diplomacy of a bondservant

greek diplomacy of a bondservant all greek

what might be the diplomacy

of a bondservant?

perhaps we decide we no longer need validation to be.

what if we decide to focus (even more) on people than on policy.

what if then, we find we need less/little/no intercession.

disclaimer: no doubt prior to now, we’ve needed intercessors. there have been too many rules/policies/bureaucracies to not. we’d all have been held up in spaces, 24/7, if we hadn’t had the ticket/loophole/middle man to get us in/out/through, you name it, whatever it was. and so – our efficiency/ocd on credentialing/diploma-ing just about everything, has indeed left us dependent on intercession. 


what it if that were different. what if we could change that up, get to a point of trust, where we didn’t have to jump through so many/any hoops to just be. where we had more time in our day to do the things we can’t not do. what if it’s not too difficult/unbelievable/utopian/ridiculous to get to a place like that. today.

perhaps we get too tangled up in words/verbiage, which then perpetuates a pluralistic ignorance.. ei: this is how it’s always been/been done.

and all the while – we’re not being careful. we’re being too busy to choose – different. and so we’re missing it.

it’s a dance, really. much to do with synchronicity. because at the very same time, we need to be truly, literally free. swimming in/embracing this culture/mindset of trust. believing/assuming that people are good. only then will our hearts find wisdom, and choose to serve.

perhaps we haven’t yet seen it, because we haven’t yet tried it.

perhaps we try/start/trust a new/different dance/ecosystem.

what if acknowledging/seeing/noticing/serving people is what sets us free, literally free. what if that’s where we find the bravery to change our mind, ..everyday. perhaps we give it a go. we indulge/immerse/emerge. just to see.

perhaps we become us, as we are simultaneously grokking what matters to us. every day.

perhaps we can model/see/find..

..not only a user-friendliness (tools of conviviality et al) via encouragement to follow our whimsy, but a rich access to the soul, where we find hunger, a craving for our people/collaboration/co-creation.

perhaps Reid Hoffman ‘s charge to create a new certification system, is both doable and urgent.

Making this transition won’t happen overnight. But if we truly want to use technology to transform higher education, we can’t just confine our efforts to transforming instruction. We have to transform certification too. In doing so, we have an opportunity to create a new system that makes it clear to students what skills are most relevant and in highest demand, and thus gives them a chance to pursue these skills more strategically.

what if there are only two skills/conversations that are most relevant and in demand:

      1. attachment, are you known by someone
      2. authenticity, do you talk to yourself everyday

imagine this strategy: 7 billion people choosing every day – how to spend their day.

imagine our strategy/dance being less about certification and more about what it means to be human and alive – eudaimonia – ness.

perhaps tech can/does make us smarter than we think. perhaps now we go beyond endorsing/validating/recommending/liking/fakingperhaps we cut into the thinking/disruption of..

perhaps this has to do with letting go and letting everything be/become miscellaneous/rhizomatic. perhaps it’s more about disrupting/abolishing our theories/dogmas of diplomacy/policy/hierarchy.

perhaps it’s time we call into question this tradition of valuing people for the folded paper they somehow assume/acquire/purchase/sell-out for.. ?

what if the culprit is in thinking/believing we have to prove things. imagine getting rid of just that – in our busy lives.

un reputation ness

Julio Olalla tells us there is richness in authentic conversation, and that wisdom can’t be owned. what if fittingness is our only credential/diplomacy. a matching-ness of who we already are, rather than any proof/non-proof of purchase.

then if we ask..

what are you doing with your free\dom?

perhaps choosing to serve will be our choice.

and that might just be…

how freedom grows..


i think of Ethan Zuckerman’s imaginary cosmopolitanism, and i wonder if we’ve got much the same going on in the realm of diplomacy/freedom/democracy.

are we missing it/us, because we obsess with a middle man, a go between, someone/something to vouch for us/others? or to blame if things don’t work out? someone/something to hide us from getting too close, too transparent. is our fear of seeing/being seen/touched keeping us oppressed/dependent/depressed.

rhizomatic network

perhaps tech can help us start to see each other/ourselves better, a personal fabrication of the invisible us, through ambient awareness, getting at the rawness/fringe of people, entering virtual peripheral vision (Clive describes this via Thad et al, in smarter than you think.)

perhaps we take heed to Chimamanda‘s warning – that there is danger in just one story. perhaps tech helps us see all the layers of stories/humanity.

c dot app 7 graphic

Jose at 3:51:

i’m an american, i just don’t have the right papers….

we do this to immigrants. we treat human beings as not human beings. perhaps the only warped fairness in that, is that we actually do it to everyone.

diplomacy.. ? it comes in all colors. too many colors. or not enough. too big, too small. why don’t we change that up.

it’s the same story if we zoom out enough. fractal-ness. interconnectedness.

what if the web is letting us go/see to the limit/discrimination of infinity. what if we’re now getting the perception/faculty/reality – of both converging on one and converging on 7 billion. everything is miscellaneous. a chaordic picnic. what if we can no longer label/diploma-ize/credential, because we’re starting to see how multi-dimensionally layered and hyper/inter-connected we are. what if that losing of control, of that intercessory power, that need/obsession to define, frees us all up. from the drudgery/stress/oppression of a bureaucratized day. and then we find out.. trust works/flows/plays/dances/feels/tastes/looks/acts/is much better than keeping track.

prejudice decreases graphic with arrows

and if we can get at that fractal/soul narrative, the one for 100% of humanity, if we can honestly/bravely get at the heart of the matter, where we affect everything, (health, poverty, school to prison pipeline, .. all of it), well, …

…how cool/breathtaking/healing/sustainable/awe-some would that be…?

what if an app might be so bold as to change the world, at least to jump start that change, by simply helping us see each other better..

…realistically, I suspect there’s no killer app to end distraction. The downsides of being highly networked are constitutionally tied to the benefits. The only way we can reduce the negative side effects is by changing our relationship to the digital environment, both as a society and as individuals.

You’ve got to make the systems so that they help people pay attention to the world in front of them.

Clive Thompson, et al, Smarter Than You Think

what if communication with no agenda gets us to betterness.

3 focus areas



perhaps, if we all end up free enough, we’ll all choose to serve.

and then – if we’re all bondservants.. we’ll not need a go between… we’ll be face-to-face with life/each other.

what if the power of love