We already have a mechanism in place to try and ensure that taxpayers get the policy they want: it's called 'voting'. Once the Wellbeing and Anti-Obesity party starts to register well in the polls, then we can look seriously at ways to increase our score on vaguely-defined subjective measures of wellbeing. Till then, we should give people what they vote for, which is a stable economy and a growing personal wealth -- which they can spend on any kind of wellbeing they want.

And if you're looking for Drivers, I hear that some of Peter Slipper's are available -- at a suitable cost to the taxpayer, of course.

As is so common with these kinds of articles, the author refuses to contemplate that it's the very foundation our society is built on that's the problem.
The bulk of modern Western wage earners/welfare recipients have no control over their lives at the individual or community level. There is a radical disconnect within community, but more especially between civil society and polity, and no amount of damage-control within community is going to address the real problem. The modern Western State is a travesty compared with the classical ideal, wherein the citizen has such a deep personal investment in their polis that involvement in it constitutes a central part of identity. Polity these days is nothing more than economic rationalism, wherein the State increasingly cedes control to privatisation and there's nothing left for the citizen to idealistically invest in. Membership in political parties and community support organisations is on the decline across the board and society is increasingly catered to by profiteers. Indeed society is no longer an end in itself, driven by ethical/political/cultural aspiration; consumerism is the raison d'etre and profit is the rationale. Increasingly too, the profiteers are loathe to pay their taxes, to fund social infrastructure, unless it in turn, turns a profit--which is what drives public sell-offs.
The modern polis has never been more prosperous and decadent, as reflected in the obesity/mental illness epidemic, but it's also never been more ethically and spiritually bankrupt. It's not a polis, it's a farm and citizens are cattle.
Instead of dealing with the symptoms, the think-tanks should be looking at the disease.
But then that's like expecting a casino-funded drive to get to the root of problem gambling. Gambling's sacrosanct, it just has to look seemly.

Good article thanks David. I agree with most of your points, and those of Squeers. These express the feelings of many of us and I'll add a couple of points.

Forty years ago many authors pointed to a a modern utopia, with most working les than 20 hours a week, with increased wellbeing due to the free time we would all have.

Instead we have what Squeers aptly term 'the profiteers' ruling the show unbridled. They do so through:
- A general 'bastardization' of most workplaces through setting up managers as delusional little kings and queens (of what?) with the 'indians' (those who do the real work)being pressured and having their self esteem reduced or removed.
- A media that is allowed to feed propaganda as news and advertizing as fact.
- A relentless classification of people according to material possessions and workplace status.

Many work 50 hours plus to get more money and possessions and/ or simply more 'manager satisfaction / self esteem. Yes it is individualism run rampant. You don't find nearly so much of this in societies which still have tribal wisdom, such as the Maoris and Timorese. Until the work and workplaces are redesigned from the top down there will be no change.

I am not anti-capitalism but I think the only way to do this is by introducing some intelligent aspects of socialism. The French are at least attempting this. The US and Australia have unfortunately being going the other way, towards more materialism/individualism and making the situation worse. The individual should still have freedom of choice but this should not be limited to consumption; people need fertile ground (a nurturing community) and education to exercise this effectively.

While I essentially agree with the theme of this essay it is interesting to note that David has created the Sophia website.

Sophia has traditionally been associated with the Goddess of Wisdom.

This is interesting because the Bible, especially the New Testament, does not having anything to do any kind of Goddess tradition. Indeed it is an almost exclusive patriarchal TEXT which is essentially hostile to any kind of Goddess inspired understanding, and thus of Wisdom.

Such is also the case with patriarchal Christianity in both its Protestant and "Catholic" forms. This patriarchal animosity towards and suppression of Sophia is most evident in the completely irrational opposition towards even the possibility of women being priests in the "Catholic" church.

Although why any woman would wish to be a priest in a church that is fundamentally opposed to what Woman as Goddess represents (in the form of every particular woman) is completely beyond me.

