Here is a famous joke:


On his way through the universe, planet EARTH meets another planet. The other planet asks the EARTH: “How are you?“ EARTH replies: ”I am not well, I suffer from Homo Sapiens“. The other planet has words of consolation: “Do not worry, this will soon be over”.


In duerre.de, my intentions for this year have been written down as follows:


Presentations & Activities in 2018:

Wake up! The bell rings!

For me personally, the main topic in 2018 is how ruthlessly we destroy our environment and what are the consequences thereof. Besides, I am also concerned about the massive change due to the extremely fast technological progress, also known as “digitalization”.

In particular, I notice the social change in the world of adults. However, it seems that this change does not affect children and adolescents in their situations during day-care, kindergarden and school. We force our children to live a life that is the opposite of what we demand for ourselves.

As I see it, the destruction of our environment is an existential threat. Consequently, I feel rather convinced that humanity will only survive for a few more generations. I do not know if I should consider this a good thing or a bad thing, but I believe that, as long as we still exist, we should at least try to live in peace and happiness. And there is a little hope left in me that, in a digital world, we can limit the massive destruction of our environment a little bit.

So now I try to share my experience and knowledge during my presentations and interactions and to help especially young persons towards a happier and more successful life. Because this might be a small contribution towards a “slightly improved” world.


Let me give a short explanation and justification:


 

  • Grown-ups want self-determination and respnosibility. Children must obey.
  • The time spent at work decreases for adults, it increases for students.
  • Grown-ups want to move around, children have to sit still.
  • Leadership wants to make grown-ups look bigger, school makes children look small.
  • Grown-ups get flexible work hours. Children must be on time and get all-day schools.
  • Grown-ups want to be motivated intrinsically , children are motivated extrinsically.
  • Grown-ups want to share their experiences and learn together, children are trained and must learn by heart.
  • Grown-ups want to find self-fulfillment at work and joy. Children have to learn things that nobody ever needs and that the grown-ups themselves, too, can no longer master. 
(I will write a separate article on this).
  • Grown-ups live active lives, they strive towards work-life balance. This is unknown in day-care centres, kindergardens and schools.

#andsoon!


Perhaps we would create a more peaceful and less evil world if we treated our children like human beings. Maybe then they would turn into happy adults who can do without consumption and wars. And perhaps they would stop damaging our planet in the self-destructive way in which our generation is currently doing it.

RMD
(Translated by EG)

P.S.
Here is a presentation by Bruno Gantenberg on „unSchooling“. It makes many things clear.

Roland Dürre
Thursday April 5th, 2018

Can We Be Saved?

In 1999, it was played on the IF-Treff: our drama “Can We Be Saved?“. That is why we called it the IT-Treff Satire (1734) – you can read and play it here. The work was created and written down by Norbert Weinberger and yours truly – on our way to India in the overnight plane. And later, we polished in during many hours of fine tuning, before we finally played it in the Munich Schlachthof before an audience of more than 700.

In those days, we, as amateurs, were part of a good tradition from previous years during which the IT-Treff had celebrated through long nights with such famous protagonists as Gerhard Polt and Django Asül. The arena was always full, it was a hot summer. And in 1999, there was a wonderful finish to the legendary IT-Treff at the same location. We decided to stop because it was so beautiful. In my personal experience of many years, it is actually a wise rule to terminate something when it is best.

In those days, I – and I think the great Gerhard Polt thought the same – I still believed that something might be salvageable. Today, I am no longer so sure. Because too many things that I cannot at all understand happen.

A useless war in Syria that nobody can and wishes to stop.

A Germany that, as an heir to the Third Reich, again gets really into the leading role when it comes to producing weapons and the always predictably failure-doomed attempt at solving problems with armies. For me personally, this is extremely bitter, because if there ever was a country that had a good reason to never again have an army, then it is exactly this said Germany. Yet that is not what we did – and thus we missed a historically unique chance.

A language that suggests wars are harmless, because it continuously uses words like information war and economic war.

  • A world-economy that is more and more centred around betting and has long ago liberated itself from the real economy.
  • And as a by-product, we ruin the planet to such a huge extent that it probably no longer makes any difference if more and more people get poorer and poorer while very few get obscenely rich. Because all will be over very soon, anyway.
  • A world where, in the wealthy countries such as the FRG, one ton of car probably is no longer balanced by 100 kilograms of humanity. Regardless of the fact that the people – especially those who drive cars – are far from light-weight.
  • With people in this world for whom it is more important that their cars have space than that they themselves have space.
  • With a principle that systematically puts growth that is impossible over “less is more”.
  • And much more that nobody can understand, yet in some way or other everybody does. …

Mind you, I am basically not a sad or pessimistic person. On the contrary: I enjoy life and have lots of fun. In fact, sometimes I almost have a bad conscience because I am doing so well. Said conscience is then pacified by me writing these stupid articles. Or by me doing things like in the video below. How sad that I get the impression it might all be in vain. And regardless of the fact that, basically, everybody I meet agrees with what I say, the opposite of it is done collectively.

So – thank you for reading it! And perhaps even for watching the video recording. And if you enjoyed the video, here is another, even better one! It is even more worth watching!

Sorry, I just cannot quit!

RMD
(Translated by EG)

P.S.
The theatre play (IT-Treff Satire) was so great that I would like to see it again? Does any of you feel like performing? I would willingly support a re-run. Maybe in a potpourri with several short and quick pieces, as part of a nice party?

