Shifting People, Communities, and the Environment toward a New Way of Living—Secured by a Governance Framework for a Better Future
The Revaluation marks a transformative period—a shift in thinking, behaviour, and systems. It represents the transition from a money-centric, neoliberal, and globalised world model to one that prioritises people, human values, and local communities. In this new paradigm, everything is reimagined to support meaningful, positive life experiences for all.
Traditionally, “revaluation” refers to reassessing monetary or financial worth. However, the term has long applied to any kind of review or reassessment—of objects, actions, or opportunities—where the value we assign influences our decisions and actions.
In essence, anything with value can be revalued. Within the context of the global systems that have shaped and often harmed humanity, The Revaluation is a comprehensive transformation. It aims to build a world that is truly better for everyone. This includes the development of new systems, processes, and governance tools that not only secure and sustain this improved future but also prevent any return to the corrupt, inhumane, and damaging structures of the past.
Why The Revaluation Is Necessary
Restoring Our Moral Compass and Reclaiming Humanity from a System That Has Lost Its Way
For too long, we’ve neglected our moral responsibility to consider others—people, communities, and the environment beyond ourselves. Even those most vulnerable, including the lowest-paid and those reliant on the state, have come to believe that success and survival require putting oneself first. This mindset has made it easy to overlook how those with power and resources have taken this pursuit of “more” to extreme and damaging lengths.
Exploitation—of people, systems, and nature—has become so normalised that many instinctively withdraw from acknowledging social problems, especially when solutions might come at a personal financial cost. Money has become the dominant tool for shaping behaviour, influencing every aspect of life—even those that seem unrelated to finance. It has replaced genuine values with a single benchmark: monetary worth.
This relentless pursuit of profit, wealth, and control by a privileged few has led to the collapse of communities, the erosion of human dignity, and the destruction of the environment. The natural systems that once sustained us have been disregarded, and the principle of sustainable living—once a cornerstone of generational survival—has been cast aside. The result is a world where ordinary people struggle to live independently within systems that no longer serve them.
Tragically, this outcome has not been accidental. It stems from deliberate strategies designed to exploit the masses, with depopulation seen as a desirable end once those in control have extracted all they can. By making life superficially easier, they’ve masked harmful changes and encouraged people to embrace their own diminishing value.
The most insidious part of this strategy is the willing participation of the public. Many still refuse to believe that those driving these harmful agendas have been openly declaring their intentions for decades. Our own selfishness has been weaponised—used to distract us and blind us to the truth hidden in plain sight.
When the truth finally becomes undeniable, few will challenge those responsible. Their defence will be simple: “We told you what we were doing, and you chose to go along.” This complicity is deepened by the addictive nature of money-centric living. Money has become not just a tool, but the ultimate goal—an addiction that feeds itself, offering fleeting satisfaction while eroding real happiness and human connection.
Addiction leaves little room for reflection or accountability. Many reject the uncomfortable truth about their relationship with money and its consequences. The illusion of comfort is easier to accept than the responsibility that comes with waking up and choosing a different path.
Spelling It Out: How Life Doesn’t Work
A Breakdown of some of the Systemic Failures We’re Living With
The minimum wage is not enough for anyone to live independently. Without benefits, charity support (like food banks), or debt, survival is nearly impossible.
It’s cheaper to buy food shipped from across the world than to purchase locally grown produce—despite the environmental and social costs.
Retailers are more focused on selling finance packages than the actual products or services we go to them for.
Politicians promise whatever they think we want to hear, deliver none of it, and then do as they please until the next election, when the cycle repeats.
Local councils seem more interested in fining residents for minor offences than in providing meaningful services that help people live well.
Police forces often appear uninterested in tackling real crime.
People are expected to self-censor their thoughts, speech, and actions to avoid offending anyone who insists their personal worldview must be universally accepted.
We’re told that if technology can do something, human involvement is no longer necessary—regardless of the consequences for displaced workers, shuttered communities, or the unsustainable use of resources.
Individuals are increasingly treated as reference numbers—valued only for their potential to generate income for those who can exploit them.
Through the influence of big business, government, and the establishment, we’re being led to believe that farms are no longer necessary to produce food.
Money has become more important than people, values, or the planet.
Private companies and individuals can own and charge rent for access to natural resources that should belong to everyone.
Blame is always shifted elsewhere, even though accountability is one of the most powerful tools for learning and growth.
