I've been thinking a lot about the world recently and how it's changed over the last 20, 30, 40 years. Twenty or 30 years ago, if a chicken caught a cold and sneezed and died in a remote village in East Asia, it would have been a tragedy for the chicken and its closest relatives, but I don't think there was much possibility of us fearing a global pandemic and the deaths of millions. Twenty or 30 years ago, if a bank in North America lent too much money to some people who couldn't afford to pay it back and the bank went bust, that was bad for the lender and bad for the borrower, but we didn't imagine it would bring the global economic system to its knees for nearly a decade.
U zadnje vrijeme dosta razmišljam o svijetu i tome kako se promijenio u zadnjih 20, 30, 40 godina. Prije 20 ili 30 godina, ako se neko pile prehladilo i kihnulo i uginulo u udaljenom selu u Istočnoj Aziji, bila bi to tragedija za to pile i njegovu najbližu rodbinu, no, ne vjerujem da je postojala mogućnost da se svi počnemo pribojavati globalne pandenije i milijuna umrlih. Prije 20 ili 30 godina, ako je banka u Sjevernoj Americi dala preveliki kredit nekome tko ga nije mogao otplatiti i banka je propala, to je bilo loše za banku i klijenta, no, nismo pomišljali da će to izazvati krah globalnog gospodarskog sustava za skoro čitavo desetljeće.
This is globalization. This is the miracle that has enabled us to transship our bodies and our minds and our words and our pictures and our ideas and our teaching and our learning around the planet ever faster and ever cheaper. It's brought a lot of bad stuff, like the stuff that I just described, but it's also brought a lot of good stuff. A lot of us are not aware of the extraordinary successes of the Millennium Development Goals, several of which have achieved their targets long before the due date. That proves that this species of humanity is capable of achieving extraordinary progress if it really acts together and it really tries hard. But if I had to put it in a nutshell these days, I sort of feel that globalization has taken us by surprise, and we've been slow to respond to it. If you look at the downside of globalization, it really does seem to be sometimes overwhelming. All of the grand challenges that we face today, like climate change and human rights and demographics and terrorism and pandemics and narco-trafficking and human slavery and species loss, I could go on, we're not making an awful lot of progress against an awful lot of those challenges.
Ovo je globalizacija. Ovo je čudo koje nam je omogućilo da prenesemo naša tijela i umove, naše riječi, slike, ideje, i naše podučavanje i učenje diljem planeta sve brže i sve jeftinije. Donijelo je mnogo loših stvari, poput onih koje sam upravo opisao, ali je isto tako donijelo puno dobrih stvari. Mnogi od nas nisu svjesni čudesnog uspjeha Milenijskih razvojnih ciljeva, od kojih su neki i postigli zadaće puno prije kraja zadanog roka. To dokazuje da je ljudska vrsta sposobna postići čudesan napredak ako zaista djeluje ujedinjeno i ako se zaista trudi. No, ako bih to danas trebao sažeti, nekako vjerujem da nas je globalizacija iznenadila, a mi smo prespori da na nju odgovorimo. Ako gledate negativne strane globalizacije zaista se čini da je ponekad previše za nas. Svi veliki izazovi s kojima se suočavamo, poput klimatskih promjena i ljudskih prava, i demografije i terorizma i pandemija, i narko-trgovine i ropstva, i gubitka vrsta, mogao bih nastaviti, ne postižemo veliki napredak naspram goleme količine tih izazova.
So in a nutshell, that's the challenge that we all face today at this interesting point in history. That's clearly what we've got to do next. We've somehow got to get our act together and we've got to figure out how to globalize the solutions better so that we don't simply become a species which is the victim of the globalization of problems.
Ukratko, to je izazov s kojim se svi suočavamo u ovom zanimljivom trenutku u povijesti. Sigurno je da to sljedeće što trebamo učiniti. Trebamo se nekako organizirati i trebamo otkriti kako bolje globalizirati rješenja da ne postanemo jednostavno vrsta koja je žrtva globalizacije problema.
