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 poslednje vreme sam mnogo razmišljao o svetu i kako se promenio u poslednjih 20, 30, 40 godina. Pre 20 ili 30 godina, ukoliko bi kokoška zakačila prehladu, kinula i uginula u udaljenom selu na istoku Azije, bila bi to tragedija za kokošku i njene najbliže, ali mislim da nije bilo mnogo verovatno da strepimo od globalne pandemije i smrti miliona ljudi. Pre 20 ili 30 godina, ukoliko bi banka u Severnoj Americi pozajmila previše novca nekome ko ne bi bio u stanju da vrati novac i ako bi banka propala, zajmodavac i dužnik bi loše prošli, ali nismo mogli da pretpostavimo da bi to moglo da baci ekonomski sistem na kolena za skoro čitavu deceniju.
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 prekrcavamo naša tela i naše umove i naše reči i naše slike i naše ideje i naša učenja i naša znanja širom planete sve brže i sve jeftinije. To je donelo mnogo zla, poput onog koje sam upravo opisao, ali je takođe donelo i mnogo dobra. Mnogi od nas nisu svesni koliko su izuzetno uspešni bili Milenijumski razvojni ciljevi, neki od njih su ostvareni mnogo pre krajnjeg roka. Ovo je dokaz da je ljudska vrsta sposobna za izvanredan napredak ako zaista sarađuje i ako se zaista jako potrudi. No, ukoliko bih to morao da sažmem, nekako osećam da nas je globalizacija zatekla nespremne i sporo smo odreagovali. Ukoliko pogledate loše strane globalizacije, zaista se čine poražavajućim. Svi izazovi s kojima se danas suočavamo, poput promene klime, ljudskih prava i demografije i terorizma i pandemije i šverca narkotika i ljudskog ropstva i izgubljenih vrsta, da ne nabrajam, mi ne napredujemo toliko mnogo u poređenju sa ovim izazovima.
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.
Dakle, ukratko, to je izazov s kojim se suočavamo danas u ovom zanimljivom istorijskom momentu. Očito se moramo time baviti odmah. Moramo nekako da se saberemo i moramo da shvatimo kako da bolje globalizujemo rešenja, kako ne bismo prosto postali 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 sporo ostvarujemo ovaj napredak? Šta je razlog tome? Pa, postoji, naravno mnogo razloga, ali možda je glavni razlog tome to što smo kao vrsta organizovani isto kako smo bili organizovani pre 200 ili 300 godina. Ostala je jedna supersila na planeti, a to je sedam milijardi ljudi, sedam milijardi nas koji uzrokujemo ove probleme, sedam milijardi istih, usput, koji će ih sve rešiti. Ali kako je tih sedam milijardi organizovano? Organizovani su i dalje u otprilike 200 nacionalnih država, a nacije imaju svoje vlade koje donose zakone, zbog kojih se ponašamo na određeni način. I to je prilično efikasan sistem, ali problem je što način na koji su ovi zakoni doneseni i način na koji ove vlade razmišljaju su potpuno pogrešni za rešavanje globalnih problema jer su zagledani ka unutra. Političari koje biramo i oni koje ne biramo, u suštini, imaju umove poput mikroskopa. Nemaju umove poput teleskopa. Oni gledaju unutra. Pretvaraju se, ponašaju se kao da veruju da je svaka država ostrvo koje postoji prilično srećno, nezavisno od svih drugih, na svojoj ličnoj malenoj planeti u svom ličnom malenom solarnom sistemu. Evo šta je problem: države koje se takmiče jedne s drugima, države koje ratuju jedne protiv drugih. Bilo koje sedmice, pogledajte videćete narode koji zapravo pokušavaju da se međusobno poubijaju, no čak i kad se to ne dešava, imamo takmičenje među državama, svaka pokušava da zaseni 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 dobro uređenje. Očigledno ga moramo promeniti. Očigledno moramo da pronađemo način da ohrabrimo države da počnu da sarađuju malo bolje. Zašto to i ne urade? Zašto naše vođe i dalje insistiraju na gledanju ka 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.
Pa, prvi i najočigledniji razlog je zato što mi to tražimo od njih. To im mi govorimo da rade. Kada biramo vlade ili kada tolerišemo vlade koje nismo birali, mi im, u stvari, poručujemo da želimo da oni obezbede našoj državi određene stvari. Želimo da nam obezbede prosperitet, rast, konkurentnost, transparentnost, pravdu i slične stvari. Zato ako ne počnemo da tražimo od vlada da razmišljaju malo prema spolja i razmotre globalne probleme koji će nas sve dokrajčiti, ukoliko se ne pozabavimo njima, onda jedva da možemo da ih krivimo ako nastave da gledaju ka unutra, ako zadrže umove poput mikroskopa, umesto umova poput teleskopa. To je prvi razlog zašto se stvari ne menjaju.
