Julia Kim – Holistic Economic Healing

Thomas Hübl: Welcome to the Collective Trauma Summit 2023. My name is Thomas Hubl, and I’m the convener of the Summit, and I’m very happy to be sitting here with Dr. Julia Kim. So Julia, warm welcome to our Summit here.

Julia Kim: Thank you, Thomas. It’s a pleasure to be here. I’m looking forward to it.

Thomas: Me too, me too. I think we have a lot to discuss and I think we have a lot of things that we are passionate about, both of us. And so, you worked a lot or you researched also with the GNH, the Gross National Happiness in Bhutan. And I would like you to first, for all of us, to explain to us, what is that? Because most of the countries are based on GDP, and tell us a little bit about GNH and Bhutan and it’s society so that we can find a way into the conversation.

Julia: Sure. Thomas. I think Bhutan is a unique country in the sense that it has dared to ask the question, what is the purpose of the economy? And even deeper, what is the purpose and value of a good life? So it starts with that question and very quickly says that it’s not to grow the economy, it’s not to grow GDP, which is a measure of the economy, but rather to grow happiness and well-being. So that’s why the term Gross National Happiness in contrast to say Gross National Product. And it really began… It’s embedded very much in the fabric of the history and the culture of Bhutan, but in more recent times, the fourth king of Bhutan, who came to the throne in the early 1970s, came up with the phrase when he was asked by a reporter, “What is the Gross National Product of Bhutan?” And instead of giving a number, said, “In Bhutan, Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross National Product.”

And so I believe what he was trying to convey at that time was that as Bhutan was opening up to the world, opening up to globalization, looking maybe to some of the lessons that were apparent from neighboring countries from the rest of the world, he said, “We don’t necessarily want to grow really quickly. We don’t want to be just pursuing GDP growth. We want to develop in a way that the well-being and happiness of all life is honored and prioritized.” And I think that’s also significant, not just the well-being of humans, but the well-being of all sentient beings. So that was kind of the beginning of what’s now known as Gross National Happiness. And what is, I think peaking a lot of people’s curiosity about Bhutan at a time when many more conventional economic systems are starting to fray and crumble at the edges.

Thomas: Mhm. And so what do you think was right or was the composition in Bhutan to come up with such an emergent principle? Because you could say, wow, it’s unique. Something arose in Bhutan that didn’t arise at that moment all over. Now it has been exported and people look at this in different places, but at that time, so I’m always curious when something emerges, so what’s in the society or what’s ready in Bhutan to even think about such a holistic way of thinking about the economy versus many other places around the world?

Julia: You know Thomas, I think you can’t speak about the origins of GNH without thinking about the deep-seated cultural roots, which include Adriana Buddhism in Bhutan. And I think really, the understanding that happiness and well-being, which have a much more profound meaning than for many of us in the West might say happiness is a great cappuccino in the morning. It’s a much more deep-seated interdependent understanding of happiness. So that was very much a part of the vision of even early founders of the country going hundreds of years back, who would say that if the government cannot create happiness for the people, the government has no reason to exist. So again, even before more recent times when GNH has been codified and measured in a survey, you’ll see in some of the early documents that the purpose of leadership is to create an environment where life, where people can flourish, where animals or nature can flourish.

And I think to maybe fast-forward a little bit to a more modern definition of happiness, which comes from the first Prime Minister of Bhutan who brought the idea of GNH to more international attention when he came to the United Nations in 2012 to speak about a new development paradigm, he would say that true abiding happiness cannot exist while others suffer, and comes only from serving others, living in harmony with nature and coming to know our innate wisdom and the true and brilliant nature of our own minds.

So when you hear that definition, you understand the deep roots of this understanding of well-being and happiness, that it’s fundamentally about relationship. You can’t have your private little bit of happiness that you protect against all odds against everybody else, that your happiness is actually contingent upon the happiness of others, not just the happiness of others, but relieving suffering, serving others. It’s also not separate from nature. Nature isn’t this thing out here that’s a blue screen against which we live out our lives. It’s so much a part of us that if we are in harmony with nature, then well-being and happiness arises from that.

