 This is the OGM weekly call on Thursday, May 5th, 2022. It is Cinco de Mayo and I actually wanted to start with a poem about Cinco de Mayo, which is pretty interesting. Let's switch over to it here. It's called, quite handily, Cinco de Mayo. And goes as follows by Luis Rodriguez. Cinco de Mayo celebrates a burning people, those whose land is starved of blood, civilizations which are no longer holders of the night. We reconquer with our feet, with our tongues, that dangerous language saying more of this world than the volumes of textured and controlled words on a page. We are the gentle rage, our hands hold the stream of the earth, the flowers of dead cities, the green of butterfly wings. Cinco de Mayo is about the barefoot, the untooled, the warriors of want who took on the greatest army Europe ever mustered and won. I once saw a Mexican man stretched across an upturned sidewalk near Chicago's 18th and Bishop, one fifth of May Day. He brought up a near empty bottle to the withering sky and yelled out a grito with the words, que viva Cinco de Mayo. And I knew then what it meant, what it meant for barefoot Zapoteca indigenous in the battle of Puebla, and what it meant for me there on 18th Street among los ancianos. The moon faced children and futureless youth dodging the gunfire and careening battered cars, and it brought me to that war that never ends. The war Cinco de Mayo was a battle of that I keep fighting that we keep bleeding for. That war against a servitude that a compa on 18th Street knew all about as he crawled inside a bottle of the meanest Mexican spirits. And here's a link to that poem. I was just reading a poem called Cinco de Mayo. Thanks for reminding me about the transcript Pete. Happy Cinco de Mayo. I thought that the battle of Puebla didn't actually kick out the French, they then came back and kick Mexico's butt and took over the country for a few years with Emperor Maximilian, then got kicked out. And I didn't realize that the battle of Puebla that's being celebrated is that in 19 in 1861 concurrent with the start of the US Civil War. The US is in complete trauma while this is happening. And then at the end of the Civil War, we're able to start sending some supplies and some some aid to Mexico so that they can kick the French back out so the French are finally kicked out Benito Juarez gets rid of the French in 1867, I think, and they have a new republic then. But I love the line where this is where the battle of Puebla was was one battle in the longer war, and I hadn't thought really about the longer war that we're fighting. Welcome to the call everybody. We have no topic today but it's a topic week. And there's a lot of interesting topics in the air so I thought we would just kick the ball around for a moment, do a little tiki taka verbally. If anybody knows what tiki taka is. Everybody who knows what tiki taka is raise your hand please. Pete it's just you and me cause you're not a soccer player. Man, okay, so tiki taka is a method of passing that Barcelona, kind of invented what to do ball control to keep keep track of the ball and it's really beautiful and it's all about triangles basically to make sure you know where your next couple past but it's just beautiful if you go on YouTube and search for tiki taka you'll find a whole bunch of interesting like soccer players and stuff like that. So I thought we might pass the ball here so I'll stop talking and see what anybody has in their heart to talk about today. I'd like to talk about the video that Klaus put in the OGM email, because I think it touches on themes like leadership which are which is also emerging. So combines a couple of things. I think that's a good idea. Anybody else for that. That would work for me entirely how many people have watched the video. Just the trailer. How many people have watched the trailer. Okay, so so enough. And I think also, I think some of us talking about it before other people watched if they're going to watch it would actually be helpful and useful and interesting. And I don't know that it's full of necessarily news but it's really well done. Stacy go ahead. I don't think it's more than two minutes, maybe people want to just watch it now. You mean the trailer. Yeah. Do we have a link to the trailer real quick. And shall I screen share the trailer is one on my Facebook page. How to get it. Why don't I screen share the trailer. Why don't I screen share the trailer. Youth, the trailer, think, think, think. Sounds good. Let me do that. And then we'll just spend two minutes and 20 seconds watching the trailer. That's a great idea Stacy thank you. Let me go back. Sure screen. I'm here. Go here and be quiet. This is the time before civil rights movement and other social justice movements. It's often the young moments that shine the light on systems of injustice. For a lot of young people right now, life is really scary. Okay, Matthew, hit head on. So terrifying. If this drought gets any worse, our way of life will dissolve. The government is taking actions that are directly contributing to the destruction of our planet. It's fully back to the 50s that government and the fossil fuel industry knew that if they continued to burn fossil fuels that it would cause catastrophic impacts. That's when they started editing climate reports. All because of choices that we had no participation in. And I'm scared for my future. The greatest dereliction of civic responsibility in the history of the world. 21 young people ages 11 to 22 assuming the federal government over policies they say are destroying their world. You're not willing to wait around for someone else's timeline to dictate their trajectory of our lives. There we are. I just want to say it's a lot more powerful with the sound and watching it. You know, sorry, did nobody hear that. The end all the sound dropped off. Gill, you're muted. Oh, that's weird. I'm sorry. I didn't see the chat. Yeah, the second half didn't have any sound. The second half didn't have sound crap. Last third or something like that. So I'm sorry, I was hearing perfect sound the whole time and I didn't realize it wasn't going through and I wasn't looking at the chat. Let me put the link to it over here so anybody who wants to can go watch. So my apologies about that and it's on Netflix so you can if you have Netflix subscription you can watch it right now. You can watch the trailer there. Sorry. Just ask what Stacy question. Yes, of course. What was it that was particularly compelling to you about this video given you know there's lots and lots of stuff out there what's what, what, what, what, what was powerful for you about this one. It's both to the helplessness in me. It's both to like that inner child. My emotions and it made me feel powerful and hopeful. Thank you. When I was watching the full movie on Netflix. Yeah, it was it was powerful emotional. And I don't know if I was just in a, in a flux of emotion at the time anyway, but my granddaughter, my oldest granddaughter is going to be 12 years old in 2030, you know, and what what made me think that all the stuff that we're supposed to have done by 2030. Maybe I haven't even started yet right and and then you look at. Look at all the trend clients I mean it is not complicated you know when you when you see where we're trending to and by 2030 we could have. And just an amazing mess, you know, if we don't capture this we're truly running out of time to capture it. That's why I just felt compared to share that. I agree. Anyone else. Lots of feelings about it. Doug, Doug, you're passionate about our not addressing these issues and not coming back to it I think it's. This is this is one of those pieces that might actually help tip things, your thoughts. It's still in the paradigm of showing what's wrong in the difficulties, not showing what to do. I've come to the conclusion that we've got to shift to a command economy. That is in World War two, the government told General Motors you've got to stop making cars and start making planes and tanks took 90 days and it happened. We need that kind of direction of the economy because the economy cannot get to where we need to be on its own because there are too many interested are going to get the way that have to be overcome by a strong central government. Now the question is how you get there. So, several of you have heard my current attempt at a plan. I think we should all be thinking about what to actually do that is get beyond the complaints about how bad it is. I think the science view is there's no way we're going to avoid four degrees and up because once we get to four degrees and keeps going. So the thing is what could we possibly do to prevent that from happening. So here's my silly plan. There's no way of getting a handful of people at the mid manager level in the key fortune 100 or fortune 10 companies to work together across company boundaries. And if you had 15 such people is three each from five companies, who would say we've got to have a press conference and announced that we've got to stop academic activities we're doing it, and do something different. And demand, not demand request nicely a meeting with the CEOs of those five companies. And so we've got to shift to a demand economy in order to be able to try and cope with climate change and related issues. So that's my current thinking. Thanks Doug, Gil Stacy Hank. Command economy is about two things. First of all, these kids aren't just complaining about what's wrong they're