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 da su ove vlade, poput nas samih, kulturološke psihopate. Ne želim da vređam, ali znate šta je psihopata. Psihopata je osoba koja, na njegovu ili njenu žalost, nema sposobnost saosećanja s drugim ljudima. Kada pogledaju oko sebe, oni ne vide ljudska bića s dubokim, bogatim, trodimenzionalnim ličnim životima, ciljevima i ambicijama. Oni vide isečke od kartona, i to je veoma tužno i veoma usamljeno i veoma je retko, na sreću.
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, zar i većini nas empatija nije slabija strana? Ah, naravno da jeste kada su u pitanju ljudi koji nekako liče na nas, koji hodaju i govore i jedu i mole se i oblače se poput nas, no kada su u pitanju ljudi koji to ne rade, koji se baš ne oblače kao mi i baš se i ne mole kao mi i baš ne govore kao mi, zar nemamo tendenciju da ih vidimo, makar malo, poput isečaka od kartona? Ovo pitanje moramo postaviti sebi. Mislim da stalno moramo da bdimo nad njim. Jesmo li mi i naši političari, u izvesnoj meri, kulturološke psihopate?
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 razlog ne vredi ni pominjati jer je prilično smešan, ali postoji verovanje unutar vlada da su domaći dnevni red i spoljnopolitički dnevni red nesaglasni i da će uvek to i biti. Ovo je prosto besmisleno. Ja sam politički savetnik. Proveo sam poslednjih 15 godina, otprilike, savetujući vlade širom sveta i tokom tog vremena, nijednom nisam video jedan jedini unutrašnji problem, koji ne bi mogao da bude maštovitije, efikasnije i brže rešen ukoliko bi se posmatrao kao spoljnopolitički problem, viđen u internacionalnom kontekstu, upoređen sa praksom drugih, dovođenjem drugih, radeći ka spolja, umesto rada u unutrašnjosti.
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.
Možda ćete se zapitati, uzimajući u obzir sve to, zašto to ne funkcioniše? Zašto ne možemo naterati političare da se promene? Zašto ne bismo to zahtevali od njih? Ja, poput većine nas, provodim mnogo vremena žaleći se na to kako je teško naterati ljude da se promene i ne bi trebalo da se zamaramo time. Mislim da bi trebalo da prihvatimo to da smo po prirodi konzervativna vrsta. Ne volimo promene. To je tako zbog razumnih evolutivnih razloga. Verovatno ne bismo danas bili tu da se nismo opirali promenama. Jednostavno je: hiljadama godina unazad otkrili smo da ako nastavimo da radimo iste stvari, nećemo umreti, jer nas ono što smo radili pre, po definiciji nije ubilo i zato dokle god nastavimo po starom, bićemo dobro. Razumno je ne raditi ništa novo jer bi nas to moglo ubiti. No, naravno, postoje izuzeci tome. U suprotnom ne bismo nigde stigli. Jedan izuzetak, zanimljiv izuzetak, je kada uspete da pokažete ljudima da možda postoji lični interes u tom skoku u nepoznato i malenoj promeni.
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.
Proveo sam poslednjih 10 ili 15 godina pokušavajući da otkrijem šta bi mogao da bude taj lični interes koji bi ohrabrio, ne samo političare, već i preduzeća i javno mnjenje, sve nas, da počnemo da razmišljamo više ka spolja, da zamišljamo širu sliku, da ne gledamo uvek ka unutra, da ponekad pogledamo ka spolja. I tu sam otkrio nešto prilično važno. Godine 2005, započeo sam istraživanje pod nazivom Indeks nacionalnih brendova. To je izuzetno opsežna studija kojom je anketiran veoma veliki uzorak svetske populacije, uzorak koji predstavlja oko 70 procenata populacije na planeti. Počeo sam da im postavljam niz pitanja o tome kako doživljavaju druge države. Indeks nacionalnih brendova je vremenom postao veoma, veoma velika baza podataka. Sadrži oko 200 milijardi jedinica podataka o tome šta obični ljudi misle o drugim državama i zašto. Zašto sam se time bavio? Zato što su vlade koje savetujem vrlo, vrlo željne da znaju kako ih drugi vide. Znali su, delom jer sam ih ja ohrabrivao da to shvate, da se države oslanjaju uveliko na svoju reputaciju, kako bi preživele i napredovale u svetu. Ukoliko država ima izuzetno pozitivan ugled, poput Nemačke, Švedske ili Švajcarske, sve je lako i sve je jeftino. Imate više turista. Više investitora. Prodajete skuplje svoje proizvode. Ako, s druge strane, imate državu sa slabim ili veoma negativnim ugledom, sve je teško i sve je skupo. Zato je vladama očajnički važan ugled svoje države jer direktno utiče na to koliko novca mogu da zarade, a to su obećali svom narodu da će da urade.
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.
