With every passing moment, the exponentially-intensifying causes of the social, political, and ecological crises currently faced by peoples across the globe are becoming increasingly obvious; the wellbeing of all life on planet earth depends upon the immediate eradication of market-driven social structures that bolster the few at the expense of the many. The image of ourselves as separate – from one another, from nature, and from the havoc being wreaked – has reinforced the disastrously misguided impression that competition (as opposed to collaboration) and the quest for material wealth (as opposed to the cultivation of caring relationships) are not only prerequisites for fulfillment, but inevitable factors in the course of “evolution”.

Those of us who are members of the wealthiest, most technologically advanced (and often most exploitative) societies on earth can no longer afford to sit idly by, waiting for the catastrophes to run their course. Once we identify that which is founded on exploitation and avarice, we can begin to extract ourselves from these toxic systems and develop new approaches based on cooperation, empathy, and altruism. By engaging creatively and constructively in even the most seemingly mundane aspects of existence, each of us realizes the potential to become an active participant in the reimagining of every facet of civilization, in clarifying what it means to be human.

Like many philosophers before him, artist and self-described “social sculptor” Joseph Beuys posed the question “Before considering the question WHAT CAN WE DO we have to look into the question HOW MUST WE THINK?” By identifying the kind of thinking (individual and collective) that is shaping our situation (for better or for worse), we can begin to fundamentally and constructively recast it. Inner alterations in perception can lead to outward shifts in the structure of our relationships, society, and surroundings. But just as thinking differently leads to different actions, different actions can lead to different ways of thinking.

Convention-challenging artists, writers, musicians, permaculturists, philosophers, architects, and other creative practitioners are currently approaching the ills of our time from all sides. By cultivating an array of alternative visions and actions, we are subtly undermining and replacing cultural paradigms that define “success” based on quantity of material goods rather than quality of life. We are supplanting that which emphasizes division (between human and human, human and nature, mind and body, time and space) over interrelationship.

Drawing on art’s infinite possibilities, system-defying agents are re-humanizing, de-commodifying, and debunking all manner of contrived contraries by creating barter systems, cooperative workspaces, soup kitchens, food forests, and street libraries. In societies based on an ever-intensifying quest ­– not for peace, health, or contentment but for “progress” (broadly defined as the drive toward maximization of personal convenience, what social ecologist Murray Bookchin called “the fetishization of needs”) – strategies for existence that are participatory, inclusive, and non-hierarchical, and that encourage the sharing of skills, ideas, and resources (the maximization of meaning) are eminently subversive.

Beuys advised us to think first, but if critical thinking and appropriate action are not undertaken in a dynamic, harmonious fashion coupled with earnest consideration of underlying systemic causes, any remedies that may be derived will ultimately serve to temporarily assuage symptoms at best, or, at worst, divert attention away from authentic solutions while providing a false sense of effectiveness.

The most fruitful interventions will be ones that do not, inadvertently or intentionally, reinforce established destructive systems, but instead directly engage populations in acts of social transformation.

In philosophy, the collectively agreed upon definitions, symbols, styles, behaviors, ways of using language, and other factors that are held in common throughout a culture – assumptions about how things are “supposed to be” – are called the “social imaginary.” Whether it is “normal” to compete or cooperate, own property, go into debt, go to war, or go shopping is determined by a wide range of constantly-shifting factors, including the influence of our political, legal, and educational systems, corporate advertising, and the media…and various amalgams thereof. For the most part, the social imaginary is like a program that runs surreptitiously in the background – until we become consciously aware of it, we don’t tend to notice that our attitudes are being influenced by entities that may have a vested interest in them. When we fear our neighbor instead of loving him or her, industries that produce guns, fences, and alarms profit – we willingly give them our dollars in exchange for a strange kind of security indeed (does anyone remember the days when “security” meant having enough trust in those around us to leave our doors unlocked?). The same happens when we buy into the illogical premise that it is “normal” to pursue endless economic growth based on finite resources that, if consumed, destroy planetary conditions that support life.