And then probably most central to all of it is our relationship to ourselves. So the connection to our highest self, the language that Otto Sharmer might use, our sense of purpose and meaning, our connection to spirit. So if that is strong, then our connection to others and our connection to nature naturally becomes more fulfilled, more balanced. So it’s quite a profound definition of happiness. It’s definitely not just a good cappuccino in the morning, and it is also not just up to individual whim or personality or genetics. It is something that a government and a society can commit to, can actually come up with policies and structures that encourage an environment where that kind of harmony and that interrelationship is possible.

Thomas: So first of all, your words are like honey in me. I think that’s very beautifully said and I think it describes also the deeply spiritual nature of the basis of the GNH. And that also says, maybe a deep spiritual nature is needed in order to be open to live that way. I think you did also some research on happiness. How can we measure happiness now? How is it being measured in this society that people are more happy or that we are in a good way or did something change and there’s less happiness? How are the metrics and the parameters that encode for happiness?

Julia: Yes, I think that’s an important part of it, that there is some kind of attempt to measure and to ground what could otherwise seem quite theoretical or spiritual into the society and into governments and policy. So, there are many different happiness surveys that are done around the world. There are questions that can be asked at an individual level about your subjective well-being, about your sense of life satisfaction. That’s in many surveys. Bhutan includes questions like that in their survey, but they also look at nine domains or areas which they think are critical to creating an environment where people can be happy, where they can pursue happiness if you will. So it’s both an individual internal quality and it’s also creating an environment where that can happen.

So that survey includes many conventional measures that you would see many countries looking at, things like living standards. So obviously if everybody’s struggling just to make ends meet, that’s not going to lead to happiness. So there has to be a basic level of development. Education, also really important, health, everybody knows that’s important as well. So they measure those as building blocks of happiness, but then some more unusual things, which it turns out the research really also supports as being important for our well-being as humans.

One of them is community vitality. So under that, you would hear questions about how close are you to others in your community? Do you know your neighbors? If something happened to you, do you feel like somebody would help you? A lot of the social science research shows that this is so important to our sense of well-being. We’re social beings, we need to feel connected and supported. Other things like cultural diversity and resilience measured in the GNH survey, questions there would be, do you speak your native language? Do you know some of the old folk tales? Are you connected to what makes culture rich? Is diversity expressed in that? So that’s measured time use. For most of us in the modern world, we don’t think about it as a building block for our well-being and happiness, but so important, again, the research showing that. So measuring that is important.

Good governance. So even in countries that are doing very well by GDP, we’re starting to see a fracturing in trust in government, polarization, a lot of mistrust in leadership. And it turns out that even if economically a country is doing well, if people don’t trust the governance and government, then well-being and life satisfaction really go down. So those are some of the ones. Environmental conservation is a part of it as well in Bhutan. So you can see how this starts to create a more holistic view that you try to measure.

And then of course, important that you align policy in a country so that it supports that. So an example might be most folks are probably aware that to go to Bhutan is not the easiest thing in terms of your wallet. There will be what they call a sustainable development fee that’s now gone up, and it’s really with the idea of trying to reduce the tourist footprint in the country, to generate income for the country, which is important, but also to preserve the culture, preserve the environment. So that’s how you try to negotiate the different pulls and pushes on a government, to try to make sure that it’s looking after well-being and happiness and not just the economic equation.

Thomas: Wow, that’s beautiful. It’s very sophisticated landscape of research. That’s beautiful. And so how do you see fluctuations in Bhutan? Now you have some decades of measuring GNH. Do you see fluctuations? Is it constantly going up? Are there waves? How does it unfold?

Julia: There’s an organization in Bhutan called the Center for Bhutan Studies in GNH Research who have been doing the surveys, and I think they’re undertaking one now in Bhutan. And definitely, they are interested in exactly those fluctuations. What’s brilliant about the survey is you can compare, you can get more granular, you can compare men and women in Bhutan for example, in terms of their happiness. You can look at different occupations in ages, rural versus urban. So for example, in the last survey, they found that men were happier than women in general in the country. That in general, I think farmers were the occupation that was least happy and that for the first time, young people were the age group that were least happy. So as a policymaker, that should make you sit up and ask, “What’s going on? Why?” And that in turn should guide some of the interventions that you’re putting in place.

I think some of the insights that are coming out, for example, around women, similar to other countries, are they having equal pay for equal work? Are they having to balance the workload of family life and domestic care along with working in the workforce? Do they have equal access to healthcare and things like that? Are they participating in politics and governments? And they were finding there were obstacles to women doing that. So how do we enable that more?

Young people, it’s a concern as it is in many countries. I think youth unemployment, youth awareness of what’s happening in the world. Definitely in Bhutan, more exposure now to social media, to marketing and advertising, to the constant message that what you have is not good enough, that somebody on your screen is living a better, happier life than you. All those things I think are part of the equation. So I think the survey is showing changes in Bhutan and hopefully it enables an ability to reflect and think about what are the appropriate responses

Thomas: And what’s the process of reflecting? So when the survey brings in this data, who are the institutions that are reflecting and integrating that feedback into the governance? What’s the process that’s in place?

Julia: So I think the center that I mentioned earlier that conducts the survey takes a lead role in doing that. They’re also policymakers, formerly the GNH Commission, and now I think that’s being integrated more into the government in general would say, “How do we start to move this into policy? What are the important policy areas?” I think the GNH Center, Bhutan, which is an NGO, a non-governmental organization where I have been working, is more taking the lessons there and trying to bring it to the grassroots level. Thinking how do we communicate this to ordinary citizens? How do we bring it into youth workshops, to schools? What are some of the implications for education?

And then more and more, a little bit engaging with the international world, trying to see what can we learn from other countries? What are the lessons that maybe we could share from Bhutan? So I think it’s an ongoing dialogue. Definitely we could be doing more of it, but I think the survey, at least having some data is a place to start.

Thomas: Yeah, definitely, definitely. And so let’s transition then. So I think around the world, I know some of my friends have studied the GNH in Bhutan and wrote PhDs. And so I think that it has inspired many people around the world already, and I’m sure you know many more places where that’s being maybe implemented. But when we look a little bit into our economy world and we say most of the world is driven by economic growth and we see what’s the implication of that on our nature, there are many places and even on our own well-being. So I would say given that I have been looking into for 20 plus years and the systemic dynamics of collective trauma in different societies and how it affects our life together. And I’m telling you this because I would love to get your view on this.

So I think that there are emergent processes in our society that are based on flow updates, being able to connect to our future possibilities and stay in an updating mechanism. And then there’s structures in our societyI think that are non-emergent, that are actually trauma repetition patterns that are just circling. It’s like the past reproducing itself and they don’t have any future until you become aware of them and integrate them into life so that they become part of emergence.

And so when you look at more extractive economies, what’s the way for us, or maybe how do more holistic economies maybe become a remedy to that? Or what might be the blockages that in order to create those more holistic well-being economies, how do we get from what we have now to a place that is more holistic? Do we need to wait until systems break down and that’s the beginning of a change? Or do you see some places where you have positive science that the implementation works well? So maybe you can expand a little bit on that whole subject?

Julia: Yeah, I think it’s an exciting time to be asking exactly that question, Thomas. I think 10 years ago there would’ve been a couple of examples of what I’m talking about, well-being economies, but there’s been a flourishing both in the critique of the current economy and what are the possibilities. So I think, to come back to what you said, there is a… Although it’s really painful that some systems are falling apart and definitely our current capitalist economic system is starting to fall apart. Within that, there is the possibility for emergence and for innovation.

