2015 November

Interesting view from Berlin by Swiss Member of Parliament?

14 replies on “Interesting view from Berlin by Swiss Member of Parliament?”

It’s not very spectacular. That was 4 years ago and the minaret episode 6 years. This guy, a college teacher, enjoys provocation, especially to enrage the left by „breaking political correctness taboos“ (that react like pavlovian dogs), openly and ambiguously coquettes with neofascists and through this provocation gets votes from the right and thus gets elected for making this noise. This speech serves this purpose. The interesting thing is that with speaking these what he calls „truths“ that “no one else dares to utter“ he finds an audience and votes. Polarity gives clarity in a messy world. And today’s world is getting messier by the day to a breaking point, national and supernational Governments being submerged by problems they cannot handle. . Somebody needs to be blamed – an obvious danger comes from the radical „Islamists“. „Somebody has to take a clear stand“. But today we are facing a huge treck of „Muslims” running from the Islamists and a fucked-up region. From a spiral DYNAMICS point of view an interesting case. What do you do? Welcome these people and overstretch your absorption capacity or build fences around them and let them perish? Blame them for causing this mess? (Even Switzerland delivered arms to the Saudis).

People here still believe the growth story to everlasting prosperity and though they go on holiday trips to all kinds of exotic places haven’t understood that globalization is not a one way street. And that you cannot control the forces with state legislation. Interesting or unsettling depending what type you are and where you are.
Since these signs, you have marked out, things have sped up enormously. The tone is getting hysterical.

Maybe 007 will show us a way out?



I always enjoy provoking and then reading your point of view, I wish we had more like you on this list from other countries around the world to make things more real;)

There are several points he makes which will catch most “modern/postmodern” off guard and that has to do particularly with…Islam is an eternity.

In Christianity you can come and go by dogma…(generally)…Islam is different and will win because of this open-end.

All in all I found this talk extremely interesting…fascinating plays on metaphors (the Hitler piece)…and in general from what I know, there is no assimilation because you can ONLY ASSIMILATE ONE WAY in Islam…to Islam. Islam doesn’t assimilate to Christianity (this is the most virulent meme design I’ve ever seen)…only to nationalism where appropriate and even then–>fractured.

People talk about moderation, but you ONLY have moderation where there are no fundamentalists…this has been demonstrated over and over around the world.

Moderation works under only “moderate” conditions and those conventional conditions where now and near term super ordination brighten…but super ordination ebbs and flows and soon as it does, the glue loosens and the assimilated becomes fractured again…Islam is a glue which doesn’t let go…just watch Europe.

We in the USA are being naive to think that moderation in all things is possible.

The guy makes VERY (inflammatory) but salient points with a better understanding of how virulent memes emerge and sustain themselves.

Islam solves the problem that short term thinkers (people emerging from profit motives) in survival have…if the American Indians had access to technology, there would be no incursion…because they were MORE RUTHLESS than the pioneers, et al.

Watch what happens in Europe where assimilation is occurring ONLY ON THE SURFACE, in deference to super ordination.

The KARMA of Europe (metaphorically) and that of the USA is descending into the laissez-fairness that is dominant in sacrifice of self-cultures.

What is occurring now which the HUGE FORCED MIGRATION is not what it appears.

I suspect it is indirectly emergent from the combinatorial effects of these lassisez-faire policies and the Islamic mandate to convert non-believers.

While it appears on the surface this can be made into win-win-win, it is by far the EASIEST VICTORY that Islam has ever won!!

For centuries, every Islamic invasion of Europe has been repelled and now as a humanitarian crisis, the mass infiltration of the “virus” is being welcomed.

The same “type” of introduction of what Mexico tried to do for several hundred years has also occurred in the USA and anytime you unite fast replication of the host, the meme naturally gains in virulence (density and frequency).

The difference is that the two situations, while similar, have two very different outcomes…the takeover in Europe will challenge the base memetic foundation and grow rapidly under green to surround and gradually subsume the resident culture because of the dogma.

If people in Europe, or for that matter anywhere REALLY UNDERSTOOD SGD (Spiral Gravisian Dynamics), they would realize ad be able to predict without any danger of being wrong, the outcomes which will emerge.