I agree broadly with both Squeers and Roses1; and would add these comments. We have a media which has replaced literal news reporting with opinion and attempted political control or regime change? We have a generation of politicians who have never ever held down a real job; and are basically paid ultra generously to endlessly stymie any real progress; a problem compounded by their myopic focus and unfailing service at the altar of the 24hour media cycle/spin cycle?
We also confront the very real possibility that power can be bought and or sold; that very powerful power hungry players only need to throw enough resources at it and elections; and or, media opinion can be bought?
What we need is genuine future vision, political rather than professed conviction that can change with every dip in so-called opinion polls? And we need genuine reform that finally addresses the ever widening chasm betwixt and between the haves and have nots. The very best reforms will also incorporate win/win outcomes!
It comes as no surprise that most of our obesity problems are most common in poverty trap post codes? If we would genuinely address this problem and others cited; then we need to first address growing inequality, which clearly has its roots in individualism, and its handmaiden, extreme capitalism/unconscionable exploitation?
We hear all this talk about Christian, do unto others, blah blah values from our pulpit pounding phoney show pony politicians. But are all too often found wanting or missing in action, when it comes to delivering, or living the message? Rhrosty.

This is nothing more than advertorial for Mr Wilson's "Sophia Think Tank", and as such may be suspected of over-egging the pudding, just a little.

"Indicators of wellbeing such as life expectancy at birth, high educational outcomes, and self-reports of happiness put us right up there amongst the top countries in the world."

Ok. So where's the problem? Oh, apparently we don't have a Wellbeing Index... hang on a minute, we seem to have one of those as well.

"According to the Wellbeing Index, along with other measures, Australia is doing pretty well, especially when compared with many, if not most, other countries."

I seem to be missing something here. We're ok on life expectancy, education and happiness, and our Wellbeing Index is good...

Ah, here we are, a problem at last

"...indicators that all is not well and that the 'wellbeing' is a façade that is not very deep in places"

Ummmm... as measured by...?

"There are many who tell us that we are sick, our social environment is broken, and that there is a call for all of us to be involved in its repair"

They must be people who weren't allowed to take part in the other measurements, I guess. And...

"[Richard Eckersley] saw a culture that was exploitative and oppressive, harsh and oppressed, and suffering from spiritual poverty"

Right, that's enough. Everyone here is happy and well-nourished, except the people who are not. On the whole, we measure up pretty well against the rest of the world, except when we don't. And the answer to this is the magic pudding of...?

"Sophia Think Tank. The Bible Society Australia's national think tank on values, priorities, and behaviour in Australian Society."

All is now clear. Would I be over-prescient to suggest that the answer that emerges from Project 217, is going to be Jesus?

The same as the previous 216 projects, I suspect.

The main thing wrong with society today is all the teaching of "humanities". All these made up, make believe sciences will rot your brain.

Even worse, every time another practitioner graduates, we have to find another half dozen sufferers, to fill their case boob, & try to justify the waste of money.

Thanks David for taking the time to write this article. It raises some important questions about our social landscape. I am particularly interested in the alternate wellbeing indicators. Gittins and Eckersly rightly point out that using economics as the sole indicator of wellbeing has left our nation in a precarious position. I agree with you that many aspects of our social and cultural environment are not working particularly for our young people and the most marginalised. Consumerism and individualism appear to be our society’s predominant ‘philosophies’ which is fine if you want to take the modernist view that working for ones own happiness or wellbeing actually means that society will benefit. After 2 world wars, a depression, many many other conflicts, crumbling communities, countless isolated people, a world wide epidemic of homelessness and poverty, I believe it is safe to say that thinking has not progressed or ‘humanised’ us in ultimate terms.

In my work as Executive Director for a community development and training organisation, we are concerned to help communities work together to create spaces and places where everyone can feel like they belong, where they are valued and where questions of purpose and meaning are explored. I believe the round tables you mentioned have the potential to go beyond surface solutions to the core of what is not working in our society. Through them I believe you will find the need for a 2 pronged approach towards any solution. Firstly the need to work with the grassroots to empower them, like what happened in Latin America in the 1950’s, through Base Ecclesial Communities. The second approach is to discover and ‘subvert’ the networks of power that discern meaning in our community. As you rightly point out these are evident in each driver and particularly in the leadership of our country. We need to find intelligent ways to enter the conversation and re-define what these networks are producing.