Changing what is “normal” in societies that are deeply influenced by corporate interests begins with rejection of forms of space (e.g., shopping malls, cloned fast food/coffee conglomerates, cubicle workspaces) and time (e.g., chronic busyness, obsessive scheduling, being “on the clock”) that reinforce behaviors and routines that alienate individuals from one another, from the development of a sense of connection to place, and from the clarity of mind that arises when we feel integrated and composed.

Philosopher Henri Lefebvre believed that the fundamental character of a society stems from the everyday habits of its people. Cultural change begins when customs change. As town squares and markets, inviting cafés, locally owned shops, pedestrian streets, and solidly constructed edifices are eradicated we succumb to a culture of the disposable, banal, isolated, and hurried, dispensed by short-sighted profiteers with little concern for enduring collective wellbeing.

Fortunately, the antidotes are obvious. We refuse to comply with those who would have us submit to a state of fearful isolation and frantic inability to think clearly, critically, and creatively. We do not allow our thoughts to be constrained by linear, commercialist clock-time, and we subvert it by realizing immeasurable, fluid, unstructured time that, infused with intention, flows via its own trajectory and with its own momentum (e.g., Parisian café culture of the 1920’s and 30’s, Black Mountain College 1933–1957, potlatch gatherings, jam sessions). By understanding the detrimental effects of prefabricated space, we can transform or avoid it to the greatest extent possible, and strive to create alternatives that provide inhabitants with deeper senses of connection to one another and to place (e.g., parks, camps, churches, locally-owned establishments, community gardens).

The Obvious International is an imaginary collective – one joins by imagining oneself a part of it. While the collective is imaginary, the relationships it generates and the results of its efforts are quite real – by re-thinking the meaning of evolution, humanity, progress; by reconsidering the meaning of meaning itself; and by living our lives according to what we find, we are setting a bold new course into the present. Each of us can start where we are, first by noticing, then by becoming practitioners of, the arts of the commonplace, the quotidian, the obvious.

This manifesto is intended to serve as a catalyst for further dialog and development of appropriate action. It is neither a starting point nor an end, but an articulation along a trajectory. This text is copyleft, share-ready, and open for comment at Plans, exchanges, designs, and modifications by collaborators will be actively sought, collected, assimilated, and implemented.


1. Paradoxes exist everywhere.

By embracing paradox, we acknowledge the human capacity to perceive subtlety and nuance, and we recognize the speciousness of habitual compartmentalization and dualistic thinking. We may feel separate from nature, but in fact we are both separate and interconnected. We are individuals and members of a society, not either/or. Thought and action are not isolated functions; they are two facets of an intricate, dynamic process.

2. All is in flux.

When we appreciate that nothing is truly static or linear we gain a sense of the astonishing complexity of being. By embracing the idea that everything, including information, is in a constant state of refinement or modification, it becomes clear that conventional forms of communication that require one isolated viewpoint to prevail above another may hinder perception of subtle connections that exist within seeming contradiction. The dialectician’s goal is not to “win” a debate, but instead to pool and analyze knowledge in order to gain a deeper, more holistic understanding of a situation.

3. Culture is in the quotidian.

To change what is normal, we must recraft the commonplace. We must cultivate reverence for and awe at everyday phenomena including air (breathing), hearing, seeing, digestion, flora, fauna, caring, clouds, stars, and the sun. By paying attention to the details of everyday existence (the ways we experience both space and time), we can influence its effect on ourselves and our communities.

This is a dynamic participatory occasion.

synergetic omni-solution


Buckminster Fuller said, “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” The Synergetic Omni-Solution is a way of describing how new models are emerging. Synergetic Omni-Solutions can be seen in decentralized, leaderless transformations happening around the world, right now, in every facet of society from freedom fighters in north Africa and the Middle East, to organic farmers, to creators and advocates of appropriate technologies and local economies. Many of us cannot wait any longer for change to happen – we can only take so much more-of-the-same before we arrive at the stark realization that if we want a different model, we’re going to have to build it ourselves using whatever materials are at hand.