We’re told to champion diversity, yet the way it’s framed often reinforces divisions between people and communities that might otherwise not exist.
What Will the Revaluation Look and Feel Like?
Understanding the Transformation We’re Already Living Through
The Revaluation—and the process leading up to it—is already underway. We are living through it now.
It’s profoundly difficult to recognise this transformation for what it is, precisely because we’re immersed in it.
Every part of it is unfolding around us and within our individual lives in deeply personal ways.
This makes it nearly impossible to take an objective view—much like walking through a forest and only seeing the trees immediately around us, rather than standing on a hillside and seeing the entire landscape.
The changes we’re experiencing—best described as the gradual disintegration of the system we’re leaving behind—are happening bit by bit, affecting each of us differently. Yet a growing sense of shared experience is emerging.
Increasingly, people are recognising that governments and public services are no longer functioning as they should, and that our current system of governance is in disarray.
This doesn’t mean a dramatic event or series of events won’t occur. In fact, it’s likely that such disruptions are already on the horizon. At some point, the system we’re all riding—like a train—will derail.
We’ll then face a choice: attempt to repair and continue on the same damaged track or accept that our future requires a new direction—one not bound by tracks laid by others and not limited by a system incapable of change.
In truth, we’ve come far enough to know that change is inevitable. The real question is whether we’ll embrace meaningful transformation that could benefit everyone or resist it out of fear—clinging to the comfort of a train we’ve grown dangerously accustomed to.
The opportunity to engage in conversations and act toward building a Local Economic and Governance System is already available to us.
While the defining milestones of The Revaluation may not yet have arrived, they are surely close. Now is the time to explore, plan, and consider how a fully localised, people-centric system can work—for us and for everyone.
This morning, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered her pre-budget statement ahead of the Autumn Budget, scheduled for 26th November.
Despite mounting welfare costs, Reeves offered no meaningful solutions — only strong hints that taxes will rise, paired with blame deflected onto everything and everyone except the government itself.
It’s no surprise, then, that Nigel Farage rushed out a bold announcement promising welfare cuts if Reform wins the next general election yesterday, while Tory leader Kemi Badenoch quickly followed Reeves with an online broadcast that, in substance, amounted to much the same.
As the government flounders, it seems poised to announce little of substance of savings on benefits or public services — yet millions already trapped in a financial vice not of their own making will see the cost of living rise again, working harder for ever-diminishing returns.
The Tories — who helped engineer the current crisis over their 14-year tenure up to summer 2024 — and Reform — now visibly undergoing their own establishmentisation makeover — aren’t offering help to people either. They’re offering help to the economy.
And that’s precisely where the problems began for those whose lives revolve around the benefits system today.
There are hard truths here. Truths that many untouched by poverty still find just a little too uncomfortable to believe.
There will always be people who are:
• Out of work for valid reasons
• Unable to work due to illness, disability, or caring responsibilities
But there are also many people who want to work and are able to work — yet still can’t. Why? Because:
• They can’t find jobs that match their experience
• They can’t find roles that fit their qualifications
• They simply don’t “fit” the mould employers are looking for
It’s easy to assume that anyone who wants a job can get one — any job, at any time. And it’s just as easy to judge those who don’t take “any job” as lazy, entitled, or abusing the benefits system.
But those who make these judgments often haven’t experienced what it’s like to be unemployed and dependent on state support.
The Reality of Benefits
Let’s be clear: basic benefits are not enough to live on.
We’re surrounded by comforting myths — stories we rarely question unless we’re forced to confront the truth. One of the most dangerous myths is that the National Minimum Wage is enough to live on independently.
• Minimum Wage: £12.21/hour. For a 40-hour week, that’s about £2,116.40/month
• Actual cost of living: To live independently, a single person likely needs £16–£17/hour — around £2,773.33/month
That’s a shortfall of over £600/month, even for someone working full-time on minimum wage.
The Impossible Choice
Now imagine you’re unemployed, with no savings or support, and your only option is to claim £628.10/month. What do you do?
• Take a job that still doesn’t cover your basic needs?
• Or claim every benefit you can, just to survive?
For many, working full-time in a low-paid job — often under poor conditions and public judgment — while still needing benefits just doesn’t make sense.
The Myth of the “Benefits Culture”
The idea that claiming benefits is an easy ride is a myth. Genuine claimants are treated the same as those gaming the system. The rules are rigid, often making it harder — not easier — to find meaningful work.