It is the crazy “rational” meme which supports doing the same thing over and expecting different results that will “drive home the dagger” so to speak–the ignorance of human nature at the beating heart of the “crazy meme”!

In the USA (just to drop a footnote) the assimilation is possible because of Catholics or the judea Christian memetic DNA.

However, in Europe, the foundational DNA can’t be a hybrid, it is a battle to the death which Islam wins…people just don’t get this, and it’s going to produce “DISORDER” NOT assimilation!

The HOPE that you can defy human nature exists in the blue-green memes–viral strains which exist around the world and are supported by human nature, however these viruses are not as virulent as those which have also agency with ruthless DNA involved.

As technology produces more and more ways for fewer and fewer people to disrupt larger and larger numbers, those viral memes which contain “RUTHLESS DNA” will persist.

The “game” programs almost always show that cooperative agents win in the end…and the reality on the ground will test these theories because what they do show is that cooperation produces the best outcome for all and unfortunately Islam is NOT WIRED FOR BEST OUTCOME, it’s wired for domination which means destruction of the underlying life is in fact an option if the process requires domination.

Just some happy thoughts on a Sunday;)


You have won a point. I listened the guy to the end. He says he is not AGAINST but FOR people. He makes a strong point by naming the value that he considers to be pivotal of our civilization of „love thy neighbor “.
You can on the other side pin point the value you do not accept: that somebody can stand up and say „I and only I represent the true faith and you must submit – i have the divine mandate to force you to submit “That gives you a compass and makes it easier than asking me to follow one or the other camp, i.e. some fuzzy group think.

Living up to a value and following a group that just uses that value as its flag are two different things. Suddenly you are caught up in a group debasing or murdering people in the name of some noble value/cause and you cannot escape the dynamics of the group. Afterwards if the deed is considered wrong, the individual gets convicted for not having resisted (Abu Ghraib, Nürnberg trials). In another he gets pursued as a traitor (Snowdon).

So, I don’t know how this SGD business game actually helps me decide what to do in a given situation. I find these analyses very slippery. So only history, looking into the mirror, will reveal the relevant patterns.


I apologize for this time, but short explanations are just puzzle pieces without the puzzle.

Mark said:

“So, I don’t know how this SGD business game actually helps me decide what to do in a given situation. I find these analyses very slippery. So only history, looking into the mirror, will reveal the relevant patterns.”

I disagree because today is the future!

Here is a point that begs explaining, and one in which the last decade of emerging markets has provided data and evidence for me to summarize IMHO.

Not that I want to draw this quartering out, but I am in the mall in Ermita, Manila today purchasing a Korean Microwave and the store is FULL of employees less than 25 years old.

I had to laugh at a lot of the younger ones running around like chickens with their heads cutoff…just rookies trying their best to fit into the proscribed service system.

Here is the point:

It’s the children and their children’s children that will become the consumption engine of the future NOT THIS GENERATION…and here’s where I’ll parallel in SGD and the ability to “know what to do in any given situation”…Mark’s lament.

Learning/unlearning requires repetition and replication in most people.

Learning occurs ACROSS generations as each generation provides the basis of the next (Memetic Construction).

The kids in that store still can’t add and subtract or make changes without permission, creating a bureaucratic system.

While these kids are a cell phone generation, they are FAR from the CODE, the level at which they are formulating code on their on as staging a shift in cultures…as in content, context, conditions, code and culture…and generations from discovering and using their core. (E5)

What SGD can help us begin to see understand and use is that introduction of people to systems in place or vice versa: introduction of systems to people MUST BE DONE WITH EXTREME CARE and through the lens of values.

Now the first kinds of objections you will get is that “design” is deterministic if you try to intervene in what arises as seemingly “natural design,” a term used in SGD, but…

It’s the nature of design that will kill you when you fail to understand that people and systems are in motion, HAVE INERTIA, and are hybridizing/developing as a result.

Let me explain.

Going back to the mall, you quickly realize that this current generation is not either scaffolded, nor cued for critical thinking challenges.

They must first master the fundamentals such as following procedures, working as a part of a process where others own a piece of that process, and only a TINY minority can take on improvements of that process and innovate, because innovation (variation, as Demimg called it) is the enemy of a system where many parts are all following procedures in processes that are designed to produce a result WITHOUT thinking or permission–which controls variation.