Why are we so slow at achieving these advances? What's the reason for it? Well, there are, of course, a number of reasons, but perhaps the primary reason is because we're still organized as a species in the same way that we were organized 200 or 300 years ago. There's one superpower left on the planet and that is the seven billion people, the seven billion of us who cause all these problems, the same seven billion, by the way, who will resolve them all. But how are those seven billion organized? They're still organized in 200 or so nation-states, and the nations have governments that make rules and cause us to behave in certain ways. And that's a pretty efficient system, but the problem is that the way that those laws are made and the way those governments think is absolutely wrong for the solution of global problems, because it all looks inwards. The politicians that we elect and the politicians we don't elect, on the whole, have minds that microscope. They don't have minds that telescope. They look in. They pretend, they behave, as if they believed that every country was an island that existed quite happily, independently of all the others on its own little planet in its own little solar system. This is the problem: countries competing against each other, countries fighting against each other. This week, as any week you care to look at, you'll find people actually trying to kill each other from country to country, but even when that's not going on, there's competition between countries, each one trying to shaft the next.
Zašto smo tako spori u postizanju napretka? Koji je razlog? Pa, postoje, naravno, brojni razlozi, no, možda je glavni razlog to što smo još uvijek organizirani kao vrsta na isti način na koji smo bili organizirani prije 200 ili 300 godina. Na planetu je preostala jedna super sila a to je sedam milijardi ljudi, sedam milijardi nas koji uzrokujemo sve te probleme, istih sedam milijardi, usput, koji će ih sve razriješiti. No, na koji način je svih sedam milijardi organizirano? Još uvijek su organizirani u dvjestotinjak nacija-država, a nacije imaju vlade koje određuju pravila i prouzrokuju naše određeno ponašanje. To je prilično učinkovit sustav, ali problem je to što je način na koji se ti zakoni donose i način na koji te vlade razmišljaju potpuno kriv za rješenje globalnih problema, jer se samo gleda prema unutra. Političari koje izabiremo i političari koje ne izabiremo, u pravilu, svi gledaju kroz mikroskop. Ne gledaju kroz teleskop. Gledaju prema unutra. Pretvaraju se, ponašaju se kao da vjeruju kako je svaka zemlja otok, koji postoji posve sretno, nezavisno od svih drugih na svom malom planetu u svom malom sunčevom sustavu. Problem je ovo: zemlje koje se natječu jedna protiv druge, zemlje koje su međusobno zaraćene. Ovaj tjedan, kao i bilo koji drugi tjedan, vidjet ćete od zemlje do zemlje ljude koji se pokušavaju ubiti, a čak i kada to nije slučaj, postoji natjecanje među zemljama, gdje svaka pokušava prevariti drugu.
This is clearly not a good arrangement. We clearly need to change it. We clearly need to find ways of encouraging countries to start working together a little bit better. And why won't they do that? Why is it that our leaders still persist in looking inwards?
Ovo očigledno nije dobar poredak. Očigledno ga trebamo promijeniti. Očigledno trebamo pronaći načine da potaknemo zemlje da započnu raditi zajedno malko bolje. A zašto to one ne žele napraviti? Zašto naši vođe još uvijek ustraju u gledanju prema unutra?
Well, the first and most obvious reason is because that's what we ask them to do. That's what we tell them to do. When we elect governments or when we tolerate unelected governments, we're effectively telling them that what we want is for them to deliver us in our country a certain number of things. We want them to deliver prosperity, growth, competitiveness, transparency, justice and all of those things. So unless we start asking our governments to think outside a little bit, to consider the global problems that will finish us all if we don't start considering them, then we can hardly blame them if what they carry on doing is looking inwards, if they still have minds that microscope rather than minds that telescope. That's the first reason why things tend not to change.