Pushing people into low-paid jobs that still leave them reliant on benefits, food banks, or debt might reduce one type of welfare cost. But it could as easily increase the others — through the problems that an ill-considered attempt to push everyone into ‘work’ will create, like mental health issues, workplace burnout, and long-term poverty.
The AI Displacement Problem
A growing wave of joblessness is being driven not by lack of talent, but by the unnecessary and unchecked takeover of roles by artificial intelligence.
Skilled, experienced professionals — once vital to their industries — are being sidelined by automation that prioritizes cost-cutting over human value.
As more capable workers are pushed into the job queue, many will find themselves forced to claim benefits, not because they lack ability, but because the system no longer has space for them.
The Bigger Problem
Most people on benefits aren’t lazy — they’re surviving.
When life becomes a daily struggle, the benefits system can feel like the only option.
But simply cutting benefits without creating real alternatives — like jobs that pay enough to live on — risks pushing thousands into homelessness and crisis.
The Psychology of Work and Pay
Most people don’t need prestige — they need security.
If lower-paid or less challenging jobs guaranteed that workers could meet all their financial obligations and live with dignity, many would take them without hesitation.
The problem isn’t the work itself — it’s that the pay doesn’t match the cost of living.
When people know they can cover rent, bills, food, and essentials every month, they’re far more willing to contribute, even in roles that society undervalues.
What Needs to Change
We can’t fix the benefits system without fixing the economic system that creates the need for it.
If we want fewer people on benefits, we must:
• Build an economy where full-time work pays enough to live on — without top-ups
• Stop supporting a system that enriches a few by impoverishing the many.
Until the government legislates for a fairer system — one where the lowest-paid can live independently on a full day’s work — poverty will persist.
The Basic Living Standard is a foundational guarantee that ensures every individual earning the lowest legal weekly wage can afford all essential costs of living—without falling into debt, relying on welfare, or turning to charity.
It defines the minimum threshold of financial independence, where core needs—such as food, housing, utilities, healthcare, transport, clothing, communication, and modest social participation—are fully covered by earned income alone. It also includes provision for savings, unexpected costs, and fair contributions to society.
This standard is not aspirational—it is structural. It affirms that full-time work at the lowest wage must equate to full dignity, autonomy, and security.
***
No food banks. No emergency loans. No skipped prescriptions or unpaid bills. Just a life that’s livable, sustainable, and free from poverty.
Assisted Dying may be controversial for those uncomfortable with the realities of Death. But it’s not the same thing as suicide and anyone uncomfortable with that reality should not be influencing public policy
To say the issues underpinning the purpose of the Bill are proving to be massively controversial would be an understatement.
But the whole question is very complex even before beginning to consider the answer and mechanics of a solution. And this reality seems to yet again be being missed by many politicians by who really should know much better.
Sadly, for us, they don’t. And whilst the Bill could and should have been handled far better than it has by the current government, the different fear-driven arguments lining up against it risks thousands – and potentially even some of those who are arguing against it right now – finding themselves unable to access the relief that they need. For no better reason than the indulgence of the unfounded fears of those who probably never will.
The tricky part is Death
Perhaps one of the most difficult subjects for any of us to deal with in life, is the question of mortality and death.
Few of us find comfort with the certain reality that our bodies will eventually die.
We certainly don’t wish to contemplate the idea that we could find ourselves incapacitated one day.
And we really don’t feel comfortable considering the possibility of a situation ever existing where we would be unable to communicate with others at the time when wishing to find a peacefully assisted way out of life may in fact be the genuinely preferential choice.
It is much easier instead to assume that we would and could never want to end our own life and have reason to ask for help to do it. That this is something that would never happen to me. And that what life means to us today must be protected and held secure in any way that it possibly can be.
To be fair, this is a feeling shared by almost everyone who has no health problems; is perhaps younger than most, or who has no reason to believe that they could ever find themselves at a very difficult stage of life where death might be the preferable option.
A situation where they would be experiencing significant and potentially intolerable discomfort and pain, that may itself be beyond the scope of functional life if to continue means becoming dependent upon high levels of pain relief.
However, for those who have already found themselves staring their mortality in the eye, knowing that there’s unlikely to be anything good about their last hours, days and perhaps many weeks before they go, looking reality in the eye takes on a very different meaning.