bringing suit against the government it's a bold and very creative move and for me the most compelling part of the trailer that I saw without sound was these young people getting sworn in witness box to testify love that particular Command economy sure, but you know we can't even coordinate our way out of a pandemic. We don't have people dead in the United States of yesterday the WHO doubled the estimates for the globe. Command economy requires the ability to come out. We don't have that we're politically fragmented elections matter we don't get it unless we win elections in a massive degree. We've got to think about how to get to a command economy. That's the task. Well, we have to win elections. I mean, notable about Roosevelt. The other part of the story is that when union leaders came to him and pound it on the table and said you need to enact the social protections blah blah blah he said great. I'm all for you go out in the streets and make me do it. Politics is a complicated game and we're not playing it well enough. I think your move Doug, you know having CEO leadership is one of the ways to go but you know even the CEO leaders on climate are not putting their lobbying dollars where their mouths are climate voice.org is working on that trying to organize the workers of the major tech companies to push their leadership to speak out on policy so yes that and many other pieces. You know, how do we get to a command economy. In this political environment is a very clutch the tough question is the spirit question. You know when the when the leak came out on Monday about the SCOTUS decision I could feel the mood of the country shift in a moment. You know, some people ecstatic and some people outraged. And, you know, maybe this moderates the democratic base to come out and vote in November and keep us from, you know, political disaster. Maybe not. I don't know. I'm moving into rambles I'm going to stop whatever you think. Stacy Hank. The command economy. Yes, Doug's plan on one side, but man can come from the government, unless the people rise up and that's where I see it has to be the populace that are calling for these things and it has to be without the labels, because the way they keep the populace divided is socialism Marxism this that the populace can respond to their children. When I went to the. The anti gun violence march. It was all organized by kids but what was different is that their parents were all supporting them, and they had people on all different political sides of the aisle. So I think these plans have to work together but we have to include the regular people and we have to motivate them and that's what excited me about that trailer, because it's a way to educate and mobilize. Hank Pete than me. Yeah, there's a lot to say about this. So, yeah, exactly. It's, it's terrific because it is actually doing something it's doing something with the generation that's required to do something because it's their future. The United States government. And if there were 50 or 100 or 1000 sets of children so in the United States government, you would need a command economy. People would be out on the streets, demanding this. That's one point. The second point is dogs proposition 15 CEOs, but there's something to be said for that. And I'm not sure I've said it in this context so I have said it in other OGM calls. I've been working for the past half year trying to figure out a concept which I call the 200. There are 15 people but there are probably 200 people with their hands on the levers and on the switches who control what people think, and what people think, and what people, how people behave. And I think we all know them. And if we made an exercise of it in the next 20 minutes, we could probably get 150 of the 200 names, and it doesn't matter if they're actually 200 or 300. I know that there are people on CEOs on interlocking director ships there are politicians there are religious leaders. There are so called Instagram and tick tock influences. How we reach those people. So, I always ask people, yeah, you want to change the world where is the lever and where is the fulcrum. I think that the fulcrum has a lot to do with children and grandchildren. And I think the lever has a lot to do with the new narratives and the new narrative has a lot to do with positivity and about the psychology of behavior of 200 people whose names we know. I'd be happy to have another call about that sometime, just I need more ideas to fill that out so I don't know what you think about that but that's what I would say. Thank you that's that's helped spark a bunch of make a lot of connections in my head as well. Thanks. I don't know how to say this without without making it sound like Billy aching or worse. But there's, there's something odd. There's something odd about Doug, kind of calmly and rationally saying, Okay, we have folks we have here an existential crisis, you know the world is, you know, as you know it is going to end and in a short time. And then where we get to is, well, but we can't make the politics work when we follow the rules of the game. You know, it or we can't be energized to follow the rules of the game or there's people who are following the rules of the game and not doing anything and then there's other people not following the rules of the game and and torquing the system all around right. I don't know how we get ourselves out of that but but saying we can't make the politics work, you know when we follow the rules doesn't mean that the existential crisis isn't going to crush us right. It means that we have to start not playing by the rules. I don't know. Then John. Yeah, I have a meeting this afternoon was a couple of retired engineers mostly but senior level people from the US arms industry chemical engineers mostly, and they have been. They have been in touch on and off with them for more than a year. And they're really very passionate and excited about the urgency of the moment and they want to really engage in my point was, how do you, how do you focus on your expertise without connecting across the island with everyone else. And I played them in the risk or the damage of subordinating of subordination within a system and because that's what seems to happen is everybody's running in within their field of expertise without connecting across to to look at what this all means so that this will have no conversation about this afternoon and the way I want to frame that conversation is to bring back but cherry already mentioned the time and the Ford motor company shifted from producing cars to holding tanks of the assembly on business six months. Think about how that could have possibly happened right in today's world, it would take more than six months to just develop the blueprints on how to change that factory right. I mean it's a it's a significant undertaking to change the entire machine line up in order to figure out the supply chain you need to develop the different expertise you need to bring to bear. It's an incredible complex undertaking. So how did this happen. Everybody had the same thing in mind, we need to produce tanks and airplanes and artillery. So we need to produce weapons systems and everyone in the field in that in that factory down to the engineer and the mechanic know what was going to be done, and they were working towards that. So there is a complementarity within these different skill sets that were motivated by a common idea, you know by by a shared mindset. That in turn was precipitated by Pearl Harbor. So there was a Pearl Harbor type event that shocked everybody down to the bone of know this is an existential risk we are we are exposed to here we have to defend the nation. That's how the Ukrainians are fighting right now. Now they're pulling together because it's an existential crisis, and there is no option other than to collaborate with each other and to help each other and to support each other. So it's a completely trust based system. You know I have a conversation with this engineer, I'm telling him I need these types of schools I need this type of of of tool what have you, and it's happening. And so we have been talking in the climate space here about needing a equivalency of a Pearl Harbor type event. Of course the problem is in climate change. Once that event happens where we're toast right I mean you can't know for this kind of calamity to occur means that we have we have crashed through tipping points that are completely irreversible and I'm afraid they're already there. So I've been at this for 10 years, you know, I mean you all know I've been trying to galvanize opinions to create a common understanding of the threat we face what are the key leverage points in the system. You know that we need that we need to pull on where where there is the most power and in my mind it's community based decentralized food systems as a first step because that will provide calm right I mean the moment the food supply gets challenged all bets are off, which is what we're seeing right now I mean this is this year this year, we will see food shortages in North Africa in the Middle East that will create millions of dislocations it's I mean it's completely baked into the system it's inevitable. If you can't get the crop into the ground in the Ukraine, you have scorching heat in Pakistan and India that is burning or has already burned half of their crop for this year. So we're already there but the it is simply not visible to to