A change in conditions can’t be met, (example), could I pay with part cash and part credit card–perturbing an immune response from the system–we are not allowed.

So content and contextual change is all that is possible and a shift in context is a real challenge at this level as I suggested in the situation of “part cash, part credit.”

Take this example:

People “leave” their country because they will be killed otherwise and there is no hope for change, coupled with the typical response to “take these refugees in” and begin an arduous, often impossible process which doesn’t destroy the underlying code/culture relationship.

Without thinking about deeper structure, the expedient actions are taken and millions of new actors are automatically introduced into a play with which the script is tacit to them and their own density and frequency in that play is thin or hollow at best, what’s most important, their capacity may be too low to assimilate without generations passing (the first failure to see, understand and use (SUU) SGD.)

There is a REASON TO SETUP refugee camps!

Dastardly as they are, the idea is that after the conflict has resolved, you repatriate those persons back into the legacy culture. And it is the REQUIREMENT clearly SUU SGD, to make that happen!

The arrogant naïveté of FS- GREEN is to think that people can change and easily assimilate into the new culture without (stupidly) realizing that the design of that assimilation is ABSOLUTELY flawed.

Secularization, nor assimilation into a “dogma OPPOSITE a dogma” will produce SUPERIMMUNE responses, which leads to fractionalization, polarization and the OPPOSITE of what FS-GREEN understands about how culture forms and assimilates because the very nature of FS-GREEN systems assume cooperation.

In my Philippine example, you design the system with 3 generations in mind, realizing that it is “natural design” is of stacking accumulating memes that creates a class of sustainable consumers who will demand the more complex services that will make the system stable.


Right now in all emerging markets, “financing” of every modern form is being employed to sell goods to consumers who do not have sustainable incomes and the next serious downfall will cause a ripple–no a tsunami–of defaults that will reverse all the progress built on this house of cards, because people don’t SUU SGD;)

It is 2-3 generations that will begin to move beyond mostly “procedural” work with low pay, poor benefits and thin retirement (stratum 1 work for you Jaquesians), to work that involves additional and more complex work…this higher value work then begins to receive pay and benefits that represents “sustainable” income for consumption of yet more complex services/living that becomes sustainable because of the attractions of the entire scaffold of functional work levels that a society needs to sustain growth and development.

Clear as mud?

What SGD helps us understand is that conditions produce “variable” solutions at each basin of values of which problem solving–at each sustainable basin of values–remains “durable” over time.

Now what happens when you mix up these basins or rather disrupt their naturally maturing memetic formation? (Or construction, where construction “may” be thought of as non-conscious and conscious.)

They devolve!

Look at this graphic of development over time:

The “cycle of development” is always depicted in general by this pattern!

Development devolves after the introduction thus becoming unsustainable until assimilation occurs.

The more ADVANCED A SYSTEM YOU HAVE, the greater/steeper the disruption possible because the more complex a system the more it is built upon trust, faith, and confidence. (TFC)

Briefly, the farther you move away from “compelling force,” the more complex the social fabric becomes as a result of the emergence of TFC.

[Each values basin produces TFC density and frequency through particular agency and cooperation; express self: sacrifice of self-ratios in relation to time, now, near and far.]

People depend on people to pay their bills, do what they say, minimize lying, cheating, stealing and scamming behaviors–>thus engendering high levels of TFC required for more complex social transaction.


If I’m going to invest to build a plant/delivery and service system, I have to TRUST that the “conditions” will remain sustainable for a period of time or MITEAM is wasted.

In another example, if I introduce people who respond well to force, but the lack of coercive force compels them to behave at the corresponding level of force: non-force–a force of shame, loss of security, safety, income or sustainability of conditions–to a system that depends on low coercion, the TRUST, FAITH and CONFIDENCE in the system begins to curtail the development of complex systems which sustain a culture.

Without the “necessary density and frequency in judicial, economic, political, social, and transformational components, the system will DEVOLVE (regression as SGD names it) until it stabilizes at a complexity where it can sustain itself, or said in another way, behavior is compelled in corresponding ways that cue, support and scaffold TFC.