I look forward to the journey.

The malaise of modern youth and indeed among many 'settled' older people is nothing to do with any of the so-called 'drivers'.

What is causing a lack of involvement, both physical and mental, is the lack of allowing people to take risks. The overwhelming movement in modern society has been to create risk-aversion and a promotion of a lack of hope.

Note the rise in endeavours by socialists and feminists to make the world 'safe' and the attendant drift to atheism.

Denying people their individualism or trying to exert control over such only adds to the malaise.

Why not encourage young people to face death and discover spiritualism rather than as they currently are facing death, in our controlled and safe society, from obesity, mental disorder and suicide.

So am I, alwaysalearner. So am I.

>>I am particularly interested in the alternate wellbeing indicators<<

Given that all the other markers seem to be favourable, where are the indicators that tell us all is not well?

Apart of course from a totally unsupported subjective view, expressed by Richard Eckersley that "saw a culture that was exploitative and oppressive, harsh and oppressed, and suffering from spiritual poverty"?

And just between us, given his background, what else could he say...?

Hey Pericles
Some of the alternate wellbeing indicators can be found at;
www.communityindicators.net.au/

Whilst some can be seen in economic terms others relate more to social capital or community connectedness, both of which play an important role in mental health. I'm not sure of the link anymore but if you google Marmot and Wilkinson you should come up with a study that was commissioned by the World Health Organisation which outlines some other indicators. I'd like to add that it is not necessarily an either or in terms of wellbeing. Economic prosperity (not excessive wealth) is an indicator in terms of measuring an abundant life or wellbeing.

Also it is interesting to note that the subjective measure of wellbeing ie people's self reporting tends to show how they were feeling immediately before being asked, so may not be a good measure of overall wellbeing. A question that plays into this for me is - what would a just society or an abundant community look like?

Interested in your thoughts? (anyone's)

>>. A question that plays into this for me is - what would a just society or an abundant community look like?

Interested in your thoughts? (anyone's)<<

Utopia.

Cheers,

Tony

Hey Tony

I had a look into some Utopian visions as part of my masters studies on community development. In my view they are all unsustainable, mainly because they put the vision of Utopia over the people as opposed to the people working together to make a difference in their own lives and the broader community. Check out the wikipedia article on Base Ecclesial Communities. I'm not holding them up as the only model however they bought significant social change.

We may not get to the end goal, but any movement towards ending homelessness, tackling the divide between the haves and haves not, creating communities that see and value their members as well as create a sense of belonging and the safety to move towards actualisation, in my view is a step in the right direction.

imajulianutter hits on an excellent point which I believe needs to be expanded upon.
It has little to do with these "Drivers" and more to do with the systematic weeding out of masculine characteristics from society, and the encouragement of a feminized view of the world.
Masculinized characters are more willing to see suffering and other problems as inherent in life, and as obstacles to be welcomed and overcome. The fact is that life is hard, life is painful, life is full of challenges; the difference is how these phenomenon is interpreted. A feminist or socialist will interpret all problems, all suffering as further evidence that life is terrible, as evidence we should be more meek, more caring, more safe.
What is required is to breed a more thorough "toughness" in man, not a delicate flower that takes offence at smallest of issues.

>>I had a look into some Utopian visions as part of my masters studies on community development. In my view they are all unsustainable, mainly because they put the vision of Utopia over the people as opposed to the people working together to make a difference in their own lives and the broader community.<<

Well there's your problem: far too much time spent examining other peoples midriff-inspired visions and not enough spent on Ancient Greek. That's where the word utopia comes from. It means 'no place': a place that does not really exist. Except in our imagination. You asked:

>>what would a just society or an abundant community look like?<<

Utopia: no place. I don't think man has ever created a perfect 'utopian' society: I don't think we ever will. Sometimes it's the trying that counts.

>>Check out the wikipedia article on Base Ecclesial Communities. I'm not holding them up as the only model however they bought significant social change.<<

Ouch. Dear gods...

