been operating for thousands of years. They are now bringing our species (and others) to the brink of death.

We are on the threshold of two mutually exclusive global value systems and assumptions, which Philip Slater (has named 1) Control culture and 2) Integrative culture. He offers the image that we are currently walking a flimsy rope bridge over a great chasm, having come too far to turn back, while the end is barely in sight. He also suggests that the excesses of consumerism are contributing to produce climate disruption, the depletion of cheap oil, growing income disparities, and resource wars. Integrative culture is more appropriate to a species living in a shrinking world, which requires global cooperation and communication. Control culture insists on splitting the world into polarized opposites, a binary world based on combat

As hopeful as Gebser's -- Integral age- and Elgin's - communication and reconciliation era - perspectives may prove to be (see previous entries), it is also essential to gain perspective on the forces that are obstacles to undergoing and successfully coming through this process -- one which is already convulsing the entire world. Eisler has described these two processes the dominator vs. partnership way of organizing society. There is a confusion of values, a loss of ethical certainty, and a bewildering lack of consensus about just about everything

Yet, the truth remains that old cultural systems usually are not abandoned without fierce resistance. As they sense that the old system is dying around them, those who are wedded to it will tend to assert its values more harshly, stridently and desperately. Diversity and holism are seen are assumed to be the "enemy."

Why is this happening now? During the last fifty years the pace of change and communication has accelerated, creating the most rapid social upheaval in the history of our species, taking us to the brink of endurance. Expressions of integrative culture include changes in the status of women and minorities, the sexual revolution,, the decline of the nuclear family, the global economy, the ecological movement, the strange concepts of modern physics are all expressions of integral culture that have arisen in a very few recent decades.

We are certainly living in an awkward time: never before have there been such growing concern about the environment -- and still our destruction of it continues to soldier on. We've never experienced such growing distrust of technology; yet, we are more dependent on it than ever. We've been deeply self- and socio-centrically obsessed, yet there is a growing movement (expressed in a variety of terms) and yearning to lose ourselves in something beyond ego. While we have a proliferation of ways of connecting with one another, we've never experienced being this disconnected.

Incivility and chaos seem to be everywhere. The recent speed of social change has put an almost untenable strain on our adaptive capacities. The recent rise in all sorts of fundamentalism and violence (secular and religious) have arisen in an effort to keep things the same or have them go backwards"to the "good old days". As the cultural pace of change continues to increase, we should expect more of the same -- based on a desire to hold on to the old ways.

Prior to the 1960's people were pushing for social change on a very few fronts of controller culture, but the movements of the 60's created a generalized challenge to every assumption of control culture by significant segments of the population.

An analogy used by biologist Lynn Margulis is that of a caterpillar transforming into a butterfly - in other words a process of metamorphosis ("Caterpillar looks up, sees a butterfly, says: "You'll never get me up in one of those things!") After creating its cocoon, the caterpillar completely liquifies; if it could speak we might well hear cries of distress, discomfort, and/or pain. We can also note, while this is a completely natural process, that the newly emerging beautiful butterfly needs to exert apparent self-effort in drying off and strengthening its wings prior its first flight.

Using this analogy Slater asserts that our own "butterfly" social form can be called integrative culture. He describes this as a spontaneous, natural process (despite current appearances to the contrary). Still, it involves our individual and collective efforts to grow into it. Simplifying things, control culture can be seen as a product of the predominance of linear left brain, while integrative the structure adds essential elements from the right brain, involving synthesis, feeling and empathy.

Here is a cursory, general list of contrasting tendencies framed simply to clarify distinctions:

Control culture: 1) sees the universe as split into contending opposites; 2) the world is seen as static matter, fragmented matter capable of being manipulated -- and to be studied as such; 3) leading and governing are accomplished through an authoritarian and hierarchical style; 4) a competitive, macho, warlike milieu prevails; women are devalued and constrained; 5) any significant change needs to be ordered from above.

Integrative culture: 1) the universe is regarded as undivided and whole; and 2) is regarded as energy in process; 3) a more democratic, egalitarian ethos is striven for and actualized; 4) likewise, communication and cooperation are valued, as are balance, recognition of patterns and circular feedback loops; phenomena are seen as wholes and the concept of hierarchy is transformed into a "holarchy". 5) the process of evolution on both micro and macro scales is seen as spontaneous -- as self-creating coherence.

A similar contrast occurred during the time of Galileo and Copernicus. Does the sun revolve around the Earth or vice-versa? For many, shifting to a radically different conception of the cosmos was no doubt disturbing.