So I think for folks who are interested in learning more well-being, Economies Alliance is a great place to go, both in terms of pulling forward governments that are trying to move in that direction in particular countries, whether they be Iceland or Finland or New Zealand, Wales, countries that are trying to move in this direction similar to what Bhutan has been doing, or it’s also civil society movements, businesses, communities that are trying to go in that direction.

I think perhaps what might be a little bit unique in Bhutan’s example of a well-being economy is a little bit what we alluded to earlier, the more inner and spiritual dynamic that is very much a part of it. I think the current king of Bhutan would say it’s balancing material and spiritual development. So to what extent you are asking what are some of the forces and pressures that are maybe at the root of some of the more extractive economies that we have? I think one of them might be that they are built on an assumption of our separation from the spirit and that we can actually be moving goods and services around in a material world, and that is what the economy is. And there’s more and more we are seeing that actually, what people are looking for, and I think the pandemic was really important for this, was the sense of safety and community and well-being that goes beyond are we importing and exporting and do we have enough people in jobs? So there is this aspect of what is the economy for and are we measuring the right domains in that respect?

I think it’s also a little bit around this idea of extraction versus regeneration. We’re hearing more about regenerative economies now, not just in terms of how do we deal with the waste products, but how do we actually create more social value? How is it that in our transactions around economy, we’re actually building closer relations? We’re actually helping and supporting one another rather than competing? If you were to look at current economic systems as maybe arising from a period of trauma, and it’s interesting that the GDP and GNP, Gross Domestic Product, Gross National Product, those measures came out of a period of the Second World War and also going into the Great Depression as a way to predict fluctuations in economic activity.

So that was important at that time, but it was never meant to be an indication of how a society is doing. Simon Kuznets, who came up with the measure said, “Please do not use this as a measure of how well countries are doing. It’s just to measure that.” So useful at that time, but now we’re more aware of things like our impact on the environment, of climate change, of rising inequality. GDP can go up without any indication of the fact that inequality within that country is getting worse and worse.

So now that we have a much more holistic understanding of the economy and of what it means to us as human beings, it’s an opportunity to expand our measures and our mindsets to take that into account. You could think about GDP as a controlling… How do we really monitor and manage the situation in a scarcity mindset rather than thinking about how do we think about regeneration and flourishing and circularity and the purpose, how do we ask what is the purpose of all this growth? And is it possible that in some areas we’ve reached the kind of growth that we need, but other areas we haven’t?

So if you look at growth in the economy from a more natural systems perspective, which a lot of ecological economics is starting to do, you would realize that the human body doesn’t grow indefinitely. You wouldn’t want the human body to grow indefinitely. If there’s a group of cells that are growing indefinitely, we call that cancer and it’s a problem. We also recognize that we don’t want all the blood to flow to just one part of the body. It needs to go to all the different parts of the body for it to be whole. So in many places, our economic system is characterized by blockages where not enough is flowing to some areas and overabundance on the other. And there’s more and more evidence that overabundance also is not a good thing, that we’re seeing the results of overconsumption, diseases of overconsumption in wealthy countries, diseases that are related to inequality.

So I think it’s a time that we now have much more of a sounder understanding of what a healthy flourishing economy would look like. I think what remains is for us to have an awareness that we actually are participating in the economy. It’s not something that we just have to completely keep following because this has been its trajectory, but that we’re active agents in creating, co-creating the economic system. And so there’s possibilities for change that are also within our grasp.

Thomas: Yeah, that’s interesting. So when I listen to you, I have two sets of questions. One is I’m wondering if… Because when we look at trauma in an organism, and I believe that’s also true for systems, it’s a disorganizing function. It disorganizes the flow, the data flow, the perception, the whatever, the inner feedback mechanisms in an organism or in a society. So I’m wondering, what’s a symptom of a systemic traumatization when we look at our economy world? So that’s one set of questions. So what is actually maybe a symptom and not really the natural flow of things? Because you spoke a lot also in the deeper spiritual aspects of Bhutan. You spoke a lot beautifully about the principles that are behind this deeper spiritual understanding, and they’re all much more organic. They’re all much more embedded in nature and spirit in a holistic easiness of life.

But I believe when trauma comes into play, we feel more separate. We start to other, we start to polarize, to fragment. We see many of the symptoms that we see in a lot of places right now. And so, one would be what are symptoms in our economy maybe that come from that, including scarcity, the sense of scarcity and that we need to have more than we need because even when we have it, we don’t feel safe and we don’t feel sound. Maybe that’s one.

And the other question, I would be interested, you mentioned Finland, Iceland, New Zealand. How do certain countries already try to transition and what do they do in order to transition and what maybe works there already that is interesting for us to learn from? So these are two sets of questions. I don’t know. You can respond to whatever.

Julia: Sure, sure. I think it’s been interesting for me to go back and forth between Bhutan and North America and to ask similar questions because I’m often asked, “Do you experience a culture shock when you come back to Canada?” And I realize that the culture shock is coming back to Canada, not going to Bhutan. And it’s a culture shock around the feeling of anxiety and scarcity even amidst plenty. And in a sense, and then I quickly see how that is… It’s hard to get away from. The moment you open your laptop or turn on the news or look at your cell phone, there is a constant barrage of news stories and things that are telling you this.

And to some extent, I feel like in some ways, our economy is self-perpetuating this sense of fear and not enoughness, and I think it would be a bit naive to say that that is by chance. I think a lot of the economy actually flourishes under those conditions. And there is a certain amount of consumption that is based on that fear and on the sense of not enoughness. And I think that might connect to some of the trauma that you’re talking about as well, that there is… There’s even this… What do we call it? Retail therapy that’s on an individual level, this feeling of anxiety or insufficiency comes up and you start shopping and it quiets down a little bit, but not for long.

So if you were to escalate that to a larger collective scale, to what extent are we creating a feeling of not enoughness? And I think it’s interesting that efficiency and busyness are seen as important values in modern life. Both of those are very much driven on the idea that more is always better, faster is always better, and that again, is leading to this accelerated action, anxious kind of lifestyle that is again, connected very much to consumption and sometimes over consumption.

So I think that’s part of it. I think it’s hard to really say what is the magic ingredient or is there just one that unites all these different countries that are moving towards well-being economics? I think the countries are quite different, but I would say one thing they have in common is a vision or a cultural value around looking after each other, a social contract that is maybe a bit in contrast to this rugged individualism that is maybe seen a lot in maybe North America. The idea that I spent many years in South Africa. Ubuntu, I am because you are. So what that means is we’re interdependent, and what that means then is that we look after well-being of others and that can translate into things like the way that we prioritize the public good, things like healthcare and education. We make sure those are accessible and available to other people.

In Bhutan, even though it’s not a huge national budget as in other countries, they have universal free basic healthcare and education, whereas other much wealthier countries would not have that. So it’s that sense of looking after each other. I think that’s really important. And I think it’s also a sense of care rather than competition. So those are aspects I think that are maybe more difficult to measure, but we definitely can see when the cultural values and the norms are pushing in the opposite direction.

So I think coming back to your question, Thomas, around trauma, I think it’s not as if we can insulate ourselves from the multiple crises that we’re experiencing that are unfolding around us at this time, but how we choose to address them, how we deal with them is going to be really important. So is it just putting in place policies and responses that look after me and my group, or is it in a way, are we looking after each other? Are we looking after the community? Are we making sure people aren’t getting left behind?

How we choose to respond to the current crises can either be healing or re-traumatizing, or lead to further trauma in the future. So there is this aspect I think for all of us that we just wish we could get rid of the trauma and just get over this period, but we are creating the seeds. In our response to the current trauma, we are creating the seeds of what will the future look like for the other generations to come and how we choose to deal with it, whether it’s me and my survival first, or are we looking out for each other? Can we care for each other as we go through this time? Super important, how we’re going to get there. How are we building for future generations? Really, really important.

Thomas: It’s so beautiful. I want to underline what you said that the way we respond to the current crisis can either be healing or re-traumatizing. So this is a beautiful sentence and I think it’s very true. It’s very true. And I think also, what’s the altruistic or what’s the openness and the care that we bring into a traumatizing situation? And there are many studies that show when you have positive relationships in adverse situations, there’s much less PTSD, and that’s exactly what you’re saying. And that lays the foundation for the next generations. That’s a beautiful sentence. So thank you for that. It’s beautiful.

You spoke about universal healthcare and I want to… One model that’s floating around is universal income as a way to deal with our current situation, and that coming with AI and with maybe many job losses and fundamental changes in our society, we’ll see how that’s developing, but that’s basically coming already and there is a lot of climate impact going to be in the next years or decades. So what do you think about universal income, basic universal income for us as humanity? Is this something that’s functional? Do you think that that’s doable? How do you think about it?

Julia: I think it’s really an important piece of the puzzle, Thomas. I think it gained more prominence after, during, the pandemic when we realized that actually, it is possible and feasible to be able to test some kind of policy like that out. Somehow, we don’t bat an eye when there’s a financial crisis and suddenly there’s a universal basic income grant to rescue businesses or banks coming from the government in order to inject new stability into those systems. So I think it’s a way of saying, as we go through the economic upheavals that are going to come, can we make sure that we look after people and at least have a basic grant so that the basic needs are met?

I think there are many different ways to be looking at how we can prepare for greater resilience, how we can make sure that we’re looking after the social and environmental consequences of our actions. I wanted to give a shout-out to Doughnut Economics and Kate Raworth’s work, which you may also be familiar with, where she talks about the doughnut metaphor is that of course, there’s an environmental limit that we need to watch, that we don’t cross certain boundaries in terms of climate change, biodiversity, pollution, all sorts of things that we need to be watching on the outside of that ring. But there’s also an inner ring, which is a social limits where we need to make sure that as we’re trying to watch out for the environment, that we’re not letting certain people fall through the cracks. And we know that climate change, a lot of the changes that are coming will not affect everyone equally.

So that’s where, not just the universal basic income grant, but the way that we look at international economic relations, the way we look at international debt, the way we look at taxation, all these things can also be creating a resilient inner safety net so that people are not falling through. So I think there are very creative ways to be thinking about our way out of the situation that could, if we follow them, lead to a healthier foundation as we move forward. The ideal healing intervention isn’t one that just heals old wounds. It should be creating a foundation for new flourishing, new growth for healthy tissue to be able to move forward.

So I think the solutions we come up with should be looking beyond just how do we get ourselves out of the mess that we are in now, to how do we create the future that we want to be stepping into? And those seeds are already there. I think that’s where a lot of people sometimes get discouraged. It’s thinking, how are we going to come up with a technology that’s going to do this and do that? Technology is part of the equation, but a good deal of it is social innovation. It’s rethinking our values and priorities, it’s redistribution, looking at new instruments that we maybe are being tested at a smaller scale and helping them to go to a larger scale.

So I think there’s a lot of really good minds that are applying themselves to this at the moment. For folks who are interested, I would also mention a recent publication called Earth for All by the Club of Rome, which looks at what are five possible turnarounds that we could do in our lifetime that would make a difference on many of the crises we’re facing and for future generations? So although it’s a really challenging and disheartening time, I think there’s also really positive and important changes and transformations that are starting to happen.

Thomas: Yeah, it’s beautiful. That leads me to something you said right now, resilience. So I think what I heard also, the change from competition to collaboration is I think one thing that contributes to resilience. You said there are different resilience measures. Maybe you can speak a little bit because even if the biosphere has more stress and certain, whatever, buffer zones will decompensate in our natural environment, so there will be much more stress on the social bodies, on the social fabrics. So what do you think makes us, or what can help us to be more resilient in these disruptive times? Collaboration is one factor maybe, and maybe you can share a few others that we can strengthen in ourselves to be more resilient as communities? Care, you said is another one.

Julia: Yes. I think part of it is really paying attention to the local, to what’s in front of you. I’m as guilty of this as anyone else who’s been working on a more of an international level, is there’s a tendency to go out there to try to travel out there, fix the world out there and neglect what’s happening in your own city, your own community, your own family. So I think as we think about resilience, it’s really important to pay attention to where you are. And this goes beyond the old adage, think globally, act locally. I would say it’s more about care and developing relationships, feeling sustained and supported and making sure that that’s what you’re giving to the folks around you. I think that’s part of it.

I think another aspect of it is also to really look at the long-term and work for the present moment, but also be able to see our place in a sense of time that isn’t driven by outputs and projects. And I think that’s where having some kind of a practice, whether it is meditation or yoga or some spiritual inner practice is really important because in the absence of that, you are very much focused on what is immediately in front of you and the here and now, and we have to do everything now or it’s all going to fall apart. And that’s a very difficult space to be working in, that sense of panic and, “Everything needs to happen on my watch.”

So I think the resilience aspect is important, as I said, in a social, immediately tangible community sense, but also one’s inner resilience. For myself, I would say that meditation and the practice of being able to stay aware and open even when things are getting very difficult has been really important to my own well-being and my own work. There was a period when I was working at the United Nations in New York and quite busy and traveling a lot, and in the kind of work I was doing, it was at a global policy level. And at the end of the day, you honestly can’t say whether you’ve made any difference. You hope that by shifting this to there and moving some money here and working with teams over there, that in the end something good is happening, but you really don’t know. There is not a feedback loop coming back.

So in that sense, you can get really disheartened and if you’re waiting for that kind of message to come back to feel that you’re doing the right thing and to feel that you’re okay, then you can really burn out easily. So I think that sense of being able to let go of the need for outcomes and validation in your way that you would want to see it and to be able to trust in the interdependence and the intentionality of your work, and to be okay with the fact that the repercussions may be seen generations from now is really an important part of resilience and an important way of also not taking expedient shortcuts in the work that you’re doing because you think you have to see the results now. A lot of the work we’re doing now is systems change, it’s inner and outer transformation and that takes time and there aren’t shortcuts to that, but it’s still important work. So I think that resilience question is actually a really important one.

Thomas: Yeah, that’s beautiful. First of all, I love the spiritual dimension that you bring in and that that’s an important resilience factor too, and the practices that you said, I think I very much agree with this. And then I also hear you say that one level of resilience is that we are… I like the word responsible. It’s able to respond, that we’re actually responsible towards the future generations because you’re also saying that the work we are doing lays lay lines for the future generations to pick it up and continue. So that non-short term vision, like a long term vision, is also basically having the future generations in our view or in our sensing so that we can be connected.

And that’s actually a very powerful vision also of resilience because often we think about resilience and you said it also, it’s important that we build communities that resilience is here, but it’s in a way a vision of a resilience that is responsive to the future, and I think that’s powerful.

Julia: Yes. I would say to the future and to the past. It’s interesting that in Bhutan and also when I speak to colleagues and friends from different indigenous traditions, they are always aware of and feeling the presence of ancestors. And that I think is also… It’s in some ways the same thing as talking about future generations to us in our very limited here and now, my body is the only thing that is present, existence. We don’t feel a sense of connection to the past and to the ancestors, and we also feel disembodied from the future, maybe our children and grandchildren, but that’s about as far as we can feel. But this is talking about a connection to the human body, the human collective that is much, much faster than me and my particular life.