Prvi i najočitiji razlog je taj što mi to od njih tražimo. To im govorimo da čine. Kada biramo vlade ili kada toleriramo neizabrane vlade, efikasno im govorimo da želimo da nam u našoj zemlji omoguće određene stvari. Želimo da nam omoguće napredak, rast, konkurentnost, transparentnost, pravdu i sve te stvari. I ako ne počnemo zahtjevati od naših vlada da malo gledaju prema van, da razmotre globalne probleme koji će nas sve dokrajčiti ako ih ne počnemo razmatrati, onda ih ne možemo kriviti ako nastave gledati prema unutra, ako još uvijek gledaju kroz mikroskop a ne kroz teleskop. To je prvi razlog zašto se stvari ne mijenjaju.
The second reason is that these governments, just like all the rest of us, are cultural psychopaths. I don't mean to be rude, but you know what a psychopath is. A psychopath is a person who, unfortunately for him or her, lacks the ability to really empathize with other human beings. When they look around, they don't see other human beings with deep, rich, three-dimensional personal lives and aims and ambitions. What they see is cardboard cutouts, and it's very sad and it's very lonely, and it's very rare, fortunately.
Drugi razlog je taj što su te vlade, kao i svi mi ostali, kulturni psihopati. Ne želim biti nepristojan, no znate što je psihopat. Psihopat je osoba koja, na njegovu ili njenu nesreću, nema sposobnost zaista suosjećati s ostalim ljudima. Kada se osvrću oko sebe, oni ne vide druge ljude s dubokim, bogatim, trodimenzionalnim osobnim životima i ciljevima i ambicijama. Oni vide kartonske izreze, i to je vrlo tužno i vrlo usamljeno, i, srećom, vrlo rijetko.
But actually, aren't most of us not really so very good at empathy? Oh sure, we're very good at empathy when it's a question of dealing with people who kind of look like us and kind of walk and talk and eat and pray and wear like us, but when it comes to people who don't do that, who don't quite dress like us and don't quite pray like us and don't quite talk like us, do we not also have a tendency to see them ever so slightly as cardboard cutouts too? And this is a question we need to ask ourselves. I think constantly we have to monitor it. Are we and our politicians to a degree cultural psychopaths?
No, zapravo, nije li većina od nas loša u suosjećanju? O naravno, jako smo dobri u suosjećanju kada se radi o ljudima koji nam djelomično sliče i koji hodaju i govore i jedu i mole se i odijevaju poput nas. No, kada se radi o ljudima koji to ne čine, koji se ne odijevaju poput nas i ne mole poput nas niti baš ne govore poput nas, nemamo li i mi sklonost da ih vidimo pomalo kao kartonske izreze? To je pitanje koje si trebamo postaviti. Mislim da ga stalno trebamo pratiti. Jesmo li mi i naši političari u određenoj mjeri kulturni psihopati?
The third reason is hardly worth mentioning because it's so silly, but there's a belief amongst governments that the domestic agenda and the international agenda are incompatible and always will be. This is just nonsense. In my day job, I'm a policy adviser. I've spent the last 15 years or so advising governments around the world, and in all of that time I have never once seen a single domestic policy issue that could not be more imaginatively, effectively and rapidly resolved than by treating it as an international problem, looking at the international context, comparing what others have done, bringing in others, working externally instead of working internally.
Treći je razlog jedva vrijedan spomena jer je tako bedast, no, među vladama postoji vjerovanje da su unutranji ciljevi i međunarodni ciljevi neuskladivi i da će uvijek tako i biti. To je obična budalaština. Radim kao politički savjetnik. Zadnjih 15 godina proveo sam savjetujući vlade diljem svijeta, i tijekom čitavog tog vremena nijednom nisam vidio nijedno unutarnje političko pitanje koje ne bi moglo biti maštovitije, djelotvornije i brže rješeno nego da ga se tretira kao međunarodni problem, gledajući međunarodni kontekst, uspoređujući s onim što su drugi napravili uključujući druge, djelujući prema van umjesto prema unutra.