As CRAZY AS IT SEEMS, this is why I’m making the TRUMP CASE for law and order to strengthen/add density and frequency back into a complex system before the less complex actors devolve the current “more complex” system.

A hierarchically complex system can ONLY BE SUSTAINED where TFC is present at each level of the lower level behaviors.

The young have grown up seeing any authority to be countered because of the nature of failures in growth to sustain its underlying structure in sufficient density and frequency–where density and frequency equal quantity and quality. (GRAVES indirectly warned about this as he stated that kids reared at FS-GREEN would not have the density and frequency of lower order memes/actions, that in fact “led” to their being able to be nurtured at FS-GREEN.

The density and frequency of youth is to question authority and dogma which in effect has provided the system that allows them to be “free” to object to authority!

(Note the Jack Nicolson speech from A FEW GOOD MEN):

Lieutenant Kaffee: Colonel Jessep! Did you order the “code red?!!”

Judge Randolph: You don’t have to answer that question!

Jessep: I’ll answer the question. You want answers?

Lieutenant Kaffee: I think I’m entitled to them.

Jessep: You want answers?!

Lieutenant Kaffee: I want the truth!

Jessep: You cannot handle the truth!

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s going to do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know — that Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives.

You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall — you need me on that wall.

We use words like “honor,” “code,” “loyalty.” We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.

I would rather that you just said, “thank you” and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand the post. Either way, I don’t give a DAMN what you think you’re entitled to!”

While this entire “Confidence Game” is built on the sewers of our society, the sewer is there for a reason and insufficient density and frequency of sewers results in us being inundated in our own BS.

What SGD can teach is to evaluate the culture and understand that if you introduce pre-conventional people to a modern culture, or modern culture to pre-conventional people, in the case of where modern memes are assimilated into pre-conventional cultures, you are in fact mixing metaphors, and their underlying values resulting in a finality beyond our comprehension.


“Should you choose to test my resolve in this matter, you will be facing a finality beyond your comprehension, and you will not be counting days, or months, or years, but millenniums in a place with no doors.”

When we disturb intentionally or unintentionally allow disruption of the natural design that is present in cultures for the purpose of amalgamation, we enter into a gambit that so far in history produces destructive conflict.

Each geographical/ethnic culture is developing at the pace it can internally as it responds to external change.

When disruption occurs, the system will DEVOLVE (civil war often being the protagonist) at “some point” to re-assimilate the fractional elements. This WILL OCCUR often veiled as a more global conflict at times as the civil war expands beyond geographical boundaries–disruptive memetic change in its purest form…all ensconced within the “…pugnacity of man” to quote LESSONS OF HISTORY.

Harris in ENEMIES OF CIVILIZATION argued that the most ruthless always have the upper hand, whether cutting off heads, salting the earth or firebombing millions…dropping a nuclear bomb?

While I’ve wandered (it might seem;) away from the original question, I have tried to provide background on why SGD is a very powerful model of explanation and prediction.

While we can’t use SGD to predict the cracks and fill, we can step back and explain well what happened and what WILL happen through the SGD lenses which SGD identifies as “values.”

As an aside, It’s ironic to me that the nurture of things depends on the nature of things;)

These lenses are important when you begin to add more complex systems and components such as motives, hierarchical complexity, social evolution and evolutionary psychology.

We CAN, without doubt predict a devolution in Europe over the coming decades, absent the progression as pontificated by current leaders with the assimilation of this and the nature of the past years immigration of non-secular memes grounded in the “strictest” religious dogma on the planet!


We CAN, without a doubt predict a devolution in the USA (Canada will behave as Europe even though it, of all nations, represents the alchemy of the USA).

Canada is mixing at a different rate with a thin DQ-BLUE base, whereas the USA through civil war produced a strong foundational fabric of DQ-BLUE, which over time has become diluted, whereas, Canada jumped through the hoops at blue into FS-GREEN…without evolution hence the thin blue density and frequency as a nation.

Europe would have been fine had it continued to remain homogenous, but the error of EU progression has now created the karma which now will devolve Europe–most likely to its roots at a less complex form.

What Germany couldn’t produce through force, it produced through politics! Now, it will unwind.

The USA was never homogenous to start with, therefore it’s social karma lies in its progression to FS-GREEN, who will soon release a raft of “expedience” into a vulnerable culture. (Thousands of prisoners will be released over the next months equaling an unintended intervention of a most dangerous kind–colluding with FS-GREEN to pave the way for…?