and indeed the tragedy is that our this propaganda network that we are exposed to this mass media refuses to to accept I mean this don't look up phenomena is truly there you know it's just absolutely refuse to accept that this is this situation is is is facing us where we're at it and to get the end is you know when you like my wife doesn't want to hear me anymore right because don't stop talking I can't take it I can't handle it because she understands what it is. It feels completely powerless to do anything about it. So it's just creating enormous frustration. And so people don't want to hear you anymore they don't want to. It's just all too much and so on so I mean it is, it is painful. It is, it is a, it's a crazy time. It is a very crazy time. I've got a couple things I want to put in the in the conversation then then then over to you john, and I hear my notes. So one thing is, I think we can all imagine that since everybody sending javelin missiles and everything and tanks and everything to Ukraine that the armories are being refilled pretty quickly there's like, I think that that that that system probably is working just fine and they're going into overdrive because we get to spend all the ammo we've been building up for all these years and look at the budgets and so forth. And that's not an issue and hardly even a conversation. I have to say that I love the clarity of the documentary, it was really crisp and clear for me, I was just like, Wow, okay, here are the harms. Here are the kids this is there that they had nothing to do with it like like the argument was presented really well, and I find I found that it seized my throat multiple times I cried a bunch watching the documentary. And partly, partly I have a weakness for people doing kind of altruistic things that are maybe unexpected and this was not so unexpected this is kind of planned, but, but these moments I thought that this particular documentary was a very lovely job of bringing us to those moments of pain and passion and worry and fear and all that in a really productive way and it goes through it very nicely. This command economies thing is really interesting. Doug, my the sensei the senior sensei at my Aikido dojo is a anarcho capitalist who loves me this and like high ex book the road to surf them is all about avoiding central control all about there is a whole of people at least in this country and across the earth, who fear centralized control, then in China and the Soviet Union for good reason Mao and Stalin are arguably the people who've killed the most people on earth ever, and not in wars in through through stupid ass policies and moving the Kulaks off the land which causes the Holodomor in Ukraine, etc, etc, etc. So there's this vast and justifiable fear of central command command control. I want to pause it Doug. How do we get the equivalent of a command economy. How do we get the effect of a command economy from some completely different route maybe from some decentralized resonant set of movements because part of the problem with climate change is that how to fix it. Do we put Dyson's fears up or aerosols in the atmosphere to increase the albedo. How do we like, don't drop iron filings in the ocean to try to change, like, wait which of these and class has found one thing which has made an utter sense to me which is hey people if we worry about soil fertility and carbon sequestration and making good food and changing to you know changing away from a destructive economy into into another one. That could be a really good thing. Love that and I'm cause I'm completely on board and want to do more of that and try to help figure out. And I love I think it was Hank who said, Where's the lever and where's the fulcrum, which is really important, and then also that children and children might be the angle here and one of the things that really hit me about this documentary was Levi in particular, who is brilliant. The young kid with the shock of here shows up throughout the documentary and it's completely centered and wonderful and great in front of a crowd. I think one of the great unused links in society is the link between grandparents and their grandkids. And there's a possibility here that there's a lever action between very young people and their, their two generations up to try to form these bonds and these resonances to go to things together to basically pull things together. Now I have a thought in my brain called does 2020 market generational tipping point. And Scott, as you can see it's pretty busy, but I've got connected to it Greta Thunberg and the school strikes for climate change it's right here. We're president, the AOC in the squad. Basically, all of us, the, the Marjorie stonem Douglas school kids against guns who are not getting much traction on gun control, the sunrise movement, nerd criteria, Hank and john green generation Z, etc, etc. And I have a funny feeling that digital natives understanding how to use the medium, finding the right lever and getting a lot of help from allies who are what we bit older, like maybe us might be able to do a lot. I mean a lot because they might be able to wrap their arms around the politics that are screwing up the whole, we're in lock up, because politics is in a Mexican standoff because a bunch of people have figured out how to weaponize mistrust, and keep us in a stalemate and stalemate helps them stalemate just helps them all. And we need to find some way to clear out of the stalemate. And so, so I'm trying to figure out how do we. I'm really interested in decentralized movements that aim in the same direction, how do we get a columnation of goals and energies across a series of movements that create effectively the same thing dog that you're looking for from we just need to put someone in charge to tell everybody, fricking close your factory now and start making this other thing, because that I don't I don't see how that happens I think that that's a general threat to sort of everybody and too easily co opted. You know, imagine, imagine Republicans come into the majority and Trump gets reelected and he's got his hands go on the steering wheel of a command economy. I don't think I don't think any of us wants that. So how do we get that equivalent. With that I will, I will stop and turn it over to john. Yes, okay. I'm just laughing because you know, where I think we all can sense both the immensity and complexity of, of what's pushing in on us and also how we're serving each other, I really appreciate all of you and many comments. And once you've just made Jerry and Pete and, and Doug. So I don't have a solution. Start. What I have are a couple of pieces that could be redesigned into something possibly that would be a solution. So I'm going to just couple of elements. One element would be the search for memes. What, but I mean, you know, those of us who've looked at this. Doug, we're, we're in other conversations, we're in serious conversations and Doug is often, you know, says, okay guys listen, you know, you're talking about this solution but it you haven't done the man you haven't done the homework. It doesn't really fix it. And in part of that conversation is, is to talk about carbon negative instead of carbon neutral because carbon negative, you know, carbon neutral, all kinds of funny games you can play with, with things that are not neutral. But if you say carbon negative, it's a bit harder to fake carbon negative so that I'm not saying that the meme should be carbon negative I'm just using that as an example of the criteria to apply. Here's another different idea. But I'm not thinking dashboard, you know, if I was going to have a dashboard for this, it would have at least two areas where you what you'd be watching is something positive that's happening, like, like this documentary. And it would be layered. So you have the immediate thing and then you click on it and then it gets a little give you the two minute version and then it gives you the 20 minute version you know and so on so it's it's depth it's got depth and eventually winds up somewhere like Jerry's brain, but also to scary negatives you know this is this is not good. This one's going on this. This is really bad you know, both bad as in this is somebody doing a bad thing and also these are people suffering because of the bad things that we have done. Now, already that's a pretty complicated idea dashboard positive negative carbon negative. And it's not enough it's not it's not it doesn't, it doesn't ring it doesn't, it doesn't pull together all the things we want to pull together but I'm just offering it as a you know, keep going keep going I think I think a central place where people could click and see, and it would have a short summary, and then a longer summary and then a deeper summary. And Jerry's brain is just one, it's a good example but we could have multiple deep backups to to explain things and some kind of attention to the cultural memes and cultural themes are going on. And then there's more there's something I there's a bunch of things I haven't thought of that that need to be woven into this idea, I think before it would begin to have any kind of traction so keep going. Thanks john and mark trexler is not on this call but he's on Monday calls a bunch and has an entire brain enabled thing that's all about climate change and all about dashboards of different kinds. And he's he's he and Pete are experimenting with alternate user interfaces to it so