Roland Dürre
Sunday March 18th, 2018

Creative Communication – Texts

I remember something I really enjoyed. On October, 22nd, 2017. That was the day we met in Nuremburg to try something new in the evening. On that Wednesday, we planned a little show. We were going to jam with images, music and text and “be really creative”. It was the closing of the DOAG yearly conference “Soft Track“ sessions. We, that was Christian Botta, Knud Johanssen and yours truly .

The motto was “Jamming instead of Complaining” (Nicht Jammern sondern Jammen).

You can also see a Video recording. As promised, here are the texts accompanying the video.

To begin with, I introduce the solo by ALTO – the alto saxophone, a little towards the middle of the presentation (recited by Knud Johannsen)

Here is what ALTO the saxophone said.

And here are my texts. As a warm-up, I punched in a few catch-words (words that make sense). I only took words that started with the letter “K” in German. After all, it was all about “creative communication”.


Kaizen (in Japan as early as in the 1940ies), capital, commercialization, communication, accounts, costs, caste, consumption, concern, commerce, control & cooperation, tie, constructivism, context, cybernetik, communism (evil), capitalism (good), art (you cannot earn a living with it), coal (everything is based on it), carbon dioxide, Knud (the one with the saxophone), children (you no longer hit them these days), the (punch) card as the beginning of the computer, cats and kindergarden will come, crucifix will soon be a thing of the past (?), church, the motorbike, the crane, the power plant, nuclear energy, cars, (K70 but not as a combined thing), the cosmos, struggle (against sickness), war (is ostracized, but instead happens on the streets), committees, criminal stories & Kinsey(-report) – it was all crass, collective and complicated …


Then the time trip began with text and music, from yesterday over today into tomorrow – the stars  ****** in my texts always mean that Knud or Christian are the authors. And for those who do not know the songs, I always added a link to a video recording of the song. Naturally, the music played by Knud on his ALTO are always recognizable on the video recording.


Yesterday


***** Yesterday (ALTO & Knud)
Yes, that was yesterday.
Yesterday was the beginning of Anthropocenum, – which is how we propose to name a new  geo-chronological epoch: the era in which homo sapiens  has become one of the most formative factors for the biological, geological and atmospheric processes on the earth. (Wikipedia).
It all started quite well! Electricity replaced coal, what progress! Electric motors instead of steam engines. Wonderful!
But: Electricity is still made from coal.
It is all still about coal – time is money.
***** Money – That`s what I want (ALTO & Knud)
Yesterday was also:
The conveyor belt (Taylorism – after Henry Ford or as practiced in the Chicago slaughterhouses) becomes part of the administration (process and organisation). The caste of engineers becomes the manager caste. Humans are resources. Punch cards for the white collars, too.
Power is in the hands of men. They are the makers. Positive: we have more wealth and are less hungry. We dance on the iceberg.
***** Dirty Dancing (ALTO & Knud)
A life of wastefulness. Waste and nonsense – like the life boats on the unsinkable ship Titanic.
***** Titanic (Alto & Knud)
On the streets, you can hear: damage what damages you!
***** Brick in the wall (ALTO & Knud)


Our trip continues in the Present:


Today


***** Löwenzahn (ALTO & Knud)
Today, success means “survival”.
With joy in life.
And the courage to preserve.
Since life becomes more and more complex: here is how it works. Basically, it is already complex enough. Then we find mistakes that are complex. Correcting the mistakes is complex and makes the system even more complex. We find new, even more complex mistakes. This is how you get a vicious circle of complexity.
***** Solo: Christian climbing a mountain to get at simple, complicated, complex and even “research“ projects (spoken presentation) supported by Heidi.
Enterprises become “excel managed companies“. They are considered machines. The managers turn the levers of this machine and thus control the turnover, profit and stock market value. Everybody competes against each other when planning and everybody bets no end. The golden lamb is growth. In politics, they talk a lot and do not do much. We know everything and do nothing. Inherent necessities rule and we have a contingent of women.
Regardless: wherever you look and in many dimensions, you will find upheaval and new ideas. We now understand: it is not that we lack the courage to do it because it is a hard job, but it becomes a hard job because we lack the courage to do it.


Tomorrow


Let us continue our trip and look at tomorrow. What will be important tomorrow?

  • Less is more!
  • KISS (keep it simple, stupid).
  • Leadership – make people look great, instead of small!
  • The future cannot work for individuals. Let us network and cooperate. Co-creativity will be the concept of the future.
  • Communicating at eye-level!
  • Give others your time, inspire and give impulses.
  • Freedom: willing and being capable of living your own life in a self-determined way
  • Wisdom as human prudence.
  • Sustainability: production cycles with no Waste
  • Biophilie: act in such a way that both your own and other lives will tend more towards increasing than decreasing in many dimensions.
  • The future is female!

We cannot make things right.
We can do the right things.
What will happen if we do the wrong things right?


Then there were some nice solo pieces by Christian (for instance about complexity), Knud never seemed to stop rapping and playing; and then everybody hummed imagine and sang hey jude.

For me (and I believe the same is true for our audience), those were 30 beautiful minutes of our lives. And if you now have become curious: here is the direct LINK to the video recording. We wish you lots of fun when you look at the material

RMD
(Translated by EG)

Roland Dürre
Wednesday November 15th, 2017

The Future of the Planet

Today, I will not write about electric bikes or sex, but about politics.

The Jamaican coat of arms

Jamaica

Currently, many people develop a sudden interest in the land of Bob Marley. It is about Jamaica, which, naturally, is only a silly word-play. It is all about the “Coalition Discussions“ (Koalitionsverhandlungen) in Berlin. We call them Jamaica because the coat of arms of this country is identical with the colours of the parties concerned (black, yellow and green).

I must admit that I had been hopeful for the Green Party to be the positive factor in these discussions.