As I’ve stated before, what holds these more complex systems together is the LACK OF FORCE, and the substitution of TRUST, FAITH AND CONFIDENCE (TFC). AS systems become more free, opportunism ignites elements in the culture which are combustible, much like not removing undergrowth in a forest produces large disruptions, all part of natural design which is the sub-structure of SGD.

Of course this subject is complex, messy and chaotic, but don’t be deterred from seeing the ORDER within it and SGD provides the lenses for us to SUU (see, use, understand).

People are FRUSTRATED with the inability of SGD to explain or predict tomorrow! However, while the devil may be in the details, God remains in the strategy;), metaphorically.

Do you remember…?

Ariel Durant — ‘The present is the past rolled up for action, and the past is the present unrolled for understanding.’

Let me add: the future is written today.

Understanding the “structure” and order of the underlying system is today and the future, together.

Time is relative and key as another dimension of developmental reality (vertical, oblique, lateral) which we are uncomfortable with because we want to plan for tomorrow, the next 1440 minutes, the next 7 days, the next month…!

Structural time is also relative and while time presents serious gaps in the order of things, we live and die within that order.

To understand that the best thing we can do in the USA is to REORDER DQ-BLUE as painful as that would be, it’s an inevitability in the least, and SGD is the way in which we know both and.

The only question is time, NOT the underlying structure which is proffered well (with some tweaks) with SGD!

Freedom produces disorder and chaos…order is emergent from chaos…but nonetheless “order is present!”

If you bolt on LeaderWARE components around SGD, it becomes a valid individual and organizational design tool precisely because SGD does the job of outlining those “values basins” which REMAIN durable due to human nature!

[These basins will soon begin to become less durable as we introduce non-natural or synthetically designed actors which can be programmed to function absent of motives, with alogithms directed fully with independent values. Humans, while knowing, can’t do without alignment of their genetically wired motives. Synthetics will be wired to know, then choose the most appropriate response without being directly influenced by motives, although indirect motivation can never be entirely avoided until we get true machine culture.]

The farther away from human nature you get, the more you need it!


As I sit in my Berlin apartment, in view of the Reichstag, I completely agree.

And some of my Muslim friends agree, but they are even more afraid than the rest from speaking up.

Last week I read the headline on the front page of a main Berlin newspaper.
Translated it read “head-scarf ban”.
But in actual fact it was reporting on a law “The neutrality law” banning ALL religious symbols on official figures like teachers and judges.
It wants such roles to communicate fairness and neutrality in all decision-making.
It explicitly focused on neutrality, and clearly did not focus on any one set of beliefs.

So, crosses and the Jewish kippa are also banned.

But sadly, the average Berliner will just read the headline, and thus will be manipulated into an old discourse.
So, the media is playing its part too, to exacerbate a difficult situation.


In Canada, particularly in Quebec, there have been laws and debates about laws “banning ALL religious symbols on official figures like teachers and judges”.

What is missed in the debates is the difference between wearing a religious symbol and following one’s religion. A cross or a star is a religious symbol. I doubt that anyone has ever been intimidated by a public figure’s wearing one of them, but you are not restricting anyone’s religious freedom by forbidding them to wear one. For many who wear however, wearing a kippa, a turban, a niqab, is a commandment. The woman who wears a niqab is not symbolizing Islam but being a Moslem. Just like wearing a bathing suit is not a symbol of modesty; it is modesty.

We may wish to restrict religious freedom, but it would be better to acknowledge that this is what we are doing.


Degrees of freedom, personal, religious, political, economic, etc. is a meta pattern governing all value dynamics, I think;)

Knowing that freedom is at issue is one level of abstraction more complex…

Just thinking out loud.


Thanks for these explanations, Mike, some of which i can follow some

The arrogant naïveté of FS- GREEN is to think that people can change and easily assimilate into the new culture without (stupidly) realizing that the design of that assimilation is ABSOLUTELY flawed.

and some of which I feel fall short. People cannot change in the shortest of periods, but it’s what our fast-paced market economy (High frequency trading, change, innovation, etc. stuff) is demanding from us all, creating havoc across the planet. I don’t think you will have the MIPAL to design any decent kind of decent refugee camp to mitigate what’s happening now.
Here’s an analysis I find quite pertinent:

What does SD suggest?