And so you may say, well, given all of that, why then doesn't it work? Why can we not make our politicians change? Why can't we demand them? Well I, like a lot of us, spend a lot of time complaining about how hard it is to make people change, and I don't think we should fuss about it. I think we should just accept that we are an inherently conservative species. We don't like to change. It exists for very sensible evolutionary reasons. We probably wouldn't still be here today if we weren't so resistant to change. It's very simple: Many thousands of years ago, we discovered that if we carried on doing the same things, we wouldn't die, because the things that we've done before by definition didn't kill us, and therefore as long as we carry on doing them, we'll be okay, and it's very sensible not to do anything new, because it might kill you. But of course, there are exceptions to that. Otherwise, we'd never get anywhere. And one of the exceptions, the interesting exception, is when you can show to people that there might be some self-interest in them making that leap of faith and changing a little bit.
I mogli biste pitati, uzevši sve ovo u obzir, zašto onda to ne funkcionira? Zašto ne možemo natjerati naše političare da se promijene? Zašto to ne možemo od njih zahtijevati? Pa, ja, poput mnogo nas, trošim puno vremena žaleći se kako je teško natjerati ljude da se promijene, i mislim da se ne bismo trebali žaliti na to. Mislim da bismo jednostavno trebali prihvatiti to da smo po prirodi konzervativna vrsta. Ne volimo se mijenjati. To je tako iz vrlo razumnih evolucijskih razloga. Vjerojatno ne bismo još bili ovdje danas da nismo tako otporni na promjenu. Vrlo je jednostavno: Prije mnogo tisuća godina, otkrili smo da ako nastavimo radeći iste stvari, nećemo poginuti, budući da stvari koje smo radili prije nas po definiciji nisu ubile, i stoga, dokle god ih nastavimo raditi, biti ćemo uredu, i vrlo je razumno ne činiti ništa novo, jer bi nas to moglo ubiti. No, naravno, postoje iznimke. U suprotnom, nikada ne bismo nikamo dospjeli. Jedna od iznimaka, zanimljiva iznimka, je kada možete pokazati ljudima da možda postoji neki privatni interes u tome da naprave taj skok vjere i promijene se malo.
So I've spent a lot of the last 10 or 15 years trying to find out what could be that self-interest that would encourage not just politicians but also businesses and general populations, all of us, to start to think a little more outwardly, to think in a bigger picture, not always to look inwards, sometimes to look outwards. And this is where I discovered something quite important. In 2005, I launched a study called the Nation Brands Index. What it is, it's a very large-scale study that polls a very large sample of the world's population, a sample that represents about 70 percent of the planet's population, and I started asking them a series of questions about how they perceive other countries. And the Nation Brands Index over the years has grown to be a very, very large database. It's about 200 billion data points tracking what ordinary people think about other countries and why. Why did I do this? Well, because the governments that I advise are very, very keen on knowing how they are regarded. They've known, partly because I've encouraged them to realize it, that countries depend enormously on their reputations in order to survive and prosper in the world. If a country has a great, positive image, like Germany has or Sweden or Switzerland, everything is easy and everything is cheap. You get more tourists. You get more investors. You sell your products more expensively. If, on the other hand, you have a country with a very weak or a very negative image, everything is difficult and everything is expensive. So governments care desperately about the image of their country, because it makes a direct difference to how much money they can make, and that's what they've promised their populations they're going to deliver.