But what is the Green Party doing?

They went to Berlin with demands that were probably justified but it is clear that these demands cannot be successfully pushed through during negotiations (which has already been proved). The first of these demands was that the combustion motor be abolished in the year 2030 (1) and the second was that all coal-based power plants be closed by the same year (2). Especially (1) sounds more than utopian. Besides, we do not need general goals but actual measures.

Electricity must replace coal, not use it up!

I will not comment on (2). After all, it is evident that the only way we can and must end the “dark” era when fossil energy was burned using electricity. Yet replacing coal by electricity cannot mean that half of the electricity world-wide is produced with coal. This must (and will soon) become a thing of the past. However, I find (1) a lot more exciting.

Driving an automobile is out!

Everybody must realize that an “individual mobility” based on electricity cannot and will not be the same as many of us now use the car. Just like “autonomous cars”, too, will not be driven in the same way as MEN and WOMEN drive them now.

2030 will soon be here!

In only 12 years, it will have arrived – that is as many years as the life-span of a car used to be. In that respect, what the Green Party demanded would have been rather easy to realize.

Prepare for the exit!

One of the factors is to quickly establish a speed limit – if necessary, why not step-by-step so that people can get used to it – but with a clear end even before 2020 at a maximum of 30 km/h in closed built-up areas, 70 km/h on secondary streets and 100 km/h on motorways. And, also step-by-step, a truly relevant and drastic increase in taxes on fossil fuel (including kerosene for planes). And if then the gigantic subsidies on “business cars” (at least the huge practice of abuse) were finally restricted, then the entire scenario would make sense!

Slim end efficient!

That would be a slim and efficient solution and it would raise hopes for a “soft landing”. It would also make quite a few stupid ideas, such as road charges, obsolete. And the Green Party, perhaps for good reasons, does not wish to be unpopular. Mind you, I personally believe that being unpopular brings you more votes than it costs you.

Investing in the future

And the money you get from all these projects must not be spent for building even more new motorway crossings on two levels with up to ten lanes, which today apparently, as a consequence of the motorway expansion having to happen on ever more lanes, has become a necessity. Instead, we should invest these moneys in a public transport system and, of course, in the “energy change” – which basically only means the abolition of nuclear and coal-based electricity production. As I see it, we are actually already quite well under way in this respect.

RMD
(Translated by EG)

Roland Dürre
Wednesday November 1st, 2017

About Authenticity and Identity in a Real and Virtual World.

 

A Tightrope Walk

 

Stone mask from the pre-ceramic New Stone Age around 7,000 before Christ. One of the world’s oldest masks (Musée Bible et Terre Sainte, Paris)

In this article, I formulate ideas I got during my current work on “block-chain technologies” in general and “crypto currencies” like Bitcoin in particular. Actually, my own ideas rather surprised me. Because many things that had not been clear to me before have become clear during the process.

Let me start with terminology: WORLD, REAL and VIRTUAL.

For me the WORLD is all that is around me – humans, social systems, … My dealings with the WORLD are through interactions and transactions. My activities not only touch me, but also instances from WORLD. On the other hand, events from WORLD also concern and touch me.

For me, the REAL world is always what I can see, touch, feel, experience. Or what I can eat. The same is true for the firewood I feed into my oven in order to get a cosy warmth in the room. The warmth from the central heating was also REAL for me. After all, I know its origin, which is either from the outside as long-distance heating or from my basement. Even money was REAL for me – but is that true?

I would say that everything I could picture myself was the REAL world for me. But newspapers were also REAL for me, and the same was true for telephone conversations. Even watching TV was part of the REAL world for me. Is that still the case?

The VIRTUAL world included what was “socially” offered, along with the products of the digital WORLD, the creation of which I myself took part in. There is no need to go as far as a mental concept of “second life“ or similar things. My first VIRTUAL worlds were forums and chat rooms where diverse, often technological, topics were discussed.

Today, social media, such as twitter, facebook and many more, could do that job. Or is all of this also REAL?

Let us now consider the terms AUTHENTICITY and IDENTITY. The first thing I learned here was how careless I (and our entire society) treat the term IDENTITY. I used to believe that the identity of a person is a singular thing. At least as far as the VIRTUAL world is concerned, this is nonsense. Because (so far) you have anonymity in the virtual world.

Anonymity means that 
a person or a group cannot be identified. If you want more or less the same meaning as anonymous, you can also say incognito. You will also find unknown, camouflaged and nameless (Wikipedia 10/2017).

Consequently, a person who wants to hang around in the internet “anonymously” (for instance as a bitcoin owner in the respective money community) needs more than one identity! He will need more or less one for every purpose. There is always only one person behind all these identities. It is one unique and undoubted existence. But none of the identities will lead to it. So there are singular images of the “authentic person” leading to diverse identities, but no way back – i.e. it is impossible to find the person behind the scene through the identity. I find that rather exciting!

For me, authentity is something like an exceptional form of identity, i.e., the unique and true “original identity” that is hidden behind several identities. Incidentally, I cannot find the term AUTHENTITY in Wikipedia, but I can find Authenticity. Since it is so important for the topic I discuss, let me cite it:
Authenticity (from gr. αὐθεντικός authentikós “true“; spätlateinisch authenticus “reliable”) concerns the truthfulness of origins, attributes, commitments, sincerity, devotion, and intentions. (Wikipedia 10/2017).

Consequently, I would say that identities are nothing but anonymous alias instances for one singular authentic instance that I would call authentity. In the VIRTUAL world, they are just masks or Avatars . The owner of the mask/avatar remains anonymous and you cannot find out who he/she is, yet he “automatically” (guaranteed through technology and algorithm) has ownership of everything that belongs to his mask/avatar as part of the “community”.