Mark said:

What does SD suggest in reference to the article linked below, an excerpt I pulled quickly to illustrate perhaps what he’s referring too (I didn’t read on, so if there is another quote mark which is better, send that for contrast;)

“The fact is fanaticism, fundamentalism, and ethnic conflict have been growing for many decades—and not just in the Islamic world.”

I could fill the space with more than an answer but let’s try for simplicity;)

You won’t find these answers in the book Spiral Dynamics, but nonetheless the idea is that they are SUU SGD (see, understand, use [Plan, Chk, Do framework-Deming], Spiral Gravisian Dynamics)…I could have used “feel” but the acronym colors itself as FUU;)

In general, the way west is not the rest….

1) start with the idea that each values basin, clearly indicated by SGD has answers to any condition, even when it’s a hammer looking for nails–applied to any problem–my way or the highway.

2) cultures are made up of emergent actions from actors in concert, and like BS, are a composites, which find NO living exemplar, but only those which attributes are taken and remixed, mashed up, or substituted for the real thing which doesn’t exist.

3) cultures evolve/develop at different speeds than the actors because when a group exists, if a condition/problem/opportunity (CPO) arises, anyone can solve it (e.g. Play charades by yourself vs with others)…you move onto the next CPO, or C3PO;)

4) cultures are governed by complexity, not motives + individual capability!

5) people are.

6) cultures quickly outpace–in the face of accelerating complexity–all the individual actors.

7) cultures scaffold the development of individuals.

8) MOST (meaning by population) of the intelligence in the world is below 100 IQ points, as a point of reference, although there are facts:

9) cultural sophistication–scaffolding its/other cultures–artificial sets up conditions of rising (note reference to the quote: …”growing for many decades”) complexity that fewer and fewer feel comfortable with…so there is a constant “falling off the bandwagon” discord incremental icing on parallel with accelerating complexity;)

10) fractionalization provides a means to our innate motives + capability.

What SGD recognizes in ISIL, et al is seen, understood and used as a beige-purple lens couple with a purple-red lens and fed by red-blue, financed by blue-orange.

Using only two basins to form a values dynamic is simpler and does not explain all, but going into more complexity for additional correlation is not necessary unless needed, for the sake of MyMITEAM…and the admonition of mayor koch: “I can explain it to you, I can’t comprehend it for you.”

Why people from the west join is easily explained by any conventional theory of ecocentrism.

The reason that the west can’t understand this parallel directly with mark’s captured quote:

“The arrogant naïveté of FS- GREEN is to think that people can change and easily assimilate into the new culture without (stupidly) realizing that the design of that assimilation is ABSOLUTELY flawed.”

What SGD may help us understand is that just because the western culture is “entering FS-GREEN” scaffolded by “less-capable” lateral elements of DQ-BLUE and ER-ORANGE that the “unbelievability” doesn’t reside in the actions of the other value dynamics but in the projection of FS-GREEN values onto others=arrogance.

We can start there…”there are miles to go before I sleep…”


I slept through this one and by now you may have already travelled the miles to your sleep (i indeed mean MITEAM – acronyms are a matter of luck 🙂 )

But let’s start from here

What I find difficult is to keep things apart (my linear cartesian mind) in order to see, understand and use the facet of reality we are talking about: motives + capabilities of an individual (core), the culture he/she is in (the basin in which we interact), the code we use (memes?).

Take this sentence “The arrogant naïveté of FS- GREEN is to think that people can change and easily assimilate into the new culture without (stupidly) realizing that the design of that assimilation is ABSOLUTELY flawed“

There is a difference when we talk about the arrogant naïveté of “Mr. XY“ and the naïveté of “FS-GREEN“. Mr XY’s naïveté is an expression of his personality (motivational profile and capabilities scaffolded by his culture). Here we can argue whether Mr XY really is as naïve as he is being made out to be or not.

But what is the naïveté of „FS-GREEN“ ? Here we are looking at what Graves calls a „subsistence level“ (for those unfamiliar with the jargon, see the Graves’ famous 1974 paper in the link at the bottom), a particular mindset (or „neurological system in the brain“ in our case F) that develops in a particular set of „existential problems“ (S). Mindset F can cope with existential problems S.