it doesn't look like a brain so it looks like something else, etc etc I think that's a really good avenue to pursue. Thanks john. Carl. And welcome to the call. Carl is a very long time brain user by the way. Yeah. Yeah, I'm at Harlan at a conference in December 1998 so it's had a love hate relationship with it for about three years. And the one breakthrough like that was putting date using date, like year month day so chronological is the same as out medical, and that let me take it to a whole nother level and then finding getting things done. And that that they're David Allen that so it's like Doug Engelbar talks about this co evolution of human and tool system so getting things done in the brain is core part of my system. I put a link. Did I hit yes. Yeah. I put a link to Ray Anderson's TED talk from years ago that's one of it's really important. He found an interface carpet and anywhere you go, basically any hotel any government building, it's you'll see the square carpet tiles and they've been. They created a whole new mechanism like carpet as a service you it wears out they come take it they feed it back into their system. They pulled old carpet out of landfills. I mean they really and that Ted talk he has in there, you can't hold people accountable if you don't provide an alternative. It's one of the key points I think he makes in there. And then the other thing too is you hear all this talk about seven generations, but people. Like most of the time it's like, you can just tell people are thinking like, oh seven generations from now but I mean we've got the, the living generations now we've got, if you want to just do 18 year type of things will have the same data are the people are the children only born January 1 2036 and beyond so what are we doing to make the world for them and stuff and Ray Anderson also there's a tomorrow's anything you see from him you'll see he will come tomorrow's child and stuff about about exactly that so that seven generations from like my father's generation and you know type of thing or my grandfather's generation as you were talking about. I'll leave it at that for now. Thanks Carl. Doug. One of the things that keeps coming up is strategies of populist revolt, which tends to divide society and us versus them. And the them. I'm going to propose that there's a whole resource that we're not paying attention to. And my plan for the 15 starts with middle level managers who are below the radar, who actually think much more like us than we tend to want to think. They're discouraged about what's happening that are scared for their kids, all that. I think that we want a movement that energizes those people and pulls them in from the power position that they actually already have. They are in the organizations. If they work together, starting below the radar so they don't get squashed and build enough strength to be able to have a good press conference, go to the CEO, not to get turned the effort over to the CEO but to include the CEO in the effort of the group that's emerging. But the key point I want to make here is that we tend to create an us versus them dialogue around climate change. And it just won't work. The political analysis, I think that a historian would do would say that the, the managerial class is a huge part of America of the world actually that's being ignored. I think that a lot and I think there's inexpensive and interesting ways to get those people together to have an interesting conversations to give the resources a whole bunch of things. And I'm not clear that anybody is particularly addressing that or them. I think that there's a there's a nice opening there to do that. Gil, it sounds like you've seen something like that. You're muted. That's what I've been doing for the last 30 years, Jerry. But you know doesn't know dozens if not hundreds of people have been working advice and working with those middle managers, recruiting them, generating them this organization called net impact which the national or maybe international organization of MBA students who are the ones who are in positions, and bringing these ideas with them. There are, you know, there are so many conferences you can exhaust yourself going to the conference about this providing mutual support resources consulting support tools and so forth. So Doug it's a great idea. It's underway it has had enormous results just look at the conversations in the business world now compared to where they were 20 years ago there's significant shift that has happened at middle management and CEO level board level companies that had one or two sustainability people are now expanding those departments to 1050 and 20 that was a mad rush for talent companies are hungry for middle managers who know this stuff there's not enough of them being minted corporate boards are recruiting board members to have deep sustainability knowledge. The quarter to a third of the investment in the public markets has moved to some sort of some not in the direction of this these issues it's pretty superficial and got a lot of bullshit layered into it. So there's enormous momentum in exactly the direction that you're talking about again it's good and it has borne fruit we've got, you know, most of the major companies in the world now have significant climate goals unfortunately almost none of them are fulfilling the goals. They don't have plans to even fulfill the goals don't know what to do. So, lots of momentum and utterly inadequate, utterly inadequate and what we need to do. Thanks. When you're muted. I'm going to share my screen. I feel like this is something that I've been working on. It comes from a lot of different sources but I'm putting my own words to it so far. And really I just want to point out that this is for me like a cycle of evolution or cycle of emergence or cycle of creation or cycle of innovation I'm trying to kind of codify a common theme the common themes here. And one of the things that I've been talking about with some people are helping me out with this. And that relates to this conversation I think is a lot of. I feel like a lot of leaders exist in the final couple stages right when something is less risky we kind of already see what it is we already know what it is where it's about to be a major contribution in the world. And maybe we're at implementation stage. And they go oh yeah this is a great new thing and they bring it into contribution stage or they help. I don't feel like our leaders are in a place anymore, where they can feel safe. Bringing something up that's brand new or ideating on something and also this whole section the early stages require a tremendous amount of time, a tremendous amount of variety of input. So when we're talking about different silos and things right each discipline or each silo of understanding kind of has its own cycle. And we're also saying that yeah we need but we need one group we need one whole cycle we need points at which the documentation for or the output or the harvesting from one discipline can be shared with another discipline and become an inception stage for another discipline to then take it and moves move their piece right and this needs to be be able to be interwoven at different times. I don't think I'm saying anything new here that we don't already know I just kind of wanted to put this framing on it, because I'm not sure we talk about it in this way very often. And I think it's super important to recognize that we have all the solutions right and I think that's what I hear I'm hearing other people say to Gil, been working on it forever. And thinking about it from all these different sides. Why isn't it being coordinated and my, you know, my contribution to that. Why is, I'm not sure we're asking the right questions, and I do believe it's bottom up. And I think recognizing what stages things are in and what types of people we need in order to shepherd something from one stage to another is starting to be a critical component to the conversation, because it's what will galvanize and help coordinate all the efforts with each other. So to that end, I'm, you know, I kind of end up wanting to say to Klaus and to, and to Gil and other people who are working in in these fears Mark Tressler. If we're trying to kind of solve one focus or where we're feeling like there's movement towards a larger growing movement. How can something like the meta project or OGM help bring all its members around say for a month. We, everyone's efforts, focus towards class or focus towards the people who are already focused on right what role can we play. If I'm a person who weaves and maps how can I do that in service to climate change right now for the next month, or whatever right how can we create that list of 200 people I think all the answers are important that we've come up with. How can we turn all of that effort towards one particular experiment one particular focus for while I thought class I was listening to you last week talk about the things that you need as you as you presented your project and it's stuck with me, and I want to go back to what you had said last week about where the project is at and what it needs, I feel like there's, it spoke to me and it's been reverberating for the last week. I've shared, you know I've shared my interest and maybe focusing on climate change as, as all of meta project right whatever's emerging from there using climate change your efforts planetary care forest to, to be a focus. It's