As we consider what the outcome of this Bill really means for people other than ourselves, it’s important for us all to understand that the experience of dealing with an end of life that has now become expected and what that means to the patient can be just the same if not worse for very close family and loved ones – who will know what this kind of suffering means more than most thankfully could.
Assisted Dying and Suicide are only similar in so far as they both involve the choice to end your own life
The fact that we are culturally backwards when it comes to death, means that we fail to have or take part in the conversations and openness about what is essentially the last part of life.
We don’t discuss or consider the realities of death as we really should.
Therefore, we avoid looking more closely at what the process of dying for those who do go with the knowledge they are going to do so really means.
The prickliness this lack of discourse creates leaves many of us facing the ridiculous situation where we back off from friends and people we know with terminal illnesses and even cancer diagnoses; sometimes without even realising that we are avoiding the issues around mortality.
Issues that would make life a lot easier for everyone if we were more willing to embrace them as being normal.
That said, everyone should recognise that there is a very distinct difference between the circumstances where a person will have to contemplate the otherwise unthinkable need to alleviate pain and suffering by ending their life sooner than what will already be an early death, and the equally tragic but also all too often isolated and lonely circumstances that surround the question of Suicide for those who have reached or are reaching anything like the conclusion that they no longer wish to continue in their life.
Assisted Dying and Suicide are not the same thing
There is a significant difference between choosing to die by committing Suicide and choosing to die through a process of Assisted Dying.
People choose to end their life through Suicide because they find the prospect of continuing to remain alive in their body too painful to contemplate.
People would choose Assisted Dying, not because they want to die. But because remaining in their body has become too painful or difficult to continue being alive – and what we would likely all agree as being a realistic quality of life is therefore no longer possible.
Whilst some would argue that there is no difference between the two, or that the differences are too subtle to make any real difference, the reality is that the need for Assisted Dying is based upon the alleviation of pain and circumstances that are or will be created by our physical state. Whereas the wish to end life through Suicide reflects pain and circumstances that are ultimately created by our mental health – often by external factors and our relationship with them – that are outside of our control.
In the most basic terms, we are talking about the differences between physical and mental pain.
As Assisted Dying is about addressing physical pain, it seems only appropriate that this is dealt with as any other physical health issue would be – with specific policies and procedures to deal with it.
Being idealistic is great, until idealism meets practical reality
We are at least talking about Assisted Dying – even if there is a significant risk that those who are afraid of what will happen if the Bill becomes law are potentially being as inconsiderate to the few that really need this option, as those involved in the debate who may well have more sinister considerations in mind.
Suicide, on the other hand, is the silent tip of the wider mental health epidemic. Quietly swept under the carpet. Probably because just like the prospect of experiencing a natural death, which may be unbearably painful, very few of us believe that we could ever reach the level of desperation, where we might want to take our own life, simply because we no longer felt able to go on.
Where the picture can blur: Suicide and the Mental Health Epidemic
Regrettably, we are living in times where the boundaries of common sense and the values that underpin life have been deliberately blurred so that experiences and actions that are either different or motivated very differently can be argued as either being the same or resulting in the same thing.
People in genuine need of consideration and help are forgotten, whilst fashionable problems become the priority for all.
Whilst the realities that underpin Suicide and Assisted Dying can be defined between the escape from mental or physical pain, it must also be recognised that there is a potentially significant group of people who may feel more open to the idea of ending their lives, if they were to be able to engage in the process of Suicide with the assistance of someone else.
It’s easy for those looking on to scoff at this and therefore write off any such position as being whimsical. But for those who are thinking about the process of taking their own life methodically, the prospect of failing but making things worse for themselves is as real as the reality that others need help either to see things from a different perspective, or more likely changes to their circumstances which at that point feel well beyond their own control.
We should be under no illusion that those who have really reached the point where they cannot continue to live will find a way to make an exit.
The real selfishness that rumbles alongside the difficult subject of Suicide, isn’t the act on the part of the person who succeeds in taking their own life – no matter who or what circumstances they may leave behind.
The genuine selfishness surrounding Suicide is the lack of empathy and consideration on the part of others who cannot or will not conceive, just how desperate, lonely and hopeless a situation will have become for anyone, when they have concluded that the only solution for them is to take their own life.
Instead, many others make ‘their’ pain, about ‘me’.
It is an absolute tragedy that any person, no matter the circumstances, should find themselves considering Suicide as an option.