I think I'll continue to save the acronym BEC for Bose-Einstein Condensate: particle physics makes my head hurt less than Catholic propaganda.

>>"Sophia Think Tank. The Bible Society Australia's national think tank on values, priorities, and behaviour in Australian Society."

All is now clear. Would I be over-prescient to suggest that the answer that emerges from Project 217, is going to be Jesus?

The same as the previous 216 projects, I suspect.<<

This post was one of the highlights of my day: thanks Pericles. I giggled for a good five minutes. But now that I discover how earnest alwaysalearner is in his belief that Jesus is the Answer - for the 217th time no less - my mirth turns to melancholy.

Cheers,

Tony

Hey Tony
The thought that I'm the cause of your melancholy is not a good one! Whilst I take your point about the origins of the word Utopia, I believe you oversimplify my position. I am not pushing an evangelical line as you suggest, instead my intention was to point out that effective social change that leads to an increase in overall community wellbeing is possible. I'm not sure that we've seen many examples in a western context, however I see that for a just society or an abundant community we need to take the principles of what has worked in other places and seek to contextualise and apply them.

David Wilson is well-intentioned, but the moment he comes under the bad influence of Eckersley, he is led astray.

I will point to three of Eckersley's assertions that are sufficient to drive us to hell:

1) That utter nonsense as if the [only] reasons to live are cultural. What an insolence to try telling us that what we live for must be what Mr. Eckersley lives for.

2) Eckersley has no clue of spirituality. His definition of "connectedness to the world" is almost the total opposite - materialism, while spirituality is about detachment from the world, not being OF it.

3) The mentioning in one breath of "materialism and individualism", stupidly blaming the evils of materialism on individualism.

The most extreme individualist in history was Diogenes - which was also one of the most extreme non-materialists. All he asked, materially, while he could ask for half the kingdom, is for the king to stop blocking the sun.

In a materialistic society, it is only the individualist who can break the habit, who can resist commercialism and ignore the media, who does not follow the herd when they all rush towards the edge of a cliff, whose well-being does not depend upon any of the stated "drivers".

I hereby grant Eckersley the title of the Chief Royal Tall-Poppy Executioner.

Hmmmm. Some interesting responses to my article. Thanks to everyone who took the time to have their say. I have been accused of having a simplistic ‘Jesus is the answer’ approach to life and its challenges. Nothing could be farther from the truth actually, but let me play along for a minute. It could be said that there are many simplistic answers to life’s problems, and a few of them popped up in the blogs. According to some, answers to the brokenness of the social environment include voting, risk taking, and masculinity to name just three. Simplistic to say the least, perhaps even worse than a Sunday School ‘Jesus’ in answer to all questions raised.
Oversimplification is dangerous. It takes a whole of community approach to address social issues. The blogs to this article , along with voting, risk taking, and masculinity have included ethical and spiritual investment, aspects of socialism, a transformed media, and equality as contributing to the possibility of social repair. By themselves these won’t go very far, but taken together we may get somewhere. This is a community development approach that ‘alwaysalearner’ addressed and it’s what is being emphasized in the research being conducted this year by Sophia Think Tank. Stay tuned….
David Wilson

While masculinity in itself may be a "simplistic" response, I do not doubt I made a very valid point.
The vast majority of social science research is conducted by leftists, those with effeminate characters, those who are easily offended, therefore, finding (or should I say "inventing"?) "problems" and "crises" everywhere comes as no surprise. On the other hand, if social science research was conducted by masculine characters, then most of the problems highlighted would not be problems at all, as masculine characters are more likely to accept the harsh nature of the world.