just an idea, but I think if we don't start picking some of these things and saying hey I'm not quite sure what my contribution can be but when I make a contribution it's going to be in this direction. And then it will draw all the different disciplines hopefully together and we can at least start practicing, even if we're a little messy at it we can start practicing on a larger scale, how to solve some of these things and collaborative nature. Thanks. Thanks Wendy, I just want to pause our conversation for a second because that was a lot, and it was really useful and my brain is like spinning. So let's go into silence for a moment and then come back into our conversation. Thank you. Stacy did you want to jump jump in. Yes. I just wanted to say yes, yes, and yes. And also what. So I want to speak to the populist thing and the idea that can't work because we get divided, because that also ties in with the grandchildren and the children in the sense that we get divided that's on us as individuals and many of us are learning to not do that and that's where leadership comes in being able to talk to people with different ideas with grandchildren and children two things are happening. They're both looking at the parent, and they're both able to see sides of the parent, and they can interact in a way I mean there's more unconditional love, and that's what we're learning to do with. We need to be learning to do with people that don't really agree with us. So like right now I've been talking on about abortion, and I've been trying to reach out to the libertarians and reframe it. Not that I can do this on my own, but just in the groups and I'm trying to just spread the idea about this is not about women. This is about individual rights versus state rights and get them to see because the more they talk. The more they see their inconsistency. So, I just want to talk about you so I'm trying to highlight Wendy's asking the right questions and reframing. That's really important. I just want to repeat again how when people were supporting their children at the rallies against gun violence. They put all their political feelings aside because one motivating factor for people that works all the time is their children, people will go to the ends of the earth for their children. And the feeling for a populist movement children really have to lead. And how we frame the questions can help mitigate the divide. Oh and the last thing I want to say is that every story where a story, every story has to have a threat. That's part of the storyline that's a pattern that's systems thinking to Wendy for a second before going to you Doug, partly because a piece of the birth narrative for me about GM is that on the one hand, it would be great if we composted and had a logical sequence and show the arguments and had a dashboard. That's what John was saying earlier and a series of things like that. And on the other hand, a lot of the conflict here is because some parties in this conflict of ideas are just working on leaps of faith. And it has little to do with contradictions or anything else in fact, some of the contradictions are okay they're sort of intentional or they've been reframed as hey, you know that that just happens it's. God's flawed messenger is perfect. It's just perfect. Ignore the fact that this guy's had you know, these that he has no ethics that he's had this horrible life. God's God's work is done in strange ways and sometimes the person who gets you the most judges on the Supreme Court, so that you get results is a frickin lunatic and an asshole and live with it. And that that's a reasonable strategic position to take, unfortunately, that that is not that is not a completely loony position to take if all you want is that political outcome. And so, and so I'm torn a lot and I think of this as a polarities to manage not as irreconcilable differences between the, hey, if a grandchild sat down and worked through the logic of sitting here thinking about families in Ukraine calling their families in Russia and saying hey we are actually being killed here on the ground and their families in Russia saying no you're not. This is just a plot. To what level do they need to walk out on the street and show the empty house of the neighbor who got who died because a shell landed in their house, or what I don't know what it is. But at some point that resistance might melt and might be something else but there's a there's an act of faith is a mental act that shuts down logic and sensibility at some point and intentionally keeps it at arms length very successfully. And we don't have to wait for too long until things are just devastating. And we need to. I think one of one of the goals maybe here is how to melt that. How to how to get through how to how to love irrational leaps of faith unconditionally in the way that Stacy was just describing in a way that lets us have a different conversation and come to some different conclusions. This clearly I'm not sure anybody saw this, although there's lots of progress on things like trauma and collective trauma and so forth and, you know, I have a big collection of people who are doing very successful work on individual and social trauma that didn't exist 20 years ago. I mean there were a few pioneers 20 years ago but now it's like much more mainstream. It's in the air it's happening and that that's one key linchpin for all of this is like, people are just suffering a whole bunch of trauma now more than ever. Sorry, lots of different digressions there but I think I think this is all of a piece, Doug than Wendy. I think that most of the organizations that I'm aware of that are consistent with gales list are still in the realm of profit making, looking at how to green how to look use new technologies or whatever to have a position in the existing and I think we need a version of tough love that goes further. We've got to use the wealth that we have to spend it down in order to cope with what climate change is going to demand of us. I think that I want to give an example. Clearly, a thing that's going to be for the future important is food. And what I think we need to do is have land reform in order to grow more food. So if there was a, I'm going to segue here into a footnote. The Greek historian Polybius says that the form of government should match the existential crisis society is facing. For example, if the issue is distribution of wealth, democracy is pretty good at creating the conversation to work that issue out. But if the society is threatened by something from the outside, democracy is the worst thing to do because you get divisive interest parties and can come to a coherent strategy. Autocracy in some form becomes appropriate when the threat is external democracies appropriate when the threat is internal divisions. The idea that the form of government should match the problem is a very interesting one and it's been affecting my thinking lately. And that in order to cope with a demand economy, it cannot be done without a centralized strong government that can mobilize across the hierarchies, including the lowest levels. Based on the idea that look, we're facing an existential crisis. We've got to spend our wealth to cope with it, rather than trying to increase our wealth. Thanks Doug, and then wealth has a lot to do with it here policies have a tremendous amount to do with it and you're talking about land reform and so forth. Wendy. Doug, I agree with everything you're saying and I think in my lifetime I haven't seen enough of that happen on the things that matter most to me, right so. It's interesting to me I find myself when you're making comments going yeah yeah yeah that's all right. And I feel like it's an and right and and we also need a bunch of movement bottom up in ways that break breakthrough in ways that create create the systemic change that we need. I just don't think the systemic change is going to come from the top down. And I think that that's if we're waiting for that to happen, I do believe it will happen over time, no question. And the issue is we don't have that time, we don't have the time that it takes for things to happen, more slowly and more gracefully. And I'm not seeing any structures that's going to bring together the leaders in a way that will create the kind of change that we need in the time frame that we need. We need to keep looking to how to how to. Yeah how to coordinate so so so let me just add to two things back into what I was saying before. One is when I when I mean we all focused on one thing I mean we're, we're still, we're still almost representing or take bring coming from our area of expertise. The governance is figuring out how to orient itself for the benefit specifically of improving things like regenerative agriculture or climate change because it needs that. New forms of economics are specifically looking at how can we help take things like regenerative economics and climate change forward one more step. Right is looking at that. Education is looking at that right what forms of education do we have that will galvanize and write this documentary is one form of education education. So I just feel like I you know right I'm trying to say how do we get everyone from their areas and from their disciplines, kind of working on one thing for a while. And I had something else I wanted to say hold on one sec. I want something new, but I lost it. So I'll come back. It'll come back. Thanks Wendy. Doug, did