But the problem is very real, and anyone choosing to pretend that the questions this whole debate raises don’t matter, because it’s not something that normal people deal with every day, is simply deluding both themselves and anyone they are making decisions about life on behalf of.
Meanwhile, the ONS tells us that in 2024 there were 568,613 deaths in England & Wales, meaning that in today’s terms, we are talking about at least 1% of deaths each year for Suicide and Assisted Dying (More than 2% or 2 deaths in every 100), which feels like a lot of people to be trying to escape life or death level pain, who are currently being overlooked.
Assisted Suicide is something different, again
Opening up the meaning of Assisted Dying so that it is considered to be the same as Assisted Suicide could indeed be a significant problem. If the appropriate safeguards are not in place.
However, the circumstances should never exist where Assisted Suicide becomes a problem. Provided that an adequate system of checks and balances are put in place that prevent any situation from coming into existence where death could arguably become a lifestyle choice. Thereby effectively legalising the death of ‘unwanted’ people at the hands of others who get away with murder.Because the establishment has helpfully allowed circumstances to exist where this terrible act can be given a different meaning by using an alternative name.
However, shutting down those possibilities does not address the reality that there are a lot of very unhappy people across the UK.
People whose lives could be improved massively if those responsible for public policy and direction were doing their jobs properly.
And there are a lot more suffering with these problems than any of our politicians might openly like to think.
Regrettably, as with most things where politicians and influencers are getting so wrong about the lives they are supposed to be improving, you really do have to have experienced a mental health problem or had your life touched by someone experiencing one to even begin understanding how very real the impact on functional life for the sufferer and those around them can be.
It is horrid to have to consider that once any person has stepped into the living tragedy that is the mental health epidemic, there is very little available to help those suffering to find a cure, beyond management of the condition itself.
Unfortunately, many of the causes of the wider mental health problem and indeed the absence of the types of support and the environments that create real happiness stem from the massively unsustainable, money and material orientated and valueless lives that we are now leading and that we are encouraged to live.
It is a situation that is itself dehumanizing the way that we approach everything and is therefore making our interpretation of such difficult issues as Assisted Dying and Suicide considerably worse.
The role of fear for those making decisions for us who are themselves completely unaffected
Our political system is failing us through the selection and appointment of so-called leaders who cannot lead, who we know today as politicians.
Lack of good leadership and public representation has become so problematic and embedded across society that it has become difficult to comprehend just how far the rot has spread throughout the public sector and our entire system of governance.
Regrettably, poor leaders, who don’t have the qualities and abilities necessary to lead, are as likely to indulge their own fears whilst identifying them as being those of everyone, as they are to being led in any direction that they are advised by whoever they might choose to listen to or be influenced by at any time.
Yes, there are very good reasons why no sanctioned or legalized form of death that involves the assistance of anyone else should simply not be allowed.
However, this is the 21st century. We do not exist in times where a system of checks and balances would be difficult to put in place and maintain.
If any good government were to consider the facts and mechanics of how the genuine need for a pain-free or comfortable death for those who are already known to be terminally ill and have rapidly reducing or arguably no remaining quality of life, a properly considered and fully consulted process should be more than possible.
However, it would need to be conducted without the emotion and the irrationality that is running rampant through the corridors of power at this time.
We would then surely be able to create and implement a system that would work for everyone, providing all the assurances necessary, whilst managing what are the relatively small figures of people who need Assisted Dying as an option in real terms, so that they can make the choice.
It is unacceptable that we have people who have been elected to represent us and therefore make meaningful and fully considered decisions upon our behalf, who do not have sufficient self-awareness to be able to discern that they are considering only their own views and experiences.
Nobody should be enabled to consider their own view to be qualified and therefore more reliable than that of others, purely because of the position that they have attained, and nothing more.
The Depopulation Agenda
Perhaps the most destructive element of the Assisted Dying debate entering public discourse, is the growing fear that the whole Bill has been introduced as some kind of trojan horse; rolled into the legislative agenda with the intention of facilitating a Depopulation plan of the kind that has been mentioned by a number of different speakers linked either to the worlds elites or world-government-obsessed organisations such as the WEF.
Sadly, experience suggests that both the last Conservative as well as the current Labour Governments have pursued agendas that have zero alignment with the public good.
Decisions made and policies enacted are massively out of touch with reality and common sense.
