In the New Year: Eyes on the Prize
2012/12/31 5 Comments
Here’s a neat idea. Well, if we wanted our world censored: The Words That Will Be Banished in 2013.
What words would you censor? I thought words that have been on previous lists such as “like,” “totally,” and “whatever” might be nice. Like, totally. Whatever.
Now if we wanted to banish things rather than words that’s something else. For example, banishing the word “Murdoch” wouldn’t eliminate subjective journalism. But what if we banished subjective journalism? There are lots of bad things we could put on a banish list to improve the world, but I’d rather put good things on a support list. It seems more constructive to work towards something positive than away from something negative. Eyes on the prize, and all that.
So let’s turn this around. Rather than words you would banish, what words would you support? These might be words that should come up in conversation more often, that should be included as a perspective in all news coverage, that should be included during all lessons in school, and that should be included in all business plans. What if we start with words like “compassion,” “peace,” “hunger,” “biodiversity,” “grandchildren,” “share,” and “happiness.” Imagine the incredible and wide-ranging impact that new perspective would bring.
Imagine.
If you think about it, the words being supported right now in news coverage, business plans, sermons, and school lessons around the world seem to be “profit” or “inflame,” and sometimes both. Maybe in 2013 we can turn this around, simply by replacing “profit” with “sustain,” and “inflame” with “humane.” That would be a great start to a truly Happy New Year. Word.
The overused word “absolutely,” should go, too. How about the phrase, “Fiscal Cliff?”
Thanks, Rob. I really appreciate your positive, optimistic point of view, and am thankful for the creative spirit that encourages you to write and share them. Happy new year! L, S.
Yes Ed, absolutely! And this whole “fiscal cliff” thing gives me such great confidence in the Washington DC preschool we colloquially refer to as “congress.”
Thanks to you too Selma! L, R.
I heard a report on NPR that banished “slacks”. That made me laugh and I support it. But how about “strategic” – just sick of it. Words to support: humanity, community, inclusion, grow.
I’m surprised that people who wear “slacks” are not referred to as “slackers.” I have to agree about use of the word “strategic.” It is most often used to imply designing events in order to achieve a goal, the end result of which is nearly always the manipulation of one set of people so that a different set of people might reap short term rewards. Military strategy, business strategy, political strategy, etc. Rarely do we hear of a “strategy of compassion” or a “strategy of biodiversity” for example.
What if compassion and strategy, and biodiversity and strategy, weren’t mutually exclusive though? Not just in non-profits, but in corporate business plans, in politics, in personal lives? Maybe designing such a strategy is the middle path.