What is it you want to say? That the prevalent „neurological system“ F is unable to cope with problems it is confronted with – that are not S problems but problems far beyond. Could we say that the cultural toolbox has not evolved sufficiently to adequately deal with the problems?

You use a lot of theoretical elements that go well beyond Clare Graves and Beck’s and Cowan’s Spiral Dynamics. There’s is the core element (Reiss) that you roughly reduce down to the four value basins (red, blue, orange and green) which are not „subsistence levels on an existential ladder“, but value basins coming out of different motivational profiles.

In today’s political climate the sentence can also just be read as some green (ecology movement) bashing rant naming everything naïve that does not follow a standard reasoning. But knowing you, I trust that this is not what you were conveying.

I think I know what you mean as I am sufficiently immersed in this thinking.

But I still find it difficult to unpack a short hand sentence like this: “What SGD recognizes in ISIL, et al is seen, understood and used as a beige-purple lens couple with a purple-red lens and fed by red-blue, financed by blue-orange“.
I find it difficult to put it on the ground and then explain things to Tom, Dick and Harry.

Or is it just dumb smart talk (which is often the case with SD graduates)? My test is always can somebody translate his shorthand back into longhand in order to share.

I fear things will get of hand here. Something will snap. To manage this you need to orchestrate an array of instruments played at the right level.


It would take a LONG TIME to unwind this but let me just pick a few tacit assumptions:

Everyone is naive and all codes are naive when they face problems beyond their alignment.

Everybody is right and everybody is wrong at some level, including all theories about right and wrong.

SGD (I call it) because I like to pick the parts I like and make sense to me–naive as you might say…

…using the Graves notation: A-M = conditions, N-Z = neurological system* along with the SD color code, as in FS-GREEN, and I use Green (first letter cap) for entering, GREEN (all caps) for “nodal**”, green (all small letters) for exiting mode, when I use it (sometimes I forget but that’s a rule I use that neither graves or spiral uses).

*”The l981 [Graves Summary] is official. Graves said the editor at The Futurists got them backward. Life Conditions should come Before neurological condition. Here is the adaptive intelligence on line which enables a person to even recognize the pre exiting life condition. We are talking about society as a whole rather each single individual. The pattern is a commentary on the aggregate or center of gravity as “nature” selects those with that pattern or code already, although Graves thought some should slide into it.” – Don Beck, PhD for references.

*i don’t know if graves used nodal, I seem to have read that somewhere, but it’s very important in my interpretation because node = network dynamics!

I use the term “basin” to talk about the value core and it’s hybrids, basin as in “attractor” basin from quantum mechanics as I believe the values are at LEAST strange attractors, but they may turn out not to be so strange, but STRONG ATTRACTORS–I am strange;)

There are NO PURE BASINS, it’s a “field” and rumi will meet you there. However you have to use notation of some kind.

In psychology, although I’ve not studied it well, about 50% is thought to be “good enough” in making a correlation, I’ve seen lower coefficients used and of course higher are desired, REISS wanted above 80%…he got some I n the 90s…leaving little doubt!

So I figure if we can explain or predict about half of what’s happening with SGD, that’s not such a bad thing, although it can be MUCH HIGHER.

Like other developmentalists, graves was one of the few to put in place a system of notation which you need to talk about things in relationship to each other. Most popular* are:

Kolhberg-Moral Perspective

*Most others-derivatives or related

Individuals have hard wired motives, cultures (to include orgs) don’t. They are influenced by them because leaders 99.5% of the time do not act without expressing their motives and depending on the “conditions present” may make the org like them in their image.

However, you can use the notation on both as long as you don’t confuse them.

I write often in generalities–figuratively– and a lot of people SUU SGD literally–1, because I’m expedient and 2, because it would require too long to write fully referenced papers for the literal, you will have to understand that or go somewhere else to get ideas;)

FS-GREEN navite is the idea that because equality and personal freedom and a host of other attributes are in their sights that everyone should have all the personal freedom they want and be equal. THIS MAPS WELL to BS like an article I posted to the list recently is good for keeping people on a spinning wheel of desire–wanting things.