The essential idea here is that the "old ways" (similar to Gebser's "efficient vs. deficient" structures of consciousness) have already shown and continue to prove themselves to be obsolete.

One consequence of control culture: Recent estimates from news articles:

(World to Lose Two-Thirds of Wild Animals by 2020? A dramatic new report warns of ecological collapse, though critics say the conclusion is overblown and misleading.

BY BRIAN CLARK HOWARD

HTTPS://NEWS.NATIONALGEOGRAPHIC.COM/2016/10/LIVING-PLANET-INDEX-WORLD-LOSE-TWO-THIRDS-ANIMALS-2020-CONSERVATION-SCIENCE/

---

PUBLISHED OCTOBER 27, 2016

An incendiary new report from two major conservation groups predicts dire circumstances for the world's wild animals, warning that two-thirds of vertebrate populations could be wiped out by 2020, based on 1970 population levels.

The new report, called the Living Planet Index, was prepared by the World Wildlife Fund and the Zoological Society of London. The index found that animal populations dropped by 58 percent between 1970 and 2012, largely as a result of human activities, from poaching to habitat loss and pollution.

The team then extrapolated those trends forward to 2020. They based their analysis on data collected in the field on more than 14,000 populations of vertebrates, from 3,700 different species. The data came from many sources, from all around the world.

The researchers concluded that lakes and rivers saw the steepest declines in resident animals. Groups that have fared particularly badly include marine mammals, fish, and some birds.

We must "act now to reform our food and energy systems and meet global commitments on addressing climate change, protecting biodiversity and supporting sustainable development".

"Global biodiversity is declining at an alarming rate, putting the survival of other species and our own future at risk," the index warns.)

*

(Eight years ago, scientists estimated that 150-200 species of plant, insect, bird and mammals become extinct every 24 hours. This is nearly 1,000 times the "natural" or "background" rate and, say many biologists - is greater than anything the world has experienced since the vanishing of the dinosaurs nearly 65 million years ago.)

Like the fate of any species which is unable to shed outworn survival strategies, the success of the human enterprise begins to seem dubious if we do not change.

One example: whether we choose to care about and reverse the decline of biodiversity is up to each of us. Making choices that support integrative vs. control culture and maintaining a broad cultural view (a "we" who are a part of and not "apart from" nature on a shared planet) in our individual and collective decisions will help determine the outcome. No one knows how this will turn out. Yet, we can speak with others about -- through whatever media we choose, including personal conversation - the probable present and future crises and consequences involved.

Our current way of life -- which we might describe as "egonomics," -- is a way of being that is simply unworkable. If we are to avert a collective catastrophe, it would appear that some fundamental changes will be necessary: changes in the way we relate to ourselves, our bodies and our surroundings; changes in the demands we make on others and on the planet; and changes in our awareness and appreciation of the world. These concerns have been echoed by experts in many fields, and there is one point on which these individuals agree; a new worldview is needed - one that is holistic, nonexploitive, ecologically sound, long-term, and cooperative; and one in which the needs of "I", the "we," and the planet are all given full legitimacy.

Authors Bio:

I work as a psychotherapist with an emphasis on transformational learning - a blend of psychoanalytic and transpersonal approaches, and am the author of Self Actualization and Unselfish Love and co-author of Families Helping Families: Living with Schizophrenia, as well as Mental Illness as an Opportunity for Transformation. My interests and life have taken parallel courses, which together have woven a complex tapestry: spirituality and meditation on the one hand, and political psychology on the other. I have studied and practiced with Ram Dass, Jack Kornfield, Mata Amritanandamayi and Gurumayi Chidvilasanda, and continue a daily practice of meditation. My early political education began with the writings of the founding fathers. Over time this led to involvement in the anti-Vietnam war and anti-nuclear movements. I was interested in the powerful molding of prevailing political and economic dynamics by what C. Wright Mills called the military-industrial complex. In time I have come to the conclusion that, despite various interest groups' attempts to minimize or trivialize the concept, the deep state is a reality - decisively and covertly shaping events on both the domestic and international fronts. I am interested in an exceptionally promising alternative source of energy that has yet to see the light of day. I see the current period as a precarious form of initiation rite into the beginning of adulthood for our species, and hope to do whatever I can to help us reach this goal. Meanwhile, I seek daily to recall the reality that the same awareness (the Ever-Present-Origin) looks out through all of our eyes, and actualize this in my relationship with other beings.