you are you is your hand up from before did you want to jump back in. You're muted to complete the agriculture example I was using a land reform. I would like it that any land which is not growing vegetables could be appropriated by anybody who would undertake to grow vegetables food on that land. It would take a very strong central government that would have to declare all contracts of land ownership as they current exist void for the duration of the project. But that's the kind of strong effort that I think we need that we can't possibly get with the populist movement alone. Obviously, you want to integrate across. I also talked about the one the few and the many. They should be how to bring them together into a common project and I think the middle level managers are resource to that. And we don't have any other. So a couple things off what you just said Doug, one of my favorite Ted talks is Pam warhursts how we can eat our landscapes she talks about her the town of Todd Morden in the UK where she lives which is right outside Manchester, and how years ago, they went and they turned every plot of land into food, they called the police station said, you have rose bushes outside do you mind if we plant lemon trees. I was like sure cool come on in, and it's become a tourist destination to created community I did a whole bunch of really interesting things. I have no idea if the town still looks that way or what you know what's happened to it. And I don't know about the contagion effect of that. But, and maybe I'll just go to full screen share for a second here so that it's not so tiny online. So here's Pam more Hurston how we can either landscapes the town of Todd Morden food scaping edible landscapes and so forth. And I have this Ted talk under one of my other favorite thoughts in my brain which is revitalizing cities. And this is where I collect up stories of all different kinds of cities that did very cool stuff that created, so it's cyclovias and I wonder, and we get a lot of the mayor at the time. And, you know, a bunch of other sort of stuff but but this is a, this is a collection of stories to tell of how you and your neighbors could go do something to be really interesting for your town. It's not focused on farming or food, and there could be a subset of it that are because there's so many different ways to do this there's a gorilla, there's a, what are they called plant bombs food bombs. Shoot types of bomb I think I've got an under here. Ikea is now starting to offer plant bombs. Fabulous. That's fabulous. Well how did I not have plant bombs in here. These are all actual bombs too bad. So, so I think there's, there's an, there's a way to do this in a fun, excited together way. And people like to join things that are connected. They like to join things that bring their town together they like to do you know, and, and, and I think I've told the story once before but I went to a thing called opportunity collaboration which was like a dating game for funders and though, you know, nonprofit seeking funding, and I found one little nonprofit there called choice humanitarian or something like that. And their MO was to go into a village, let's say in Guatemala and say what do you need. And they didn't come in and say, Hey, we build like wells and we're going to make you a well, got a well we got funding. Let's make a well. They came in and said what do you need and one town said we need a soccer soccer field. And, and they were like don't you need a hospital or a school and they're like no we need a soccer field we need to get our kids off the street. And they didn't build a soccer field and it had some of those, some of those desired results but they were busy following and being of help. And part of our problem here is, and this is the problem with the command economy also is that it runs against anybody's many people's natural inclinations to do stuff they have to, everybody needs to find their way to do the thing that they feel drawn to do with people they want to do it with in a way that they think is going to help their life. So whatever that whatever that picture or frame looks like, and we can maybe influence the picture or frame certainly this, the cultures and religions that were raised in paint that frame, like redemption in heaven. So you should do these sorts of things as you know as your act says you are alive because that's what God decrees, which is then changed by the prosperity gospel that says, Oh, and by the way getting really wealthy is a sign of being that and that's a good thing, as opposed to a couple years before prosperity gospel where the greedy and the rich are the ones who will pass through the eye of the needle if I'm misquoting the Bible properly. So, so, so the stories that we tell the big stories that are told outside control a lot of these possibilities. We're stuck inside of a series of dysfunctional stories were stuck inside of series of dysfunctional systems, all of which are hard to tip which took me back to land reform Doug, which I wanted to sort of bring up a bit because I want to I want to just ask a little bit what do you mean by land reform and what would be the shape of land reform because I grew up partly in Peru, and reform agraria land reform was like what half the parties that lost most of the time we're running on. So now and then they would win and redistribute the big landowners farms into small plots and so forth and then it would get taken back, you know back and forth is this struggle over the joystick over time. Then there's the gorgeous sort of land use tax which is really interesting, but I don't know how we get there. And then the thing I wish we could impose is a soil fertility tax, which, you know, if you are depleting the soil then we're going to tax the hell out of you. If you're soil we're going to make it, you know, like, like give you subsidies, that'd be cool but where in what do you mean by land reform. Well, I mean, doing what's necessary to take the land that we have and use it for growing, because it's going to be a need we're going to be losing a lot of land to temperatures that make growing food impossible. There's a place that could grow food. So I, I picture, and this of course is a little abstract but I'm doing best I can that anybody who can find a piece of land that's fellow, or, or in some kind of views like parking lots. That's not growing food, they have the right to requisition it, providing they grow food on it. Nobody can take land away from somebody else. If it's growing food. And I realize there's a difference in growing food between local efforts and corporate growing that we probably don't want to have too much of. But, you know, it's got to start with the intent that we're in real trouble. And we need draconian measures that are going to be really painful. Because it's going to affect interests and stability in people's lives for sure. But climate change is going to do that anyway. So let's find the best way to do it. And my own view is that you start with things that are really attractive to do. Like if you think of gardens and habitat as being in the same place. When you walk out your front door and there's food that you're growing. It's safe for children it's safe for pets it's safe for old people. It's attractive. We want to think of putting food and habitat together in a culture of craftsmanship and attractiveness that makes it a project that feels like it's worth doing. End of round. Thanks, I agree. Wendy. I just remembered. What I was going to say I'm going back a bit to the thread that was weaving itself before about concerns, valid concerns that I want to re echo here that around people who are dissenting or people who don't understand or people who aren't on board, or don't think like us, and finding ways to find common ground to bring people together galvanize momentum. However, I also want to point out that there is a tremendous amount of available motivation and resources and information. And I think a ton of low hanging fruit. I think the bottleneck is in the coordination. I do think we do need to solve those issues of contention and division and duality and those things. But I think we can do a lot of really good stuff long before we hit that edge. And hopefully by the time we hit that edge will have some better solutions as as we all know there are people working on that piece as well. It just seems to me that with some coordination we could do a lot before we ever hit that edge. Thanks. Thanks Wendy. Plus. Yeah. I mean it all comes back down to having a shared perception of reality of having a shared understanding of what are the issues that need to be tackled and and and the Polish and this idea of coordination that many just mentioned is really elusive. I mean, I've been working in a leadership world is the Sierra Club at the grass woods network, and to just get people to to come to a common platform of accepting the science, you know, the, the, what we know about raising food and what the food system is all about is is an amazing battle. Right. But is that a prerequisite to taking actions that might remedy food scarcity and soil depletion. I mean, do they need to do we all do they all need to agree or if they took some actions while disagreeing, but the actions were good, we'd be cool. So I'm saying, does this have to be a sequence or can we just like maybe skip the theory and just go straight to, let's all do these things together. We need scale, you know, so when you when you think about the food system, when you have, you know, like, here we can, we can go on tomatoes and Ben, but we are the local Walmart inputs tomatoes from Mexico at a price that you can't match. And so, and they have have absolutely no provision to purchase local produce and put it on the shelf. So the system is so disrupted now that there has to be a certain level of acceptance and understanding so that the supply chain starts collaborating and this is actually my focus now many took me six months you know to get into funding to talk about funding the transition. And we have actually made some really good progress there because the concept that has penetrated out of this last series of discussions in the last webinar was the aggregation of support, you know, they're calling it now plenty, so that you get support from multiple sources to have a farmer change, and not just focused on soil and corporate focused on pollinated production, water shed repair and things like that. So that was good, but my focus now really is on supply chain, you know, finding collaboration within the supply chain to support farmers, even very very small scale farmers, because last year, you know, I just keep listening here's a farmer who has a bumper crop of tomatoes, and he ends up having having to plow them under because there's no market for it. All you can do is give it away for free to the food bank and get a tax credit that doesn't do him any good. So so this the supply chain has to collaborate in order to empower the cause to to monetize the efforts which they need to do because they have to buy seeds and fertilizers and all kinds of things to make the tools to make this all work. So there has to be we have to penetrate into the supply chain, and so far, all of my conversations, you know, with, whether that's not general meals or Kellogg or, you know, startups that are going into the into the fermented meat products here, I mean, plant-based protein extracts, none of them have the slightest interest to talk about supply chain development, not to work with farmers to assist farmers because it is inconvenient. It adds cost after decentralize their supply chain, you know, they have to develop aggregation methods. So, yeah, it is a system and you can't, you can pull one lever without having the entire system engage. It's just not going to work at scale. You know, you can do little stuff, but you can't scale it. Thanks, Wendi. Yes, it's a perfect example class and I'm really glad you went into the detail because I don't have the answer for that, right. And I know you're chipping away at it and I'm sensing that you feel like you're making progress but the progress is much, much slower than you could possibly be, right. And so it's, what's forming in my mind is almost like, you know, and I know you're not the only one working on it. But I feel like, if there was a larger effort, more minds put to the task that you just set forth, right, how could more effort be, how could effort help you. Maybe a new solution presents itself that provides easing for your efforts, right, so if the issues are distribution, transition and supply chain, maybe what comes forward is a new video needs to be created, a new documentary needs to be created, a new presentation needs to be created, more people need to talk to them. Oh, I know someone over here who knows somebody at General Mills, it would be better if you talk to that person instead, and then it would affect a whole series, I don't know, and making stuff up, right. But and it's not that you're not thinking this way, it's that we're not thinking in those ways to help you, right. And so I'm not suggesting you need to do anything else, I'm suggesting all of us could add just a little bit more to the leading edge of frustration and and need and leading questions that you have so you, it would be an effort where you're defining what the what the need is and the leading edges and even if it seems like you're doing your thing and you've got it all under control many times before the rest of the community knowing what that leading edges might actually have an idea that helps unlock it, or helps break it apart or helps move things a little bit faster. And so to me this is that's the interesting part what can we do when we start playing in conversation there, putting all our energies towards you. That's totally its clarity of purpose is its information education alignment around common principles. And that's what that was my reference to World War two the mobilization right, everybody know we had to build a tank. That tank looks different from a perspective of logistics supply chain, mechanical engineering, you know, building an assembly line everybody had a different part in this but they all knew they were working towards a common outcome. And we are we are not there yet where we don't we simply don't have that picture of we need to decentralize the food system. Bring it as much to community level as possible we need to have companies change their supply chain strategies decentralize develop different aggregation models that support farmers. That's basically the message. There's an interesting. We keep coming we often come to the example of FDR mobilizing industry to make tanks and whatnot on airplanes, which is which is fascinating. There's another side of this which is actually really interesting as well which is at the end of the war. They had a whole bunch of factories making a bunch of shit we didn't need any more like ammunition. And that turned into fertilizers and pesticides because nitrates and all the you know same same chemicals got a lot of them processing we're digging them up we're making them. Let's just sell everybody a whole bunch of pesticides and it's sort of industrial ag, in some sense flourishes after World War two because these commodities suddenly come on the market and everybody's like let's do that. It's kind of craziness that happened that really shaped our world tremendously. And, and so I say that because there wasn't a, there was a demand crisis or whatever because all of a sudden, the expenditure of all that ammunition went away, and it wasn't like we could stockpile it and it's useless social expenditure, but but we didn't think to shut down the chemistry and do something completely different. We were like okay let's let's like put it back to work. I think we need to think creatively about what are the moments where people can see new opportunities and shape them differently, like, extremely differently. Julian then guilt. Let's go and play out some of this discussion reminds me of the space program of the 60s when America felt that there was a goal to get to. I think the space program is probably more constructive description than Pearl Harbor. It's a class was sort of getting to this about the idea of having a goal to work towards and the other thing I was going to bring up is that relating to supply chain the idea is that the people who do well were blessed by God. And if you don't make people pay for the waste that they produce then they get to make even more money. So for supply chain, going to say local farmers cost four cents more than I would could see that Walmart would not go that way because they lose out on four cents and then they multiply that by a billion. But the thing is part of the structure is going to be getting people to understand that you can't just dump stuff into the air and into the sort of into the rivers because that does cost money. It may not cost the vendor or the manufacturer money but it's how somebody money downstream and getting people to understand that they are the ones who are the ones who are losing out on the money somebody else can make money. I think this has to be part of the process. What is that space race. I have a bit of a pet peeve around it which is, we collimated a lot of energy and spent a lot of treasure to do that, for which we a lot of technology spins out of that but we got some rocks back from the moon. And we don't know anything about our oceans. Like, nobody spent money to go into the ocean, which is right here on the planet don't need to lift anything off the planet, need to build stuff that will survive pressure. There's all sorts of goodies down there that we we slowly started to figure out like maybe a little piece of it later but but we spent a lot of money to get off the rock and not a lot to understand the rock. So even that is changing the space the Apollo program was at this back in the 60s NASA was 4% of GDP. Last time I was at NASA 20 years ago working on the shuttle program it was 0.4% of GDP. Even back then in 2002 NASA started to reoriented to a lot of earth sciences. In fact, you look at some of their aircraft like the U2 that the military use for spying NASA had two of those which they renamed to the ER one for earth resources ER one near to so NASA already understood that they needed to look back in as well as with their their budget has been shrunk so much that they cannot put the same effort that they did back in the 60s. And the other thing is that thanks to George Bush and Sean O'Keefe this is my personal pet peeve who ended the two of them who ended the space shuttle program is that in 2004 they switched NASA from a research agency doing aerospace and technology to an agency to funnel federal money to corporations in red states, and this is also effective their long term operations. Yeah, a lovely side note of the NASA of the space program was the basis across the south, basically, and employment in southern states for a variety of reasons including favorable geography, but also as a sort of a civil rights program in the United States. And I love the movie Hidden Figures. Gil. Yeah, a few things have been answered for a while so I got a few things here. There's a problem with goals, one of which is that we don't have one. The other is that the goal of, you know, beating Japan and eventually the goal of what we have to deal with now. So the complexity of the problem it's not just building tanks that everybody has to align around but doing you know 1000 different things that seem to have no connection with each other. It's a challenge for the, you know, for the command economy strategy, because as you said Jerry, you know, sometimes the need what's needed on the ground is not what can be seen from the pinnacles of power. There's a big combination between those. I'm real, and you know, and there's terrific stuff happening the, you know, the notion of the turning parking lots into farms and food for us is great. On the one hand, on the other hand, the problem, the food problem is not that we don't have enough food on the planet but said it doesn't get to the people who need it and people can afford it. But, you know, turn parking lots into food for us and you not only provide food you affect the water regime of cities you reduce load on sewage treatment plants you reduce heat island effects you improve amenities and health and well being of people. These kinds, you know, these kind of multi faith faceted strategies need to be part of the mix. I'm really struck though in this conversation we're now 75 minutes into the call. And I haven't heard any mention of the word power. And I haven't heard any mentions word capitalism. We've talked a bunch about both so we've talked about politics a whole bunch. We've talked about politics early which is which is sort of the moving around of power right. Yeah, but we haven't said the word. Okay, and now we have. Well now we have and and if you know if we want to support Doug's notion of command economy that means someone has to take power. And that can be done by, you know, by centralized coup, which is, you know, the common way we think about it. It could be done grassroots like the zapatistas or the folks in the, what's the name of the community and in the the Kurdish anarchist and anarchist centralist community someone knows the name of that. I will look them up and row row. It's not the Rohingya it's something else but but you've got you know you've got a functioning community that's grassroots democratic feminist ecological military, waging war against their multiple enemies of Turkey and Iraq and so forth so there are many ways but you don't get to duck the question of taking power and exercising power, and you don't get to duck the question of do we have an economy that fetishizes the capital over every other form of resource of production. You know, pet pee for me I'd agree with Julian that you know how we structure the economics is really key. Not only don't we make people pay for the damage they produce we subsidize the destruction life, the whole economic system is built around that subsidy both, both not paying for the externalities but also direct payer payments from employers to polluters to generate jobs, you know GDP and the rest. So that tangle needs to be a central part of the conversation. I think you know a lot of what we've talked about it's been wonderful but peripheral to that. And it's tough because you know here we are saying climate is the existential crisis but if we lose the Congress in November. We're all held to pay. So maybe that's the essential crisis how do you, how do you, how do you decide and act among multiple existential crisis, all clamoring for attention. Thanks, Stacey. Yeah, so I want to throw out this idea it's not the best. I mean I don't know if it's a good idea just thought of it, but I want to use it to illustrate something. When Doug was talking about the land, and I was thinking about you know the issues that different people would have. I thought to myself, what about if the idea were to find a million different ways a million different ideas because again I'm thinking about the populace and what feeds them and drives them Facebook has shown me they like throwing out their ideas. So I thought about my mother who has a large piece of land and she's living in a house like many older people who can't really afford it. And as a fixed income, the taxes are really high. And I imagined if we made a deal with a local landscaping company that they got some sort of stipend for being able to take care of the land that was being farmed, and that the homeowner got, you know, got the produce in, as much as they needed, and they got their land taken care of, and it became like a community thing that's just one little idea in one little place that maybe nobody would like maybe somebody would like. But if we had all of these ideas which break I want to connect that to the playfulness the connection and the idea of ideas coming out in conversation, because I've been on a lot of calls where I meet somebody for the first time and they say well I feel like I know you watched you. So I want to share that when people watch us talking it doesn't mean that they have to be here to still hear the ideas. And I think we should keep that in mind and I really want to encourage a place where we could all take one person's thing and maybe not do it their way. I mean I do think that it would be too draconian the way Doug saying, but I don't have to throw his whole idea out I can try to think for myself. Well, how can I work towards his goal in a way that might work in my little piece. Complete. Thanks. Love that Stacy thanks and I was pointing there's there's, I don't know how active they are now but garden dating yard sharing. There's a bunch of things where you can in fact have other people farm your land and give you 20% of what they grow or whatever it is that that is happening in lots of different places and I don't know if it's Peter to Pete it out or still still growing Pete you may have the last word today. Actually, I'm going to read I'm going to read the poem again at the end so not quite a lot in honor of Cinco de Mario but you'll have the last substantive thing to say. I feel like a lot of what we talked about today was incrementalism, which I think isn't going to get us there. So I really like Doug's plan, because it starts small. It hits a leverage point and expands from there. So that sounds like something that's not incrementalism to me. I also gills, I like gills question, you know, amongst, you know, a number a handful of existential crises, how do you decide which one to work on. And I think maybe it's, it will end up if the world changes it will end up being something else. I think there's going to be a small number of people who find a wedge someplace and they're going to change things. So whether that's the political system or the way Supreme Court treats human rights or climate change or or water or the overarching immensity of our military. I think it's not so much that as one person, you pick the most important problem I think there are going to be revolutionaries who say, Well, this is the thing I'm going to sit out and change today and I'm going to gather together, you know, 100, 100 of my closest friends. And we're just going to frickin change the thing and maybe it'll be climate maybe it'll be something else. But it won't be incremental. If we need, if we need to get it done in time. Thanks Pete. This has been a wild ride. I really appreciate everybody's hearts and participation in this. I think we're all stirring this in our heads and trying to figure our way toward functional things. Let me reread the poem which is Cinco de Mayo by Luis Rodriguez in honor of today's Cinco de Mayo. And I just, I'm rereading it partly because it feels more relevant than at the start of the call it feels like a lot of what we've talked about on this call resonates strongly with the poem so Cinco de Mayo by Luis Rodriguez. Cinco de Mayo celebrates a burning people whose land is starved of blood civilizations which are no longer holders of the night. We reconquer with our feet with our tongues that dangerous language saying more of this world than the volumes of textured and controlled words on a page. We are the gentle rage. Our hands hold the stream of the earth, the flowers of dead cities the green of butterfly wings. This is about the barefoot, the untooled, the warriors of want who took on the greatest army Europe ever mustard, and one. I once saw a Mexican man stretched across an upturned sidewalk near Chicago's 18th and Bishop, one fifth of May day. He brought up a near empty bottle to the withering sky and yelled out a grito with the words, que viva Cinco de Mayo. What do you then what it meant, what it meant for barefoot Zapoteca indigenous in the battle of Puebla, and what it meant for me there on 18th Street among los ancianos. The moon face children and futureless youth dodging the gunfire and careening battered cars, and it brought me to that war that never ends. The war Cinco de Mayo was a battle of that I keep fighting that we keep bleeding for that war against a servitude that a grandpa on 18th Street knew all about, as he crawled inside a bottle of the meanest Mexican spirits. Thank you all.