For a Bitcoin, you would have the following scenario: all bitcoin owners are part of a special community of identities, all of which are anonymous. The surprising thing about it is: it works (or is supposed to work) through “peer2peer” interaction. So you have no central instance!

However, the used (necessary?) technology costs a lot, which means this currency is rather impractical as a means of payment. Which means that bitcoin will only be used for speculation (betting). On the other hand, what is special about that? After all, more than 90 % (99 %?) of all currency business, such as the exchange between EURO (€) and DOLLAR ($) and vice versa, are only made for reasons of speculation. They have nothing to do with the exchange of goods! Maybe normal money is also a VIRTUAL commodity today?

Back to the topic: I used to believe that my IDENTITY is actually my AUTHENTITY. But now I know better. The opposite is true: in the internet, I hide my AUTHENTITY behind various IDENTITIES. And no way must lead from them to my AUTHENTITY.

The AUTHENTITY is as unique as my DNA. It would be a good “key” (as a biometrical data set), since the probability of two identical DNA’s is practically zero (due to the quasi endless quality of DNA-s.).

So far, for instance, I still have to fill in the registration form at all hotels, i.e., I must give my surname, first name, place of birth, nationality, home address and passport number. As an entity, these data make me uniquely identifiable. I testify to their truthfulness by showing my passport and giving my signature. …
🙂 The hotel, too, has an address, although it would probably be more precise (and easier?) to just take the GPS coordinates.

But let us go step by step and start with the REAL world: the first thing I did was look for “truly anonymous identities” in the REAL world.

Here are the examples I found:

  • Numbered account: 
Formerly, and especially in Switzerland, it was possible to open an anonymous bank account. The account only had a number, but the bank did not know who owned the account (and the money deposited on it). Legitimation happened by giving a number (cipher). And everyone who visited the bank branch and had the account number and cipher could (anonymously) draw money from the account. It worked quite well for many decades.
  • Classified advertisements
    Formerly, you could publish classified ads, for instance personal ads, anonymously in daily papers. You had a cipher and said cypher was assigned to a key. With this key, the incoming replies were correlated with the advertisements (through the cipher).
    🙂 I remember how, at school in the 1960ies, we (especially the girls) were warned against marriage frauds that took advantage of this anonymity …
  • Car number plates, telephone numbers … 
If you think of traffic, car number plates come to mind. They, too, used to be anonymous – although there was a central agency (some kind of “man-in-the-middle“) who knew who was hidden behind the number plate. Today, only number plates for cars driven by federal security agencies and similar institutions are anonymous – even the police has no way of getting hold of them. The same used to be true for telephone numbers. Of course, the postal service, as “man-in-the-middle” knew who was hidden behind the telephone number. But if you had a good reason, you were not listed in the telephone book and could basically only be traced by being called.
  • Prepaid and Email 
In the REAL world, you could remain anonymous thanks to prepaid cards. And you could also open an email account without giving any personal information. But is that the definition of the VIRTUAL world? As I see it, there is currently a huge process of change, at least in Germany. These things can be done less and less easily. 
They want the darknet in the VIRTUAL world (?) to make less and less accessible. But that is not something I personally know. I would have to investigate in order to find out more.

So:
Currently, I cannot think of any existing anonymities established through identities in the REAL world. On the contrary: in my perception, ANONYMITY is not desired in the REAL world – and consequently it has been/is being more or less totally abolished by the legislators and the administration.

But then, is not the VIRTUAL world part of the REAL world? And isn’t the VIRTUAL world rather schizophrenic? On the one hand, everyone dreams of “anonymous currencies and communities” and on the other hand they do everything to abolish anonymity!

For instance, the postal service advertises its POSTIDENT-service, which, basically, has one goal: to abolish anonymity in the VIRTUAL world, as well.


Close to the customer – tailor-made identity management!

Here is the individual legitimation check for your customers – now online!
The Deutsche Post offers the tailor made identification concept for your business model. With our online and offline POSTIDENT method for legitimacy control, we identify your customers quickly, securely and without violating the statutes Geldwäschegesetz and Datenschutz (postal advertising).


Isn’t that hot stuff? Note that they use words such as – identity concept and legitimacy control.

But regardless, the service – which is definitely questionable and easy to abuse – is used by many internet providers who want to know who they are really dealing with.

For me, the following questions arise:

Isn’t it paradox if anonymity is completely abolished in the REAL world but can flourish in the VIRTUAL world? Regardless of the fact that the VIRTUAL world is basically part of the REAL world?

What if technological leaders like CHINA abolish anonymity? Would not the consequence be that, through the technology we import from them, we automatically forfeit our anonymity?

What sense does it make if the functionality of the “good old Swiss numbered account” is again realized through anonymous crypto currencies? Do we even want that to happen? Or isn’t it just a question of time before, for instance, the bank secret, too, will soon no longer be socially trendy?

Is it not so that the entire affair is just a special tool for speculation – just like “betting in the internet” becomes more and more popular and is already a massive business as far as turnover and profit are concerned?

As I see it, these issues should be discussed in the context of social ethics. But what do we do? We establish an ethics commission that deals with artificial intelligence and driverless cars. Yet we do not discuss the important question whether or not we should leave certain parts of society anonymous. We make noises about absurd data protection laws and get enthusiastic about it, although we know full well that it will not work in the way it was demanded, and in doing so, we get lost in a network of rules and laws that paralyze us and from which there will probably eventually be no rescue.