FS-GREEN, also believes–like other basins believe in their “insights”–that negotiation/cooperation is the “right” way to handle everything.

The four basins colored, red, blue, orange and green arise in importance for me NOT FROM THE REISS RESEARCH, but from GRAVES primary research, and while there are debates about the four systems matching exactly those notations, I gathered in McClelland’s SOLID research on social motives and HUMAN MOTIVATION, where 3 social motives emerged as ach, pwr, aff to correspond to:
achievement = ER-ORANGE, affiliation = FS-GREEN, and a fourth which he wrote about called avoidance = DQ-BLUE.

Having these show up in two non-related forms of primary research is enough for me because as broad basins which are STRONG ATTRACTORS, they continue to hybridize to meet more and more conditionals.

I also believe in the power of 4 as our DNA = A G C T


DQ-BLUE adds algorithms which allow it to solve (partially, as in good enough for the situation) and still remain linked to the core of DQ-BLUE = sacrifice self to get later.

I went further to hybridize SGD to a matrix of time (now – later), and self/other dynamics (express self – sacrifice self) to give us the following:

Express self – get now (CP-RED)
Sacrifice self – get later (DQ-BLUE)
Express self – get later (ER-ORANGE)
Sacrifice self – get now (FS-GREEN)

GRAVES didn’t use this but it makes sense clearly to see these alternating on the spiral.

So, no REISS doesn’t create four basins, although my work on LeaderSTYLE does group the REISS desires into these broader networks, but this is already going to tome which won’t be read by most!

From here, let me segue to the ground that Mark is in need of…


“What SGD recognizes in ISIL, et al is seen, understood and used as a beige-purple lens couple with a purple-red lens and fed by red-blue, financed by blue-orange“.

Of course this is short-hand but very strategically and tactically useful-albeit complex!

[oversimplified for brevity]

AN-beige-BO-Purple cuts off heads, eats people, uses law of jungle through tribal dictate.

Mix it with express self to get now CP-RED and you get force, power, rape, slavery, destruction of history, etc…salting of the earth.

BO-PURPLE in charge?

Watch this bye the way, as the system will implode if it goes too long.

There is a mandate given by a few BO-purple (who use purple as a way to hold their followers), CP-RED (Islam is warm naturally, but now HOT underfire), DQ-Blue (careful to show you the full chord brightening).

DQ-Blue is linked to ER-Orange for money, “no money-no honey!”

Now enter FS-GREEN.

Negotiation, and cooperation (duped by equality) believes new Middle East strategy of we give money, bombs and “permission” let them fight it out, right?

Not if you want something other than what you got!

Now how did I arrive at this perspective?


Figuratively, once I realize that the on the ground elements are going to kill, eat and f*** everything that moves…unless you have a strong stomach and turn a blind eye, all the while you are negotiating and cooperating, they are killing, eating and f****** everything in their path, while the media channels “BRANDO”…”The Horror…The Horror…”

Is it wrong?

Not to them!

And that’s the FS-GREEN naïveté!

Projecting how I am and what I value onto others makes sense only to me and those like me, no matter how rational it might seem, but according to SGD, would be a form of INSANITY, realizing what I said is IN FACT WHATS HAPPENING WITH ISIL.and FS-GREEN tolerance!

I could go on, but perhaps the TPOV is well-enough formed;)

Took two hours to write/research that Mark;)


Thank you, Mike for this long conversation and for putting all this material together. I highly appreciate the work put into it. It also took time and effort to formulate my points and tickle this out you 😉


Did u mean MITEAM?;)

(Money, Information, Time, Energy, Attention, Motivation)

One thought as an aside, an acronym CAN represent an abstraction in and of itself which MAY be the higher order action to organize “at least” two lower order actions in a non-arbitrary manner.

MITEAM may be an abstraction at a hierarchically more complex level. I’d like to think so.

AAF (Army Air Field) would not, to make a distinction that all acronyms are not hierarchically more complex abstractions emerging from the organizing of lower order actions.

Just a thought for those on the list who are interested in weaving adult developmental models into practical use.

Mark, I wasn’t sure if you were referring to the quote when you said you didn’t get it, or couldn’t follow?

Let’s start there?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *