Involuntary Third Culture GroupThink?

Edge.org's third culture or Richard Florida's creative class, as technophiles might think of themselves, may be doing itself a disservice. It is de rigueur for everyone to read the same books, blogs and mags. Really, who has not read Blink, The World is Flat and Freakonomics in the last few months? And as the content is read, so are the memes spread.

Is there paralysis mired in GroupThink? How critically does the creative class think about new memes? Or are they just accepted because of the TechnoCelebrity status of the messenger? To the creative class' credit, they have a red hot sort for true innovation and these memes rise to the surface. But few are willing to call out mediocrity (e.g.; Friedman's under-edited vague analysis and conclusions from anecdotal evidence.)

The third culture is palpable and significant. Core knowledge can be assumed when speaking to the third culture the way topic knowledge can be assumed when speaking to a university major in a field.

Perhaps never before has there been such a large and growing group of people with such an extensive and shared meme-base. The shared meme-base may have some exciting emergent properties; one is that new memes can be absorbed, critiqued and assimilated with increasing, and dare I say accelerating speed. Information dissemination, absorption and action will all be quickened especially when coupled with machine tools, e.g.; instant wireless voting on policy issues.

China's sure-footed lurch into a capitalist society

Tim Clissold's book, titled "Mr. China" in the US distribution, is an interesting account of ten years (roughly 1985-1995) of the author's experience visiting factories all over China and investing in about forty of them. Clissold and partners established one of the first foreign private equity firms in China and invested approximately $500M in controlling interests in joint ventures with apparently unimpressive returns; it is not clear how much of the original investment capital put up by investors (primarily US pension funds) may have been returned.

The book is a light and entertaining read featuring some funny comments such as these examples: the localized version of flavored condoms might be spicy bean curd, the image that investors might have to take their dividends in shampoo like some factory workers had to accept their wages, and the government trade representative accusing the investor of "talking in dog farts."

The major Chinese cultural themes highlighted in the book are indirectness, ambiguity, lack of transparency, and a different outlook on theft and morality in dealing with others, especially outsiders. The Chinese culture is portrayed as being quite different from Western cultures: speech is elliptical and metaphorical, not direct; infinite reserves of patience are required to wait out bureaucratic and regulation-heavy processes and saving face and giving others the opportunity to save face is critical. The government and the communist party wield control through rules and regulations that they may not even know themselves and which may not communicated externally to those being regulated. The relationship between the government/party and the budding business community is that business people/entrepreneurs generally look down on the sinecured and possibly corrupt government/party officials. One further challenge to business is the absence of a functioning and trustworthy legal system.

The book does an excellent job of showing exactly how different and much more challenging doing business in China was the early 1990s than doing business in the US or Western Europe. Some people would say "Forget it, that's way too hard" when presented with these challenges while others, like the author, grabbed the opportunity. Clissold's firm initially went about matters in the ways of their Western cultural background and met with less than successful results until they switched to more of a Chinese approach which understood and responded to the cultural business challenges more locally; for example, instead of depending on the bank to freeze accounts under dispute, the firm moved the money to another account first.

The implication of Clissold detailing how business was being done in China in the 1990s is the implication for any interaction between different value systems. As with any communication, those who receive and understand the other party and meet that party in their words, body language and cultural values will succeed. The world may or may not be going to brown, the increasingly homogeneous globalized poli-econ-social landscape of work, life, consumption, enjoyment, dreams and values, but chameleons who "speak local" will always have value.

Techies are homogeneous

There is a certain homogeneity about techy culture, both on the surface and below. On the surface, the homogeneity is visible by age, race, educational background, demeanor, posture, hair and clothing style and facial expressions. Below the surface, the homogeneity is in the type of questioning the mind does, the inquisitive questions that will be asked, the assumed knowledge base, the educational and life experience background and the comments, sense of humor, means of communication, value systems and approach to life.

How can one understand, and integrate with if desired, the techy and non-techy cultures? More than ever, tech culture does seem to be the rise and long-term persistence and domination of a class.

There seem to be shortcomings with the techy culture. What are they? Is it the homogeneity? The lack of integratability with others? Is it the predictability, for example, maybe not the details of how to get somewhere but what the general set of interesting problems is (e.g.; like better physics, faster biological solutions, nano). Is it that they seem like they are in a clueless bubble compared to the other, "normal" larger yet anachronistic world?

Some techies are oblivious either naturally or selectionally to the other or any other culture. Some techies and non-techies are in the void trying to bring or lead the wayward normal culture along. What do those who see both sides and live in between call home?