Waiting

I’m sure you’ve heard of Waiting for Godot. It’s a play by Samuel Beckett, in which two people: Vladimir and Estragon, wait for the titular character of “Godot”. These people – despite, deep in their hearts, knowing that Godot will never arrive – remain hopeful! But yet (SPOILER ALERT) Godot never arrives. This play – despite being: Well, a play – is also symbolic, in a way. It teaches us not to wait for change, but push it.

Who is Godot?

Godot – in the original play – is a man that possibly exists. The characters don’t really know if they’ve ever met him or if they ever will, yet they’re somehow sure he’s a real person and not some schizophrenic illusion. It’s a very mysterious play, since Godot is not elaborated on further than the fact that Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for him.

I believe that Godot is real since – around the end of the play – a boy arrives to tell Vladimir (because it is only Vladimir, since he’s the thinking man) that Godot is not coming. The boy can provide an… Uncertain description of Godot, the most prominent feature of Godot being his white beard which the boy is somewhat sure of Godot inhibiting.

Symbolism

Waiting for Godot tells us that, in my interpretation:

It’s not in your best interests for you to wait, yet not act. Vladimir – the thinking man – thinks, yet doesn’t do. A do-er will always be more successful than a thinker, whether you like the do-er or not.

To think

This book’s title draws comparisons to Waiting for Godot, and for a good reason. What I want to tell you is to act, not think. This is where I want to define two new terms, thinkocracy and – a bit later – actocracy and sentiocracy.

Thinkocracy is largely: To think. It’s a governmental system where much thought is put into governance, yet not much is enacted. A thinkocracy is controlled by thinkocrats (the professional term for “thinker”).

Many people fall into this trap of thinking yet not acting in a governmental situation. Vladimir from the play is largely a thinkocrat, which is also a good thing! Don’t get me wrong!

To act

Actocracy is: To do, or: To act without thought. Though more successful than thinkocracy it’s arguably worse since thought is key to most policies. The professional term for do-er (and for a follower of this governmental system) is actocrat.

This is – as mentioned in the definition: Worse than thinkocracy. In a thinkocracy, the leaders at least give thought into their policies. Impulsive people tend to fall victim to this terrible system. Many countries in the world – and some FOSS-projects – fall victim to a version of this called:

Actocracy-Democracy is a democracy in which people don’t tend to give much thought into anything, yet they still participate.

To balance

Sentiocracy is: to act and think, and is – as such – the most successful and – sadly – utopian governance system of the three “Waiters’ ideologies” (thinkocracy, actocracy and sentiocracy). It takes aspects from both thinkocracy and actocracy which inevitably leads to a better world. Not to be confused with sentiocracy-democracy: A democratic implementation of the core principles to sentiocracy.

The above is my formal proposal to mediate between the two sides of thinkocrat and actocrat, with the preferred version of sentiocracy being – of course – sentiocracy-democracy. Direct sentiocracy-democracy is – from here on out –one of the core principles of marxocracy. Well, after a deep philosophical conversation about the value of waiting, it’s time for a bunch of more shit about waiting!

FOSS-users and waiting

Many FOSS-users love waiting. Or, I don’t know if they exactly love waiting, but they can tolerate it. “This new feature that was revealed 5 years ago will SURELY be implemented now… No? I guess I’ll just wait!” is a toxic relationship with reality that must be abolished. If you want a feature: Push for it! Saying “I want X feature!” is a much more healthy relationship with reality than “Surely someone will suggest X feature… Some day…“. And in the end, if more people just adopt this toxic mindset – which I hereby define as Godotism – we’ll have no more people to suggest features!

The Godotist satire

Once upon a time, there was a man in the US named Peter Peters: A very insignificant and quite frankly generic man with no personality. He had a wife and 2.5 kids (one of them was cut in half by a chainsaw falling onto their legs) and was quite happy. But one day: Disaster struck. The US army was going to drop a bomb on innocent arabs, but they accidentally dropped it on Peter Peters’ house, killing his whole family except for the 0.5 of a kid who was only cut in half by some sharper rubble and was thus 0.25 of a kid. The child was named Bert McBert and he was devastated.

McBert: Father! Father! We need to rebuild the house!
Peters: No.
McBert: But we need a place to live!
Peters: Yes, my son. But we must stay strong. If we just wait here: Eventually, some virtuous people will show up and rebuild the house for us!
McBert: No? The chances of that happening is less than the percentage of person I am, that being 25%.
Peters: No need to worry. We don’t even need to ask for help, the neighbours will ask for help for us! Look at them, across the street! They’re virtuous, right?

Across the street, a man named Robert Roberts and his son: Oliver McOliver were talking. They seemed to be in the same predicament, even McOliver was the same percentage of person McBert was!

McOliver: Father! Father! We need to rebuild the house!
Roberts: No.
McOliver: But we need a place to live!
Roberts: Yes, my son. But we must stay strong. If we just wait here: Eventually, some virtuous people will show up and rebuild the house for us!
McOliver: No? The chances of that happening is less than the percentage of person I am, that being 25%.
Roberts: No need to worry. We don’t even need to ask for help, the neighbours will ask for help for us! Look at them, across the street! They’re virtuous, right?

Days pass, and no one is yet to arrive. While McBert is now starting to realize what is happening, Peters stays ignorant.

Peters: How come no one has arrived!?
McBert: No one is going to arrive. Ask for help.
Peters: No! Somebody is going to ask people for us.

A person suddenly appears.

???: Hello! How’s it going for you two! My name is Carla Carlsen, and I’m just strolling by!
McBert (to Peters): Come on, ask her for help!
Peters (to McBert): No, somebody else will!
Carlsen: Answer me!

No answer arrives.

Carlsen: Well then, I guess I’ll be going now!

Carlsen disappears.

Weeks pass by, and our heroes are starving. Yet they (or McBert, at least) know that they’ll die now. McBert is first to go, leaving Peters with 0.0 children and an acute case of starvation, yet living in bliss due to ignorance…

Next chapter: Cultism