Thanks, David for you article. You have clearly noted that any possible solution to the issues we face in this land will not be simple. I am unable to see how you are leading us to a simple solution.
Not least of the difficulties we have in addressing our society's problems is getting people to the roundtable discussion, many of whom who will have interests in maintaining the status quo. They must be serious about looking beyond their own interests, and have a willingness to make personal sacrifices to achieve the well being for our society that you speak of.
It will also be essential that we all put away our prejudices and work togther if we are going to seek viable solutions to our society's problems. If we are going to be serious about helping our youth find meaning in their lives, for example, particularly when life has been cruel to them, the rest of us must lay down our cynicisms and prejudices and seek to work togther if we are going to genuinely help them. Indeed the attitudes and example of the older generations are crucial in helping our young people. We can contribute to the welfare of our youth, and indeed wider society, in the attitudes we carry and the example we provide in the way we live

'It could be said that there are many simplistic answers to life’s problems, and a few of them popped up in the blogs. According to some, answers to the brokenness of the social environment include voting, risk taking, and masculinity to name just three. Simplistic to say the least, perhaps even worse than a Sunday School ‘Jesus’ in answer to all questions raised.'

With your intolerant anti-masculine anti-christian attitude on display in this comment, how could you seriously include those expressed views in your 'community development approach'.

Obviously it is reasonable to conclude your 'community development approach' only seeks to include views aligned to your own whimpish outlook..

I'm not sure how I turned from being a 'Jesus is the answer' person to being 'anti-Christian' (imajulianutter) in one blog, but nevertheless, I'm certainly not anti-Christian. I also believe that I can work with anyone who is open to searching for common ground for the common good. We have to work together for the benefit of society and in particular for the future of the next generations. I won't deny where I'm coming from and I wouldn't ask you to deny your core beliefs but we have to learn to work together.
David Wilson

Dear David Wilson,

"I also believe that I can work with anyone who is open to searching for common ground for the common good. We have to work together for the benefit of society"

What do you mean by "we have to"? Is it that if I don't then you will shoot me?

I have no idea what "common good" means - there is one good which indeed is common to us all - that is God, but from the context it doesn't seem that this is what you alluded to, so why else (other than being shot otherwise) would I want to work together with you on fortifying a mechanism that oppresses individuals and promotes the lowest common denominator, materialistic indulgence and vain culturalism? Why else would I want to benefit that beast?

"and in particular for the future of the next generations."

In other words, that we must sacrifice the only time which we really have - NOW, THE PRESENT, for an illusion of a future for the next generation, which in turn will sacrifice their present for others' futures, ad nauseam. Why should there be future generations in the first place, who will then suffer in turn from society's oppression and vanity?

david/quote...""We have to work together..for the benefit of society"

yu/quote>>..""What do you mean by "we have to"?
Is it that if I don't..then you will shoot me?""

society is a construct
a good sopciety begins..off a base..[4..the base]
meeting need not stupidity or greed

""I have no idea..what "common good" means
there is one good..which indeed is common to us all -that is God,""

common good..is our work productivity
how hard..we comminers..work for our bettors
workers working just to survive..cant be slaves..[oops]

""but from the context..it doesn't seem
that this is..what you alluded to,..so why else?""

if it's not of god[good]
its a faulse idol

(""other than being shot otherwise)..would I want to work
together with you on fortifying a mechanism that oppresses individuals and promotes the lowest common denominator,""

not me neither

""materialistic indulgence and vain culturalism?""

for the common stocks

""Why else..would I want to benefit that beast?""

for the common market?
state colluded enslavement..in lue of service?

"and in particular..for the future of the next generations."
yep..just like their fathers..before them[under lien to anyone who gets state licence/permit..warrent or grant..to exploit the common wealth..held under the lie..of the common weal

we aere all
enjoined living mortal/heirs
of the immortal immaterial good..as a mater of trust

and our..trustees are failing big time

""In other words,.that we must sacrifice

the only time which we really have..NOW/THE PRESENT,

for an illusion...lol..of a future for the next generation,
which in turn..will sacrifice their present for others' futures, ad nauseam.""

informed concent..or treasonous ignorances?

""Why should there be future generations..in the first place,
who will then suffer..in turn from society's oppression..and vanity?""

born enslaved
died with enslaved minds

shame[you to whom..much was a given*

Nice try David,

but how do you reconcile your derogratory claim that Christian beliefs are simplistic and the mere concern of children Sunday schoolers, with your claimed non-anti christian stance?

You are not denying Christian beliefs you are belittling them.

That seems far from intending to be understanding and inclusive.