Incidentally, the solution to this problem is rather simple in my concept:
As soon as we have a (world-wide) guaranteed rule of law, anonymity is no longer needed. That is also true for an anonymous currency.

If and as long as, however, the rule of law is threatened or non-existent, we are well advised to keep “anonymous areas”.

RMD
(Translated by EG)

P.S.
Now I hope what I said is more or less understandable. I would not wish to have confused you with AUTHENTITY and IDENTITY. And as a post scriptum, here is another story:
In my carelessness, it happened that my purse was stolen from me early this spring in Athens when I was riding an underground train. It contained EVERYTHING. Consequently, I also had to apply for a new passport. They asked me if I wanted it with my digital signature. It is free whenever you apply for a new passport, whereas, if you want it later, you need to pay 20 € extra.
Naturally, I asked what advantages this digital signature would have for me. My advisor at the municipality was unable to come up with very much – except a strange professional register the purpose of which remained unclear to me.
So I asked him if the signature would at least be an option for the electronic tax declaration (Elster). When he said no, I declined – perhaps out of defiance – and I believe this decision will not be detrimental.

Klaus Hnilica
Thursday August 17th, 2017

“Don Carl“ – or: the Heroic Fight for the Underpants

Carl and Gerlinde (Instalment #52)

Rarely had Carl stepped into his underpants more enthusiastically in recent years. It was this great feeling of ’being embedded’ and ’being protected’ that he enjoyed.

It was a pleasure he made himself aware of several times each day these days – and the feeling was strangely enhanced whenever, during the day, he allowed himself to re-position the private parts hidden therein by discreetly re-arranging his trousers!

Yes – it was “allowed himself to” – not “had to” – as he formerly used to look upon it!

Because ever since, apparently, a movement that originated in Southern Germany – headed by the usual suspects /1/ – had started discrediting men’s underpants – which, incidentally, had been establishing an excellent tradition in the Christian culture over almost three hundred years – with Bavarian relish, Carl had become alarmed for more than one reason!

Yes – it was really a ’shock with an aura’ that found its way to Carl when, on this 13th day of August in 2017, he came upon said IF blog /1/ in the social networks. In this article, the author talked about a world-wide underpants-free future for all men: a world where, from one day to the next, wearing underpants by men was abolished. As a reason, it was stated that, apparently, all chafing, uncomfortable itching, disgusting tickling and virility-threatening clamping between razor-sharp zippers was now ignored, denied or hidden under a ’caftan ’.

A ’caftan’ that allegedly was only invented to give more freedom – that is, freedom for the ’unrestrained dangling of the male privates’ and consequently freedom to enjoy the ’so-called feeling of comfort’ that went along with it!

Of course, this had unimaginable consequences for the body – life – health – morals – society and economy! Not just for Germany and the European Union, but, when all was said and done, also for the entire Christian Occident and thousands of underpants-producing workers.

And was the time really chosen at random?

Had not just a few months ago Putin forbidden all activities around ladies’ underwear for the entire Eurasian Economic Zone, which had had disastrous consequences for TRIGA?

Maybe this was the balance against the male half of creation that was necessary due to gender-equality, after the first hit had devastated the female half of creation?

And was it really totally by accident that this campaign started in Bavaria of all regions? Or was it perhaps part of a long-planned conspiracy by Putin and Seehofer?

But when Carl, a few days ago when they had a meeting to discuss the ’development of new market strategies’ at TRIGA, mentioned these aspects, he was appalled to notice how his colleagues could not have cared less. Bernie – i.e. Dr. Osterkorn –, who was the head of the hosiery sector at TRIGA, in particular, did not seem to understand the impact of this event at all. As often before, he, again, lacked the antennae for trends in fashion and society!

Incidentally, the same was true for Gerlinde during their breakfast in the morning!

She, too, only had a laugh for him …

And – almost sympathetically – called him, Carl, a maniac who, once again, was chasing ghosts. And when Carl reacted offended and left the breakfast table without having drunk all of the morning coffee she always brewed for him with special love and care, she cried after him that she was not going to believe in the threat to occidental culture before Horst Seehofer appeared wearing a ’Caftan’ for the next Political Ash-Wednesday in Vilshofen!

Luckily, Carl knew what needed to be done in such catastrophic situations when everything was in danger of tumbling down: ’nothing’!

Now that was one aspect where, as always, he found himself in the best company with the others …

KH
(Translated by EG)

Roland Dürre
Friday March 17th, 2017

We Cure the Symptoms and Ignore the Sources.

Long Live Populism!

or
Talking Instead of Acting?

Charly, the Great Dictator.

Now I witnessed the first (electoral) campaign events with Martin Schulz. Even from the distance, I got the impression that this is another and admittedly talented attempt at using the general uncomfortable feeling of many persons as a resonance body for someone’s own goals and demanding a few improvements where small details are concerned that, however, only equal a treatment of symptoms if you look at the entire picture.

In these speeches, I perceived what is probably generally called populism and what is probably the last remaining recipe for success in the current generation of politicians. Apparently, nobody ever got the idea of asking what caused the problems and then introducing change in a social consensus through political activities.

Consequently, Martin Schulz is the next populist looming on the horizon for Europe. This time it is a candidate for the one “party of the people”. Again, the motto in the speeches I heard is the same:

We are appalled by the symptoms and enjoy to point out what went wrong, but we do not dare to approach the sources.

After all, that would be system-critical and call for change. Which is an absolute no-go. Especially for the SPD. Because that is something the comrades forbade themselves many years ago. After all, they want back to power. And even when they were part of the government, they avoided all “system-critical” issues wherever possible. Because “holy” practical constraints and systemic necessities stood in the way of change.