Tako sam velikim djelom proveo zadnjih 10 ili 15 godina pokušavajući otkriti što bi mogao biti taj privatni interes koji bi potaknuo ne samo političare već i tvrtke i općenitu populaciju, sve nas, da počnemo razmišljati malo više prema van, gledajući veću sliku, ne gledajući uvijek prema van, nego ponekad prema van. Ovdje sam otkrio nešto vrlo značajno. Godine 2005. započeo sam studiju zvanu Indeks brendova zemalja [The Nation Brands Index]. To je opsežna studija koja uključuje veliki uzorak svjetske populacije, uzorak koji predstavlja oko 70 posto svjetske populacije, i počeo sam im postavljati niz pitanja o tome kako oni doživljavaju druge zemlje. Indeks brendova zemalja je tijekom godina narastao u vrlo vrlo veliku bazu podataka. Ima oko 200 milijardi podatkovnih točaka prateći što obični ljudi misle o drugim zemljama i zašto. Zašto sam ovo napravio? Pa, zato što vlade koje savjetujem bi vrlo rado znale koliko ih se cijeni. Znale su, djelomično zato što sam ih ja potaknuo da to shvate, da zemlje ovise u ogromnoj mjeri o svojoj reputaciji kako bi preživjele i napredovale na svijetu. Ako zemlja ima odličnu, pozitivnu sliku, poput Njemačke ili Švedske i Švicarske, sve je lako i sve je jeftino. Imate više turista. Imate više ulagača. Svoje proizvode prodajete po većoj cijeni. Ako, s druge strane, imate zemlju s vrlo slabom ili negativnom slikom, sve je teško i sve je skupo. Zato vlade očajnički drže do slike njihove zemlje, jer to čini izravnu razliku koliko novca mogu zaraditi, a to je ono što su obećali svojim građanima da će im omogućiti.
So a couple of years ago, I thought I would take some time out and speak to that gigantic database and ask it, why do some people prefer one country more than another? And the answer that the database gave me completely staggered me. It was 6.8. I haven't got time to explain in detail. Basically what it told me was — (Laughter) (Applause) — the kinds of countries we prefer are good countries. We don't admire countries primarily because they're rich, because they're powerful, because they're successful, because they're modern, because they're technologically advanced. We primarily admire countries that are good. What do we mean by good? We mean countries that seem to contribute something to the world in which we live, countries that actually make the world safer or better or richer or fairer. Those are the countries we like. This is a discovery of significant importance — you see where I'm going — because it squares the circle. I can now say, and often do, to any government, in order to do well, you need to do good. If you want to sell more products, if you want to get more investment, if you want to become more competitive, then you need to start behaving, because that's why people will respect you and do business with you, and therefore, the more you collaborate, the more competitive you become.
Prije nekoliko godina, mislio sam malo predahnuti i razmotriti tu golemu baza podataka i upitati je, zašto neki ljudi preferiraju jednu zemlju više od neke druge? Odgovor koji mi je dala baza podataka potpuno me zapanjila. Bilo je 6.8. Nemam vremena za objašnjavanje detalja. Uglavnom, rekla mi je - (Smijeh) (Pljesak) - preferiramo one zemlje koje su dobre. Ne divimo se zemljama zato što su bogate, jer su moćne, uspješne, jer su moderne, tehnološki napredne. U prvom se redu divimo zemljama koje su dobre. Što podrazumijevamo pod "dobrim"? Mislimo na zemlje koje pridonose nešto svijetu u kojem živimo, zemlje koje zapravo čine svijet sigurnijim ili boljim ili bogatijim ili pravednijim. To su zemlje koje nam se sviđaju. Ovo je otkriće od značajne važnosti - vidite kamo smjeram - zato što to rješava naoko velik problem. Sada mogu reći svakoj vladi, a često to i radim, kako bi bili uspješni, trebate činiti dobro. Ako želite prodavati više proizvoda, ako želite privući više ulagača, ako želite postati konkurentniji, onda se trebate početi pristojno ponašati, zato što će vas tada ljudi cijeniti i poslovati s vama, i stoga, što više surađujete, to ćete biti konkurentniji.
This is quite an important discovery, and as soon as I discovered this, I felt another index coming on. I swear that as I get older, my ideas become simpler and more and more childish. This one is called the Good Country Index, and it does exactly what it says on the tin. It measures, or at least it tries to measure, exactly how much each country on Earth contributes not to its own population but to the rest of humanity. Bizarrely, nobody had ever thought of measuring this before. So my colleague Dr. Robert Govers and I have spent the best part of the last two years, with the help of a large number of very serious and clever people, cramming together all the reliable data in the world we could find about what countries give to the world.
