God speaks through puppies: Kibbles vs. that other stuff

God speaks through puppies: Kibbles vs. that other stuff: "I have been noticing a new trend infiltrating society: schools, churches, politics, corporations and families as of late, and it's been very..."

Kibbles vs. that other stuff

I have been noticing a new trend infiltrating society: schools, churches, politics, corporations and families as of late, and it's been very interesting. At first, I thought it was just a leadership style, a change in how people manage or led others so to speak - you know, a shift from autocratic to democratic kind of. Have you heard about it? It's pretty neat actually, its premise is more of a relational type leading verses the more traditional "yes Boss" attitude.

This new style appreciates the gifts, talents and experience of every person; suggests that every one is a leader and would run more like a team, than a government. There's not much not to like about it, happy people are productive people. It's basic morale boosting 101. I for one find it refreshing, and see it as a real good thing - as it empowers every individual to give their best shot, to be valued and have significance.

However, when I started to notice how this attitude was infiltrating all of the different areas above, I started to really weigh the above pros with the cons - in light of the different scenarios that I had heard of recently.

I wondered what its worst would look like? How it would affect people in terms of the direction they'd be heading? And what pace they'd move ahead at, if they moved at all?

I mean in a perfect world, it would totally work! People would naturally just respect one another, understand the need for direction, realize that someone would have to take the lead and work together to accomplish their goal. However, what happens when things don't go that way? When no one is willing to step up to the plate and take charge, provide direction? What if the fear of being disliked or coming across as being authoritative dominated instead? What if everyone decided to do their own thing as long as it didn't seem to effect others? And nobody stood up for any morals for fear of being labelled as 'negative'? What if everyone just wanted to be on every one else's good side? And didn't speak their minds for fear of having a confrontation or disagreement? Now, I know that these may be a lot of 'what ifs', but don't we already see a lot of these things happening? 

• Parents who want to be 'friends' with their kids, that they forget their role as parents.
• Colleagues who look to each other for direction, but nobody really wants to take a stand and initiate anything new or for the better, or get mad at the person who does
• People that are so fed up with their experiences at church, that they all decide that the answer is to just not go, not believe, or eliminate the structure as a whole.
• Citizens who decide that their current government needs some serious change, and decide to vote for groups that just want to appease the crowds - not realizing the possible outcomes or instead, starting some kind of uprising instead.

I even heard from a friend that she's seen this similar attitude in elementary schools as people seem so clueless and unwilling to provide clear instructions.

Don't get me wrong, there's a time and place for everything, and I'm not saying that there were no cons to the old way of doing things either. It bred a lot other problems - pride, making others feel small, and even abuse in some cases, etc. 

Change (although many don't like it) is often a good thing. It gives us a fresh start, the opportunity to change the way we think, or have done life previously: a chance to grow.

In terms of the new trend/style/culture, whatever you want to call it, the prior may have had its set of down-falls when abused, but when used appropriately it led to good things like standing for morals, conserving the family, corporations, churches, the welfare of a country, established some ground-breaking dreams led by one man or woman (and there were many of them). While the new establishes a sense of self worth, recognizes that those dreams accomplished took more than the one man/woman - those that believed, and followed them. It states that we are on level ground (as we truly are).  But at it's worst, it can also create a disdain or ungrateful attitude for things that were, trying to build from scratch when a rich heritage is available as a foundation.

So why not have the best of both worlds? We have so much to learn from our past, it could give us a head start as new generation - where we can learn that equality is important, but that we don't need to be afraid of leading and helping others accomplish things. We can take responsibility for our actions and yet be productive people that honour others. So what am I really getting at? In other words...

"Be careful not to throw out the baby with the bath water," "Eat the meat and leave the bones" OR in Chloe's case, 'eat what's placed before you - but separate the kibbles from the pedigree' (she sorts them!). 

As with everything, Balance is possible, attainable and healthiest! :)