The environmental catastrophe and destruction of our planet (plastic, climate, …) and the social polarization of humanity with all its consequences such as flight because of destroyed living space and more left them just as untouched. In fact, they would like to just leave these issues out of the government altogether. Because it would only have be a nuisance.

“Social Democracy First” is rhetorically easy to communicate. Except: it is a little harder to actually realize and then to work on the causes. After all, you do not want to be (too) inconvenient and you also would not wish to hurt anybody, would you? These topics do not even appear in the electoral slogans, because bad news are not popular. Especially if you can no longer ignore them.

Regardless of the fact that reality, too, might well be a good topic for populists. See the video below. But if you talk about reality, you cannot be afraid of your own courage. You have to be able to bear the truth. And you are ill-advised if you fear that it might cost you votes. So what you need is courage. But currently, it seems that cowardice is more popular. Fear happens between the ears and it reigns over the world in a truly demonic way.

So here, yet again, I am trying to describe the reasons why our society drifts apart into fewer and fewer rich and more and more poor people. Which is exactly where you should get active if you call yourself a social democrat.

The reasons for polarisation are:

  • The free speculation with everything: currencies, enterprises, food, raw materials, property, copyright, all sorts of rights …
  • A property legislation that protects individual “mental property” in an exorbitant and excessive way;
  • A general understanding of ownership that seems to have totally isolated itself from the maxim of “ownership is also a responsibility”;
  • The social legitimacy of illegitimate influence on common-good interests exerted by interest groups (aka lobbyism as a criminal act of advantage theft);
  • Propaganda, including the seduction and manipulation on all levels, also of the sub-conscious, as a normal business method (aka marketing). Seduction that aims at making the concerned persons behave in contrast to their will and ratio.

Although we know better, we still believe that

  • Growth beats health;
  • Taylorismus beats task-identity;
  • Shareholder Value beats common-good economy.

When will we understand that

  • the interests of the stakeholders (customers, employees, …) should have priority over the shareholder interests and that
  • In a society with a future social togetherness instead of private property preservation must have the highest priority both for all individuals and the entity?

So why do politicians never talk causes but instead only make loud populist noises? And why do they always only write in their programs about minimal corrections and symptoms that need to be cured? And why do these methods actually make them successful?

🙂 Here is an example for POPULISM I rather like. Even if Harald Lesch is only partly correct (and I can easily imagine it), my aforementioned “social fear” might soon no longer play a role at all, because surviving will be more important.

Yes – this is exactly the speech I would like to hear from a politician…

RMD
(Translated by EG)

Two Magazines I Like – Or: Paper that Deserves to be Read.

brand eins & enorm!

I started “blogging” and publishing my experiences and ideas in the IF blog in 2008. It was a true delight for me to primarily do this for myself. Then I enjoyed noticing how many readers I have and also liked the many events and contacts that developed from it. Then I looked for and found a few co-authors, not many of whom actually remain to this day.

IF-Blog.de was also responsible for me finding brand eins. But more on this later in this article.

The January 2017 Edition

The history (Geschichte) of  brand eins officially starts in August, 1999. In 2008, brand eins was already in its ninth year. In fact, the early stages of its history were even three years before that, in 1996. And yet, like many of my friends, I did not yet know anything about brand eins.

The beginning of the brand eins story was probably with an interview by Jost Stollmann (1996). At the time, Jost was the boss of Compunet; the InterFace Connection GmbH was twelve years old at the time. My personal connection with Jost Stollmann is not only that we are both IT enterprises. No: he was also one of Rupert Lay’s students.

At the time, Rupert drove a red Series-Three-BMW (including a 2.0-litre machine), which was rather extraordinary for a Jesuit pastor. In fact, his car looked a lot like my red Series-Three-BMW (including 2.3-litre machine). That was something we enjoyed very much. Rupert’s BMW, however, was not a business car, but a gift (or item on loan) from Jost. And Rupert very much delighted in his fast red BMW and especially in its origin.

Incidentally, Jost Stollmann remained faithful to brand eins – he gave more interviews with them (in 2009 and in 2012).

(Unfortunately, I could not find the 1996 interview anywhere. I would really like to read it. If any of you has a link or a pdf for it, you could make me happy by sending it).

Florian Prange, Entrepreneur and Treasurer of FÖS.

brand eins is something I first came upon through Florian. At the time, Dr. Florian Prange had just started working for InterFace as a senior consultant. He was a very refined, young and socially active type of person. Today, he has his own enterprise and is treasurer in the board of directors of FÖS (Forum Ökologisch-Soziale Marktwirtschaft), which is also a very interesting address.

Florian liked my articles and consequently pointed me towards brand eins. In his opinion, my articles deserved a few more readers – and he thought that maybe this could be achieved through brand eins.

In fact, I did not know about brand eins at the time, regardless of the fact that it had already been on the market for nine years. For managers, the “must” magazines were the Manager Magazin or the  Wirtschaftswoche. Both are anathema to me – and I saw that brand eins was totally different and much better.

Consequently, I was fascinated by brand eins and quite a few friends and business partners were given a copy or two of the magazine over time. Giving it to them was always a huge success – many had never heard about it and were surprised. They were happy to get totally new impulses.

It was even beneficial in terms of business. One of my friends (If-blog author Edwin Ederle) managed to be mentioned in one of their editions with his enterprise data2impact (Feine Klitsche). And the reviews (Rezensionen) on brand eins I wrote in IF-blog for quite a few years were also often read.

Frau Gabriele Fischer Giving a Presentation for InterFace (2009)

This is also how I first met Gabriele Fischer, the founder of brand eins. My contact with her led to a great presentation by Frau Fischer at the IF-Forum.

