I've been wrestling with a tough admission lately. Although I am legally bound to the United States, a country where I've spent almost my entire life, I've had to confront an uncomfortable reality — that the United States may not be the place where I should devote the majority of my energy.
It’s a baffling scenario. As someone striving to enact radical improvements within the country, I often find myself viewed not as a catalyst for positive change, but as a threat. It's not just the official elected leaders who see me this way, but also the behind-the-scenes powers that be, and surprisingly, a substantial segment of the American populace. This perception has been the unfortunate fate of many like me who’ve tried to level up systems here, be it in San Francisco or elsewhere.
There's a peculiar phenomenon at play, particularly in the US. When a city or state achieves success, it tends to fossilize into an institution that seemingly forgets its primary role — to serve the people. Instead, it starts to hinder those who are keen to drive significant progress in human and ecological flourishing. In too many nation-states, the most talented, capable, and willing people — those who are eager to take the country to the next level — are dismissed as nuisances, disruptors of the status quo. To me, this is not only exasperating, but it fundamentally undermines the ethos of progress.
Here's a question to ponder: As a creative, soulful individual, does it make practical sense to dedicate your valuable energy to a system that views you as an inconvenience? Or should your efforts be directed towards governments who welcome innovation and ask what policies could incentivize your work towards problem-solving and earth regeneration?
Given these two options, it seems counterintuitive to choose a system that treats you as a destabilizing factor over one that collaborates and supports your goals. It's worth considering the possibility of working with a government that, while perhaps not deemed wildly successful over the past quarter-century, is now poised to leapfrog past these stagnant, formerly dominant superpowers.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that I'll renounce my American citizenship anytime soon, or ever, for that matter. But I must say that I'm deeply inspired and energized by the prospect of working with politicians who are genuinely interested in fostering innovation, rather than acting as bureaucratic opposition.
It's an exciting realization that there are political actors out there who not only avoid obstructing progress but are actively working to be partners and superchargers of innovation. For me, that's a vision worth dedicating my energy towards, even if it means reconsidering where I focus that energy geographically.