They appear to have either been built upon the ignorance and ineptitude of the politicians themselves; because they are having their strings pulled by someone else, or both.
Regrettably, the fact remains that in terms of the things that politicians have and are doing that harm us and have the potential to harm us even more in the future, there are much bigger and much more real issues that we are choosing to ignore that are already affecting us and our lives today. Issues that are themselves laying the groundwork for sinister levels of societal control that make clear there really is no need for politicians to use such obvious tools as this Bill to achieve such aims – if that’s what they intend.
The fear that a growing number have of the establishment and all those who seem to have been able to maintain unquestionable levels of societal control, is very real to those who feel it.
But this fear could quickly be addressed if we were to all stop going along with the information meal that we keep getting served; take back our own power and begin taking steps to make every decision that relates to our lives, our communities and our environment, for ourselves.
Done properly, Assisted Dying would not be open to abuse by the State or anyone else
Were the process of putting a policy for Assisted Dying together conducted properly and with the resources, time and impartiality that it should be – given that as things stand, we are arguably kinder to our pets than we are to other people when it comes to the practicalities of dealing with a physical need for euthanasia, there is no reason to doubt that the necessary safeguards and protections could be put in place to ensure that no circumstances could exist where assisted suicide – whether voluntary or involuntary – could take place. Even in cases of dementia or other forms of mental incapacity where the sufferer had not themselves given reasoned and appropriate consent.
Regrettably, whether the Bill currently working its way through the Legislative system was as well intended as it arguably should have been or not, the reality is that like most things this political class touches, it is anything and everything else that sits beyond the real purpose and outcomes for the genuine beneficiaries of a successful process, that seem to be getting prioritised first.
Useful Contacts:
If you have been affected by any of the issues that have been discussed in this Essay, and are not already in touch with them, you can reach The Samaritans on the phone by calling 116 123 or Mind by calling 0300 102 1234.
Being right does not automatically make anyone else wrong; even when you have the loudest voice
The Penny appears to finally be dropping amongst the masses that power does not necessarily mean virtue. And it’s certainly no guaranteed of integrity either.
Meanwhile, for the powerful, reality is also now dawning that position, influence and how loud they may be in public (or how many people hear them) doesn’t mean that they can do anything they want and that the power they seem to have will automatically make anything they do right.
The problem is, belief that position and being seen to have won the argument, got the result or controlled the narrative – often with words, deeds and actions that are morally apprehensible when it comes to political power, have not only convinced the political classes that ‘do as I say, not as I do’ is baked in.
Politicians really have reached the point where they believe they are right, no matter the consequences or real human cost from whatever they do or what they say.
All because they are the ones deciding what’s right and what’s wrong.
Wrong things shape our beliefs and make them feel right
It’s not only a problem that public policy that isn’t really about the public at all is damaging lives, people, communities, the environment around us and the businesses that we need to survive and thrive.
The fact that sanitised but nonetheless tyrannical behaviour is coming at us constantly through every channel and digital stream that most of us regrettably consider to be credible sources, mean that many people are becoming conditioned with the belief that behaviour that is reflective of what our so-called leaders are doing is not only correct, but good for one and all.
The Dehumanisation of Life through remote-controlled Techno-Tyranny
Regrettably, there is an urgent need for us all to recognise that the dehumanised way of life that is progressively taking over with each and every step taken towards the Tech and AI Takeover, where it seems that every need possible can be met through the tap of a finger on our phones, is feeding into the nightmarish version of an increasingly dystopian life and living environment for us all.
It’s sucking up lies from each direction, whilst simultaneously convincing us that we still have freedom and choice.
We’ve lost sight of the very principles and values that equip us to function, communicate and interact with other human beings face-to-face. All within a rapid, dehumanising transformation process, that is currently succeeding in convincing otherwise very sensible people that the only guides and directives necessary for a successful life come from a smart phone or online.
What is more, the whole process has already began removing and questioning ‘common sense’, taking everything in life backwards.
We find grown adults fighting over whether the basic tenets of life are either wrong, right, open to interpretation or that taking what should be obvious as read and thereby offending somebody over what only they might ever believe is itself enough to justify ruining the other persons life.
We are the sum of our experiences
It really doesn’t matter who we are. One thing that we can almost certainly be sure that we have in common, is that if you or I were to stop and reflect upon our current view of the world; what everything means and how we see it; we would both be right.