Unfortunately, Frau Fischer did not want to become a “Youtube-Toussie“ (this is how she herself formulated it), which means we cannot offer you a video documentation of her excellent presentation.

And this is how posterity will really miss something very important.

brand eins still exists today – and it is now the established business magazine, not only for managers! And it is still the only paper I deem worthy of reading. …

Wrong!

I should have written:  Was. Because now I found enorm . That is a magazine dealing more with life than with business.

Here is how it happened. On Friday one week ago, I was introduced to Peter Felixberger (who, incidentally, is good friends with Gabriele Fischer). Among other things,  Peter was also the founder of changeX.

Today, he is programming manager of Murmann Publishers. He is the editor and responsible for the edition of kursbuch.edition and of the magazine enorm, as well as publisher of »Kursbuch auf Weltreise« (Goethe-Institut). And there are many other things he does on top of that. My friend Andreas Zeuch also published his latest book  at Murmann.

On that Friday, I had a wonderful conversation with Peter Felixberger. I noticed that there are many similarities between our ideas of value, interests and needs. Consequently, it was very nice for me to listen to him. He really made me quite enthusiastic about his publishing company and his products.

He also showed me enorm, which is a magazine directed at the age group between 20 and 40, but in my estimation it will find and has already found many followers among the younger and older readers.

I can easily imagine enorm in less than ten years being as much of a success as brand eins is today. Consequently, I will now give you a short mini review of the current edition 06 (December/January 2016/2017).

What is it that fascinates me about enorm?

There are two elements that fascinate me: the basic concept of the magazine and the topics.

I would say the basic concept is one of fairness and considerateness.

I rather like the topics because everything I find in the magazine is of high relevance for me. The structure is GET-UNDER-WAY, BECOME-ACTIVE and LIVE.. Under the subsection “Against All Odds”, I find a beautiful collection of topics that I consider extremely important today. After all, enorm has been available since January 2010. You will find all the editions since 2010 in the archive archive on their website. Also full of important topics. Many articles, however, are “not yet set public” – dependent on the edition. I find that reasonable, because especially if you write about important topics, you should also be able to earn money with what you write. Besides, there is still enough to read.

Now I wonder if it is perhaps a good idea to make some enorm editions gifts to my friends and business partners – as I formerly did with brand eins. Especially in the departments with the impossible name “Human Resource“ (HR), enorm might perhaps be extremely helpful in small and big German enterprises when it comes to better understanding the values, expectations, interests and needs of the employees. And there is probably no enterprise that could not potentially benefit from such understanding.

Withbrand eins, it was possible to read all archived articles for free. That seems to be a thing of the past. But I find many brand eins articles on the internet – see also the two Jost Stollmann interviews. And the Inspiration section on the brand eins website also looks very attractive to me.

Incidentally, it is also very rewarding to follow both magazines on twitter. Here are the “accounts“:
@brandeins and @enorm_magazin. So: #FF!

Buy and Pay!

I think it is a matter of fairness to, once in a while, also buy paper articles. If you do not wish to read it yourself, you can make a gift of it. And that will inspire other persons.

So here is what you want to do: walk to the kiosk on February, 24th and buy the next enorm edition.

RMD
(Translated by EG)

Roland Dürre
Tuesday January 17th, 2017

Prognoses are Difficult, Especially if they Concern the Future.

Complexity made by Visual-Braindump.de.

This sentence is not only said to have been spoken by Karl Valentin , but also by Mark Twain, Winston Churchill, Niels Bohr, Kurt Tucholsky (they all were rather intelligent persons). It clarifies a lot: prognoses are not at all easy – and the same is true for planning ahead. After all, planning is the little sister of the prognosis.

On Friday (February, 10th), I will give a presentation at high noon during the FORUM AGILE ADMINISTRATION 2017 in Stuttgart. The amusing title is:

“The inevitable unpredictability of the future“

Naturally, such a title was not something humble me came up with. Still, I find it suitable. After all, it sounds like the intellectual formulation of the simple truth that the future is not predictable. Just as they teach and write in the academic sociology and/or politics circles in their overblown way.
How am I supposed to plan for the future if I cannot even see the future? I will show you with a few examples how very seldom this will work.

I also would like to tell you how private enterprises will always make themselves scarce when matters get a little problematic. They are particularly keen on making themselves scarce if they managed to privatize good profit over many years and if then, as their life cycle nears its end, big deficits are on the horizon. Of course, deficits are something they want to burden society with, rather than face them themselves.

Whenever we are talking public agencies, this is not quite so easy. They have to survive disruptive situations, even in situations when a private enterprise would simply give up. Because life has to go on. Consequently, they need to maintain resilience, or do all they can in order to develop “anti-fragility”.

To be sure, resilience and anti-fragility are also just two additional buzzwords. They are supposed to make it clear that agile and flexible structures offer a huge advantage in times of change. And that strict processes can then easily kill a system.
I already have many ideas for my presentation. Now I am in the structuring and refining stage. I look forward to my presentation and my audience and would be delighted if I could welcome a few familiar faces in Stuttgart.

So here is all the information on the event. On the front page, you will find the program:

 

And details for the booking process can be found at the back of the page:

So I look forward to seeing you in Stuttgart.

RMD
(Translated by EG)

Roland Dürre
Thursday November 24th, 2016

“Digital Change” – About my Presentation – #nostructure !

Leider habe ich keine Bilder von Vortrag in Nürnberg und Rosenheim.

Unfortunately, I have no pictures of the presentations in Nuremberg and Rosenheim.