And I think when you can touch into that even briefly, there’s a sense of the power and momentum behind you that is caring and supporting you, that tells you you don’t have to do this all alone and also don’t get too high on yourself and try to take credit for what you’re doing because you are constantly building on what has come before. What you are able to do now is on the basis of what has come before. And similarly, it gives you a little bit of lightness and letting go and allowing what you are doing to feed into the future. So it’s almost a paradox. On the one hand, it’s kind of telling you you’re not so great as you think you are. Don’t think that you’re the one doing all this by yourself. But on the other hand, it’s also a relief. It’s saying, don’t worry. You are part of a much larger story and the story’s going to unfold before you and after you.

It doesn’t mean be complacent and just sit there and don’t do your part, but it’s saying take part in something. It’s an invitation into the dance and be a part of that dance, but don’t hold onto it so tightly maybe.

Thomas: That’s very beautiful, very beautiful. So I wholeheartedly agree to what you said and you drew a vision that I think is the remedy for our hyper individualism, especially in the Western world. I think that’s what you said right now, seems to be a great remedy for that and to fill ourselves again as part of a process and not just ourselves as small particles moving around in the world. That’s beautiful. So I see a bit of time. Is there anything that you didn’t share that you would love to leave our listeners with? Anything that you think… You said so many great things already and I’m very happy for this conversation, but if there’s anything you think for… Because the Summit’s theme is in a way creating a global healing movement. So how do we become as a world, a healing movement? If you have any final pearls of wisdom for our listeners?

Julia: Maybe just a chance to reflect that for me, one of the challenges has been that I sometimes bounce between feeling like my individual meditation practice or my own self-care. I don’t think it’s even self-care. It’s paying attention to your own inner life is not going to be enough, or that it’s self-indulgent sometimes. There’s that aspect of it. And there’s also sometimes the feeling that the work in the world that I’m doing, it’s not going to be enough that we’re running out of time. I have that feeling also like a lot of people I think these days.

And then I think to just trust that those two things don’t worry about them so much, just continue. Just put one foot in front of the other, and I think the surprising thing that happens when I do that, when I trust and in both cases stop looking for outcomes, is that the work and the practice become more joyful. I think that’s often a sign of just don’t take yourself so seriously and trust that what you’re doing is part of the unfolding of things. And so on the one hand, it’s the work in the world that we do that is around changing systems, bringing social justice, addressing climate change, all the big topics that you could list.

And then there’s just a very simple humble thing of getting up every morning and just sitting on your cushion and then going through your day with some awareness, trying to embody what you’re doing out in the world with the people who are right in front of you, which is sometimes the most challenging. Right? And then just have a bit of spaciousness and a bit of humor in that. I think that’s what I’m trying to practice myself when I’m trying to learn.

Thomas: And that’s so beautiful that we are coming full circle because what you said right now feeds totally into that. That’s so important to have your time of meditation or your time of intimacy with spirit or with life is as it seems, what’s the foundation of the GNH to start with. And so I think having that practice seems to me at all times, but especially in this time, I must have in order to stay really connected to do the work that you do in the world. So it seems to me like that that’s the battery charger for your activities.

Julia: Exactly. Well put.

Thomas: Thank you, Julia. This is so beautiful. I could talk so much longer. I know we are at the end of our time now. I don’t want to stretch your time too much. And on the other hand, I really walk away very inspired. And also I love the beauty of your words and also how you transmit what you say into the room. I can feel your practice when you speak. I can feel the beauty of the interconnectedness when you speak. So it’s very lovely to listen to you. I had a very inspiring conversation right now. So thank you very much and I think our listeners can take a lot away from that.

Julia: Thank you so much, Thomas. Also from my side, very much enjoyed it and felt the connection and wishing you well with the Summit.

Thomas: Oh, good. Thank you. Thank you very much.