We would both be right, because as individuals that’s what all the experiences up until this moment have taught every one of us. Even when our experiences may have been harmful to us, been incorrect (because of what others have done) or because for whatever reason, they are basically skewed.
Experience is cumulative too. Whilst none of us may wish to admit that the understanding we have of anything can only be as much as layer-deep, or that we have only reached a certain level of knowledge about anything; such limitation of understanding can therefore mean that what we believe to be right isn’t completely right.
It can certainly be very disconcerting to reckon with the reality that reaching GCSE, then A-level, then degree level, then masters level, then doctorate level in the same very specific subject may well mean that whilst we may have a very good and correct subjective view; in objective terms, even then, as an ‘expert’ or with even a recognised level of qualification, we are still a very long way from getting it right.
Misplaced confidence based on our beliefs being ‘who we are’, when our beliefs come from those who influence us
Recognising the value that we give to others when they have been awarded academic qualifications is one thing.
Then there is also the phenomena which is the way that we give credibility to others simply because they have a role (like politicians or public officers) and most alarming today, to influencers (which can mean many things), based on nothing more than the reality that they have a platform of some kind, where the number of people watching, following, liking or subscribing gives them credibility that reaches beyond all other things.
Oddly, when anyone speaking or even writing doesn’t appear to have one or more of these status anchors, we seem to consider whatever they are sharing to not have the same legitimacy. No matter the content of what they say. And if what they say contradicts our own message and belief system in some way, there is all too often the chance that we will simply assume that whatever they offer has no value and that they are therefore ‘wrong’.
Misplaced confidence based on our beliefs being ‘who we are’, when our beliefs come from the establishment, religion and the shibboleths they impose
Perhaps more difficult to consider and accept is the role and influence that what we might otherwise call cultural or societal norms have on our beliefs and therefore behaviour. Because we can all too easily believe that these are just the things that ‘normal’ people do.
How we behave in public. How we consider some behaviour and actions to be acceptable whilst others are not. How we consider right and wrong. How we look up or look down upon others – in ways that would be called prejudices in any other terms. Increasingly how we stop and question actions and behaviours that we had previously not given a second thought to because we considered them to be normal, but now we stop and feel guilty because we thought them.
These are all based upon the belief systems that are set, adapted and increasingly forced into our lives by the organisations that we recognise as being the establishment. And for some more than others, from our religions which can become the most important source or framework for our behaviours and what we expect for ourselves and from others across our lives.
Whilst we must recognise that some of the rules and social codes that have come from our system of governance and our religions can be very good for us and for everyone in very specific contexts, we also need to understand, accept and therefore recognise that many of the rules and social cues that we live by were or have been created as forms of social control.
They have been created and are used to foster and promote fear of something that is apparently outside of our control, so that what we do have control over can in turn then be restricted and therefore controlled by someone else.
For instance, there is no need to question the existence of a God, Source, universal force or whatever we may each choose to call the focus of what we might ultimately believe in, to recognise that words and interpretations can change each time they are passed on.
We must recognise that ultimately, to further the scope, reach, influence and power of religions, the people who benefit from being in control of those religions have created compelling stories and interpretations of those stories and what they may or may not require of us. All based upon material that has itself been passed on potentially many times, each time by another person who was never actually there at the time whenever the chain of these stories first began or could be witnessed firsthand.
Genuine, voluntary and uncoerced faith in the system and faith in a religion can be the same or should be the same. In that they are most powerful, most compelling and most beneficial to us and to others, when they are left to us all to recognise what we believe to be true and in turn to then apply our understanding of everything in terms of what we know to be wrong or to be right.
There is no system in existence that seeks to control or compel others coercively that is also unquestionably right or correct
Doing anything because someone with authority or because a book says so isn’t voluntary belief or choice.
It is dogmatic servitude that excuses itself by insisting that slavish adherence to whatever it teaches, automatically makes it right – even when it is very clearly wrong.
We are indeed fortunate that what we might call the societal operating system of British Culture is based upon the secularisation that the evolution of a Christian system has allowed to develop, that was itself probably only possible because of The Reformation and the otherwise questionable parts of the reign of King Henry VIII.
However, the freedom of thought and expression that becoming unshackled from the Church has ultimately brought has also made us massively vulnerable to anyone who understands how narratives, group thinking and the tools that media offers can be used to introduce and make us subservient to contrary systems of belief.