I always enjoy giving presentations. Most of them are for cherished friends or good causes. I try not to express truths, instead questioning those concepts I myself believe in.

Because I feel the “truth” inside myself that there is no such thing as an absolute truth.

It is a rather difficult topic. Just think of the sentence:

“Tolerance is the most precious commodity. Intolerance can only be tolerated against intolerance. But that is where it has to happen!“

A little pondering will quickly make you understand what the real problem is.
These days, I mostly speak about topics such as “leadership”, “entrepreneurship” and “digitalization”. I always learn most when I give a presentation. The same was true the day before yesterday in Kolbermoor, where I had been invited by Tech-Division, which is an enterprise that gave me a very positive feeling. The Tech-Division’s offices in Kolbermoor are at the “Alte Spinnerei“, which is a beautiful loft building.

This time, the title of my presentation on digital transformation was: 
What is often forgotten when people talk digitalization!

Since it is my desire to have something of interest for all the audience, I always bring something like a “critical potpourri”. I mostly work with metaphors. I try not to force the presentation into a structure. Consequently, as a matter of principle, I do not use slides (if the lecture hall is huge, I use emotional background images).
I only use the important standards of communication (such as the rule of three and the rule of five, Syllogisms  and logic arguments) within my “potpourri”. I used to give many “sales presentations”. The intention was to manipulate or at least to convince the audience of something.

Here is how I did it:

In my presentations, I introduced a (plausible) theory X (which was easily understandable for the audience) and then developed a logical chain: from X follows A, from A follows B … and from Y follows Z. This is how I deduced a message Z from X, wanting to show that from a commonly accepted assumption X a conclusion Z can be justified. Z was my message. I wanted to make the audience believe in Z. Those days are over.

In general, I like working with analogies during my presentations. For instance, I describe a principle or a mechanism that basically has nothing to do with the actual topic, yet it contains a message that can be applied to other principles or scenarios. And, depending on how I see the current moment, I also relate the analogy – or let the audience find it.

Here is an example:

Whenever I talk digitalization, I also talk infra structure. Infra structure is an exciting topic. We live in the Anthropozene (Anthropozän), that is the era of humans. Humans have changed the world, either considerably or totally. They created new infra structure and technologies. In fact, it started with the “humanoids” who were our forefathers.

Initially, a very long time ago, came the upright posture, the (resulting?) development of tools, the ability to think and speak (10,000 years ago?), followed by “written language” (5,000 years ago?). These innovations probably triggered the “information society”, or else they were at least what made it possible.

Building infra structure in mobility was probably started with the development of paths that facilitated “walking on foot”. When the wheel was invented (3,000 years before Christ?), the first forms of “streets” had to be built. Water (the ocean, rivers, lakes,…) has always played an important role when it came to mobility. A network of channels was used. Then came the postal service coach, the railway and mechanized and motorized individual traffic. The traffic network was extended to an unbelievable dimension.

However, not only humans and products must be mobile. The stories of the people also needed mobility. This is why the job of the courier was invented. Letters were sent, transmission by cable or radio communication, networks such as the telefax, telegram or telephone circuits were invented. Today, it is the internet. The first requirement for all these things was electricity. Consequently, they made electricity networks for transporting energy.…

What I like talking about in my presentations on “digitalization” is the road network, which – as I see it – is the biggest infra structure of all times. You can probably get to almost any inhabited place on this planet by car. You will find parking places, streets, gas stations and repair shops for cars everywhere – even on small islands. There is probably nobody who does not get products that have not at some point been transported by a truck or car.

There is probably no other sector where rules and regulations tell us how individual mobility has to look and what we have to do and what characteristics such a vehicle must have. There is a minimum age and you need a driver’s licence if you want to move inside this infra structure with a motorized vehicle.

For me, the question (naturally) is: what benefit did all this bring us if we look at the results. 1,400 million fatalities per year world-wide. Besides no end of health hazards through noise and air pollution. But also indirectly because we no longer exercise and consequently become obese. A landscape that is all concrete. And much more. Isn’t it quite obvious that one might fear something must have gone wrong? And that perhaps you should learn from history?

In my presentations, I take this huge infra structure and the way there as a metaphor for technologic development (after all, digitalization is only a part of technology). Now, being the orator, I have to decide:

Should I explicitly say it? After all, I am talking about “digitalization”. Consequently, everyone in the audience might start thinking about how the road network metaphor might be applied to the “digital network” and the internet.

I might choose to motivate people verbally towards thinking and I might give some impulses.

On the other hand, I might want to expand on facts that will motivate people to think by themselves. That the traffic network reaches almost every human. However, the internet currently only reaches 2 trillion out of 8 trillion persons. Facebook can allegedly reach 1 trillion persons. I say “allegedly” because some sources say the number is “only” 500 billion.

I could ask people what it means to be a “digital” person and internet user. Is it enough to use email and chat, have a Facebook account and occasionally use Wikipedia (which, basically, is just another thesaurus)? Or do I have to actively participate in order to be a digital person? Just think of the not-so-old buzzword Web2.0 that is now forgotten (humans becoming “part-givers”, instead of being “participants“)!?

This is how I intentionally try to give very “chaotic” and “confusing” presentations. I enjoy every single nice feedback. Especially if it is later modified by phrases such as “… but, unfortunately, it did not seem to be very clearly structured… “ or ”… even if occasionally I could not find a real thread… “

Because then I succeeded in doing what I wanted to do!
RMD
(Translated by EG)

P.S.
Here is another piece of advice: if you want to learn something about digitalization – meaning how it works – then I recommend you read Fefe’s Blog, That is the “BILD-Zeitung for Nerds“ (joke!) You can learn under many aspects.