Ovo je doista značajno otkriće, i čim sam to otkrio, osjećao sam da će se pojaviti sljedeći indeks. Kunem vam se da, što postajem stariji moje ideje postaju jednostvanije i sve više dječje. Ova se zove Indeks Dobre Zemlje, i znači upravo to. Mjeri, ili barem pokušava mjeriti, koliko točno svaka zemlja na svijetu pridonosi ne svojim građanima već ostatku svijeta. Bizarno je što se nitko prije nije sjetio takvo što izmjeriti. Moj kolega dr. Robert Govers i ja proveli smo zadnje dvije godine, uz pomoć velikog broja vrlo ozbiljnih i pametnih ljudi, sabirući sve pouzdane podatke na svijetu koje smo mogli pronaći o zemljama koje pridonose svijetu.
And you're waiting for me to tell you which one comes top. And I'm going to tell you, but first of all I want to tell you precisely what I mean when I say a good country. I do not mean morally good. When I say that Country X is the goodest country on Earth, and I mean goodest, I don't mean best. Best is something different. When you're talking about a good country, you can be good, gooder and goodest. It's not the same thing as good, better and best. This is a country which simply gives more to humanity than any other country. I don't talk about how they behave at home because that's measured elsewhere. And the winner is Ireland. (Applause) According to the data here, no country on Earth, per head of population, per dollar of GDP, contributes more to the world that we live in than Ireland. What does this mean? This means that as we go to sleep at night, all of us in the last 15 seconds before we drift off to sleep, our final thought should be, godammit, I'm glad that Ireland exists. (Laughter) And that — (Applause) — In the depths of a very severe economic recession, I think that there's a really important lesson there, that if you can remember your international obligations whilst you are trying to rebuild your own economy, that's really something. Finland ranks pretty much the same. The only reason why it's below Ireland is because its lowest score is lower than Ireland's lowest score.
Čekate da vam otkrijem koja je na samom vrhu ljestvice. Reći ću vam, no prvo vam želim reći što točno mislim kada kažem "dobra zemlja". Ne mislim na moralno dobru. Kada kažem da je Zemlja X najdobrija zemlja na svijetu, i mislim najdobrija, ne najbolja. Najbolja znači nešto drugo. Kada govorite o dobroj zemlji, možete biti dobri, dobriji i najdobriji. To nije isto što i dobar, bolji i najbolji. To je zemlja koja jednostavno pridonosi više čovječanstvu od ikoje druge zemlje. Ne govorim o tome kako se ponašaju 'doma' jer se to mjeri drugdje. I pobjednik je Irska. (Pljesak) Prema ovim podacima, nijedna zemlja na svijetu, po glavi stanovnika, po dolaru BDP-a, ne pridonosi više svijetu na kojem živimo od Irske. Što to znači? Znači da kada uvečer odlazimo na spavanje svi mi u zadnjih 15 sekundi prije nego utonemo u san, naša zadnja misao tebala bi biti, kvragu, drago mi je što postoji Irska. (Smijeh) I to - (Pljesak) - Usred velike ekonomske recesije, vjerujem da postoji bitna lekcija ovdje, da ako se možete sjetiti svojih međunarodnih obaveza dok pokušavate obnoviti vlastitu ekonomiju to je onda nešto zaista bitno. Finska stoji otprilike jednako na ljestvici. Jedini razlog zašto je ispod Irske je taj što joj je najniži rezultat niži od irskog najnižeg rezultata.
Now the other thing you'll notice about the top 10 there is, of course, they're all, apart from New Zealand, Western European nations. They're also all rich. This depressed me, because one of the things that I did not want to discover with this index is that it's purely the province of rich countries to help poor countries. This is not what it's all about. And indeed, if you look further down the list, I don't have the slide here, you will see something that made me very happy indeed, that Kenya is in the top 30, and that demonstrates one very, very important thing. This is not about money. This is about attitude. This is about culture. This is about a government and a people that care about the rest of the world and have the imagination and the courage to think outwards instead of only thinking selfishly.