Historically, certain individuals have served as catalysts – visionaries who by accident or design capture the sentiment of a population and, by acting on an impulse that resonates across a culture, awaken others to their cause. But Rosa Parkses, César Chávezes, Gandhis, and Mohamed Bouazizis are not born in a vacuum. They are extraordinary conduits, tips of icebergs. It may require thousands or millions of people all feeling a certain way at the same time to produce a single individual who seizes the urge to act, unlocking a gate through which others may follow. The Synergetic Omni-Solution is an effort to minimize this ratio by testing the theory that everyone possesses a unique key – it’s just a matter of recognizing it, and deciding to use it to open the lock.

Buckminster Fuller used the word “synergetic” to describe an ideal system or philosophy that results when unique parts are elegantly integrated to create a greater whole. He often attached the prefix “omni” to words to emphasize their universality – omni-cooperative, omni-inclusive. Synergetic Omni-Solutions, while they may be small in and of themselves, contribute in a positive way to society as a whole. I think of the grandmothers who never dreamed of participating in a political demonstration who made tea to share with protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square.

So often media and political leadership – in western culture, at least – discourages the tea makers by glorifying competitive spirit and rugged individualism while downplaying or even demonizing approaches intended to benefit the greatest number. Fear mongering news outlets are inherently disempowering, constantly reminding audiences that individuals are helpless, that the world’s problems are too complex and overwhelming for the actions of one person to make a difference. This theme assuages the conscience of the uninvolved – if actions don’t matter, then we are not responsible for the manufacture of our predicament.

Leaders took a very different approach during WWII. In the 1940’s U.S. and British “War Advertising Councils” launched extraordinary media campaigns based on slogans such as “Use it Up, Wear it Out, Make it Do, or Do Without.” These wildly successful initiatives not only promoted self-sufficiency and conservation of resources during tumultuous times; perhaps most importantly, they united citizens behind a common cause. The public was invited to participate in solutions, and entire nations rose to meet the challenge. Today we face all manner of global crises – economic, environmental, political, social – and yet those in positions of leadership overlook an important opportunity to invite us to play a role in helping to resolve them.

The Synergetic Omni-Solution is this invitation. Buckminster Fuller understood the challenges that lay ahead for humanity, but remained optimistic that our extraordinary abilities to innovate and cooperate would enable us to avert them. The SOS proposes that a new participatory model for planet-preservation and regeneration is already underway at the grassroots level, and seeks to hasten and strengthen its growth by identifying, highlighting, and encouraging engagement in this phenomenon. Every action – from seed planting to tea making to twittering – that reinforces the notion that the things that unite us are more powerful than the things that divide us contributes to the SOS.

On the final page of Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth, Buckminster Fuller offers his insight into how he believes humanity will ultimately avert disaster: our problems, he says, will be resolved by the computer. Certainly Bucky understood the computer’s potential as a tool for computation and design – but it’s hard not to wonder if he had some inkling of its potential as an interactive information sharing and culture-connecting device. YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Instructables, Flickr, SoundCloud, Wikipedia…the list of resources driven by users’ willingness to freely share and exchange knowledge is endless. Wikileaks, Avaaz, and We are all Khaled Said are just a few among thousands of examples of internet-based initiatives designed to bring injustices to light and direct and inspire social action. Those who followed the Egyptian revolution via social networks can attest to the powerful sense of community that has arisen as a result of the protesters’ ability to broadcast their message using ubiquitous technology, connecting and communicating with sympathizers around the world in real time. The momentum and immediate, widespread engagement made possible by the Internet can be applied to people-powered, grassroots revolutions of all kinds. By facilitating the pooling and dissemination of resources such as information, resolve, and passion, and by allowing us to join forces around common goals that transcend nationality, religion, and geography, the Internet is helping humanity to understand that we are all connected to one another in ways that are unaffected by signal strength and persist long after we shut our laptops.

The Instant & Efficient Comprehensive & Synergetic Omni-Solution exists wherever and whenever any individual chooses to infuse an action, however minute, with creativity and purpose for the sake of a greater good.


See Alyce’s site:

Republished with permission of the author.

2 Responses

  1. May 20, 2014

    […] By Peter Rothman […]

  2. February 27, 2015

    […] in decision making and solving problems. We’ve met the solution and it is us. We are the Synergetic Omni Solution or we can be if we choose […]

Leave a Reply