Indeed, alien beliefs that run contrary that everything our society has been built on have been progressively introduced and are reshaping societal beliefs, leading to people questioning their own common sense, whilst others simply accept philosophies and agendas that are ultimately not offering anything that is good for anyone and least of all you or me.
Fear is today being used to disproportionately exaggerate societal problems, in ways that have created the risk that those problems may quickly become even bigger problems that we would never otherwise have experienced.
Whilst learning to stop, count to ten and then think about what is being said, who is saying it, why they are saying it and what is really happening would help every one of us to uncover the truths that are good for us all to believe.
Finding and creating beliefs that we can trust
There exists no person, no government, no establishment and no religion that has the right to insist that either you or I believe whatever they say or require of us, without question.
Such expectation is an abuse of the rights of whoever they are victimising or making a victim of. Whether that victim is aware or sees their relationship as being that of a victim under an oppressor or not.
This is not a question of those with responsibility hiding information from those under their care that would otherwise be harmful to them.
This is about those with responsibility for others abusing the trust that others have given and that has been assumed from anyone who is vulnerable and then either ignorantly or deliberately misusing that trust to abuse they very people they are there to protect from such abuse.
We are in troubling times
Regrettably, few institutions now exist where integrity can be assured from the actions, behaviour and decisions from anyone that we don’t personally know and have no good reason to belief that they are and always will be as good as their word.
The digitisation and mission creep of the online world has exacerbated this greatly and made the overall process of dehumanising everything progressively worse.
The reality we must face is that if we want to own our own beliefs and develop them using reliable and trustworthy sources, we can and must only use face-to-face relationships and the benefits of the social interactions that remain open and available to us without accessing anything that is only available to us online.
The only relationship that matters is the one that’s right in front of us
For all the benefits that we may be able to agree upon, the latest forms of digital technology and artificial intelligence are also introducing a much bigger and malevolent dark side into the world as we know it.
Almost every system that has and is being introduced into daily life for you and me, is either already or soon will be used as a tool of control.
And these tools can and only will work as effectively as they do, because we believe that what they bring or give to us is good for us in ways that make us forget or overlook the freedoms they have replaced and ultimately the non-financial price that we pay.
Yes, AI for medicine, AI for diagnostics, AI for workplace safety and purposes like these are and will always be good uses. Especially so when they are not about profit but about improving life and therefore the common good.
But AI in any form that appears to make life easier, quicker, or that replaces the need for us or any person to do anything are not and will not be good for anyone other than those who profit from it.
The AI and Tech-takeover really doesn’t offer the whole of humanity anything that any of us need in day-to-day life. But it is set to take away a massive amount from us that we do.
Of all the beliefs that we have been conditioned to have, the belief that whatever is outside of us is better than us and that it reduces our value in any way, is the worst one possible for any of us to have.
When we interact properly with others and use all of the senses and skills that we have to communicate and to read, listen to and understand communication in the circumstances that can and only will ever be offered through real one-to-ones, we will soon begin to remember or realise that these are some of the very best sources of learning – and therefore belief development that any of us could ever have.
Once you become a number, it won’t matter what you believe
Relationships – that’s real relationships, with real people, in real life, really matter.
Once all those relationships have been lost and we no longer have the ability to interact normally beyond familial or friend-based relationships in person and everything else is done without people with names online, our opinions, what makes us happy, what makes us healthy and what is actually good for us will no longer matter. Because the humanity in relationships and therefore the values that make us human will have successfully been cast aside.
The most concerning aspect of the process and steps that are now taking us towards this destination is just how quick and therefore soon we will arrive there.
Whilst most of us still don’t even question what we have unknowingly given up and that has been taken from us, because we have accepted the belief that what has been given to us or that we have often actually paid money for has been good or even better for us in some way.
Thinking for yourself isn’t about being right. It’s all about thinking the right way
Whilst we may not have used this term here until now, critical thinking is the key for all of us to unlocking the door to the pathway that leads to understanding what everything in life is all about.
Critical thinking isn’t just the magical formula that gives us back the power to define our own belief system.
Critical thinking is the golden gift that enables us to recognise and understand the value of all the experiences that have made us and therefore to self-define who we are, and who we will be.
A certain truth that we would all benefit from learning, understanding and living is that none of us are right or will be right until the time that we recognise we are all right and that being right is just the next step in learning what else is right, until we all agree that right is exactly the same thing.
Adam Tugwell 