Primjetit ćete i to da su u top 10 osim Novog Zelanda, sve zemlje Zapadne Europe. Isto tako su sve bogate. Ovo me je izdeprimiralo, jer jedna od stvari koju nisam htio otkriti uz pomoć ovog indeksa bila je to da se radi o grupi bogatih zemalja koje pomažu siromašnim zemljama. Ovdje se ne radi o tome. I zaista, ako pogledate ostatak popisa, nemam ovdje slajd, vidjet ćete nešto što me stvarno obradovalo, da je Kenija u top 30, a to pokazuje jednu vrlo bitnu stvar. Ovdje se ne radi o novcu. Radi se o stavu. Radi se o kulturi. Radi se o vladi i ljudima kojima je stalo do ostatka svijeta i koji imaju dovoljno mašte i hrabrosti da razmišljaju prema van umjesto da razmišljaju sebično.
I'm going to whip through the other slides just so you can see some of the lower-lying countries. There's Germany at 13th, the U.S. comes 21st, Mexico comes 66th, and then we have some of the big developing countries, like Russia at 95th, China at 107th. Countries like China and Russia and India, which is down in the same part of the index, well, in some ways, it's not surprising. They've spent a great deal of time over the last decades building their own economy, building their own society and their own polity, but it is to be hoped that the second phase of their growth will be somewhat more outward-looking than the first phase has been so far.
Preletjet ću kroz druge slajdove da možete vidjeti neke od zemalja koje su niže na ljestvici. Njemačka je na 13. mjestu, SAD na 21. Meksiko na 66. a zatim su neke velike zemlje u razvoju, poput Rusije na 95. mjestu Kine na 107. Zemlje poput Kine, Rusije i Indije, koja je na jednako niskom mjestu indeksa, na neki način i nisu iznenađenje. Puno su vremena provele zadnjih nekoliko desetljeća izgrađujući vlastito gospodarstvo, vlastito društvo i državni poredak, no trebali bi se nadati da će druga faza njihova rasta imati više viziju prema van nego što je to imala prva faza.
And then you can break down each country in terms of the actual datasets that build into it. I'll allow you to do that. From midnight tonight it's going to be on goodcountry.org, and you can look at the country. You can look right down to the level of the individual datasets.
Potom možete raščlaniti svaku zemlju prema konkretnim skupovima podataka koji su ugrađeni u nju. Dozvolit ću vam to. Od ove ponoći nalazit će se na goodcountry.org, i možete pogledati svaku zemlju. Možete pogledati sve do razine pojedinačnih skupova podataka.
Now that's the Good Country Index. What's it there for? Well, it's there really because I want to try to introduce this word, or reintroduce this word, into the discourse. I've had enough hearing about competitive countries. I've had enough hearing about prosperous, wealthy, fast-growing countries. I've even had enough hearing about happy countries because in the end that's still selfish. That's still about us, and if we carry on thinking about us, we are in deep, deep trouble. I think we all know what it is that we want to hear about. We want to hear about good countries, and so I want to ask you all a favor. I'm not asking a lot. It's something that you might find easy to do and you might even find enjoyable and even helpful to do, and that's simply to start using the word "good" in this context. When you think about your own country, when you think about other people's countries, when you think about companies, when you talk about the world that we live in today, start using that word in the way that I've talked about this evening. Not good, the opposite of bad, because that's an argument that never finishes. Good, the opposite of selfish, good being a country that thinks about all of us. That's what I would like you to do, and I'd like you to use it as a stick with which to beat your politicians. When you elect them, when you reelect them, when you vote for them, when you listen to what they're offering you, use that word, "good," and ask yourself, "Is that what a good country would do?" And if the answer is no, be very suspicious. Ask yourself, is that the behavior of my country? Do I want to come from a country where the government, in my name, is doing things like that? Or do I, on the other hand, prefer the idea of walking around the world with my head held high thinking, "Yeah, I'm proud to come from a good country"? And everybody will welcome you. And everybody in the last 15 seconds before they drift off to sleep at night will say, "Gosh, I'm glad that person's country exists."
To je Indeks Dobre Zemlje. Čemu on služi? Postoji zato što želim pokušati uvesti tu riječ, ponovo je uvesti u diskurz. Dovoljno sam se naslušao o konkurentnim zemljama. Dovoljno sam se naslušao o uspješnim, bogatim, brzorastućim zemljama. Bilo mi je dosta slušanja o sretnim zemljama jer je to na kraju krajeva još uvijek sebično. Još se uvijek radi o nama, i ako nastavimo razmišljati o nama, u velikim smo problemima. Mislim da svi znamo što je to o čemu želimo slušati. Želimo slušati o dobrim zemljama, pa vas želim nešto zamoliti. Ne tražim puno. Možda će vam to biti lako napraviti i možda će vam to čak biti zabavno i korisno, a to je jednostavno početi koristiti riječ "dobar" u ovom kontekstu. Kada razmišljate o svojoj zemlji, o tuđim zemljama, kada razmišljate o tvrtkama, kada govorite o svijetu u kojem danas živimo, počnite korititi tu riječ na način o kojem sam večeras govorio. Ne "dobro" kao suprotno od lošeg, jer to je rasprava koja nikad nema kraja. "Dobro" kao suprotno od sebično, "dobro" kao zemlja koja razmišlja o svima nama. To bih volio da napravite, i želio bih da je koristite kao batinu kojom tučete svoje političare. Kada ih birate, kada ih ponovo izabirete, kada glasate za njih, kada slušate što vam oni nude, koristite tu riječ, "dobro," i upitajte se, "Bi li to napravila dobra zemlja?" Ako je odgovor "ne", budite vrlo sumnjičavi. Upitajte se, ponaša li se tako i moja zemlja? Želim li dolaziti iz zemlje gdje vlada, u moje ime, radi takve stvari? Ili mi je, s druge strane, draža pomisao da hodam svijetom visoko podignute glave misleći "Da, ponosim se što sam iz dobre zemlje"? I svima ćete biti dobrodošli. Svi će u zadnjih 15 sekundi prije no što utonu u san reći, "Bože, drago mi je da postoji zemlja te osobe."
Ultimately, that, I think, is what will make the change. That word, "good," and the number 6.8 and the discovery that's behind it have changed my life. I think they can change your life, and I think we can use it to change the way that our politicians and our companies behave, and in doing so, we can change the world. I've started thinking very differently about my own country since I've been thinking about these things. I used to think that I wanted to live in a rich country, and then I started thinking I wanted to live in a happy country, but I began to realize, it's not enough. I don't want to live in a rich country. I don't want to live in a fast-growing or competitive country. I want to live in a good country, and I so, so hope that you do too.
Naposljetku, vjerujem da je to ono što će učiniti promjenu. Da su riječ "dobro," i broj 6.8 i otkriće iza njega promijenili moj život. Vjerujem da mogu promijeniti vaš život, i mislim da to možemo iskoristiti kako bismo promijenili način na koji se ponašaju naši političari i naše tvrtke, i na taj način možemo promijeniti svijet. Počeo sam razmišljati mnogo drukčije o svojoj zemlji otkad razmišljam o ovim stvarima. Prije sam mislio da želim živjeti u bogatoj zemlji, a onda sam počeo razmišljati kako želim živjeti u sretnoj zemlji, no, shvatio sam da to nije dovoljno. Ne želim živjeti u bogatoj zemlji. Ne želim živjeti u zemlji koja se brzo razvija ili je konkurentna. Želim živjeti u dobroj zemlji, i duboko se nadam da to želite i vi.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)