Pre par godina sam razmišljao da iskoristim slobodno vreme i razgovaram s džinosvkom bazom podataka i da je pitam: zašto neki ljudi više vole jednu državu od neke druge? A odgovor koji mi je baza dala potpuno me je potresao. Odgovor je bio 6,8. Nemam vremena da objašnjavam detalje. U suštini mi je rekla - (Smeh) (Aplauz) - Države koje najviše volimo su dobre države. Ne divimo se državama samo zato što su bogate, zato što su moćne, zato što su uspešne, zato što su moderne, zato što su tehnološki napredne. Pre svega se divimo državama koje su dobre. Šta smatramo pod dobrim? Smatramo da te države doprinose nešto svetu u kome živimo, da te države, zapravo čine svet sigurnijim ili boljim ili bogatijim ili poštenijim. Takve države nam se sviđaju. Ovo otkriće je od značajne važnosti - vidite na šta ciljam - jer uokviruje krug. Sada mogu da kažem, često to i radim, bilo kojoj vladi: kako bi vam išlo bolje, morate da budete dobri. Želite li bolji izvoz, želite li više investicija, želite li da postanete konkurentniji, onda morate da se upristojite jer će zbog toga ljudi da vas cene i poslovaće s vama, i samim tim, što više budete sarađivali, bićete 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 prilično važno otkriće i čim sam to otkrio, osetio sam da mi se javlja novi indeks. Kunem se, kako starim, ideje su mi jednostavnije i sve detinjastije. Ovaj se zove Indeks dobrih država i bavi se onim što piše na ambalaži. Meri, ili bar pokušava da meri, tačno koliko svaka država na planeti Zemlji doprinosi, ne sopstvenom narodu, već ostatku čovečanstva. Bizarno, niko se nikada pre nije setio da ovo izmeri. Kolega, dr Robert Govers i ja smo proveli dobar deo protekle dve godine, uz pomoć velikog broja veoma ozbiljnih i pametnih ljudi, uklapajući sve pouzdane podatke iz sveta do kojih smo mogli da dođemo, o tome koliko države doprinose svetu.
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.
Vi sad čekate da vam kažem koja je na vrhu. Reći ću vam, ali pre svega želim da vam kažem šta tačno podrazumevam kad kažem dobra država. Ne mislim dobra u moralnom smislu. Kad kažem da je Država x najdobrija država na Zemlji, najdobrija, ne najbolja. Najbolja ima drugo značenje. Govoreći o dobroj državi, ona može da bude dobra, dobrija i najdobrija. To nije isto kao dobra, bolja i najbolja. To je prosto država koja doprinosi čovečanstvu više od bilo koje druge države. Ne govorim o ponašanju kod kuće jer se to meri drugde. I pobednik je: Irska. (Aplauz) Prema podacima ovde, nijedna država na Zemlji, po glavi stanovnika, po dolaru od BDP-a, ne doprinosi više od Irske svetu u kome živimo. Šta ovo znači? Ovo znači da kad legnemo da spavamo noćas, svima bi u poslednjih 15 sekundi, pre nego što odlutamo u san, poslednja misao trebalo da bude: dovraga, baš mi je drago što Irska postoji. (Smeh) I da - (Aplauz) - u dubinama veoma ozbiljne ekonomske recesije, mislim da se tu krije izuzetno važna lekcija, ako možete da mislite na međunarodne obaveze dok pokušavate da obnovite svoju ekonomiju, to je zaista nešto. Finska se kotira slično. Ispod Irske je samo zato što je njen najslabiji rezultat, lošiji od onog kod Irske.
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.
Primetićete još nešto kod prvih deset, sve su, naravno osim Novog Zelanda, zapadnoevropske nacije. Sve su takođe veoma bogate. Ovo me je rastužilo, jer ako nešto nisam želeo da otkrijem uz ovaj indeks je kako je isključivo nadležnost bogatih država da pomažu siromešne. Ne radi se samo o tome. Zaista, pogledate li niže na listi, nemam slajd ovde, videćete nešto što me je veoma usrećilo: Kenija je u prvih trideset i to je pokazatelj jedne veoma, veoma važne stvari. Ovde se ne radi o novcu. Ovde je stav bitan. Kultura je bitna. Ovde se radi o vladama i ljudima koji brinu o ostatku sveta i imaju mašte i hrabrosti da razmišljaju ka spolja, umesto isključivo sebičnog razmišljanja.
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.
Preleteću preko drugih slajdova, prosto da biste videli neke od nižerangiranih država. Nemačka je na 13, SAD je na 21, Meksiko je na 66. mestu, a zatim slede neke od najrazvijenijih država, poput Rusije na 95, Kine na 107. mestu. Države, poput Kine, Rusije i Indije su u istom delu indeksa, i to, na neki način, ne iznenađuje. Proveli su veći deo poslenjih decenija gradeći sopstvene ekonomije, gradeći sopstvena društva i sopstvene politike, ali nadajmo se da će u drugoj fazi rasta biti okrenutiji bar malo ka spolja nego što su bili u prvoj fazi.
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 da razložite svaku državu prema aktuelnim setovima podataka koji je čine. Omogućiću vam to. Noćas od ponoći to će da bude na goodcountry.org, pa ispitajte neku državu. Možete da imate uvid čak i u nivo individualnih setova 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."
Eto, to vam je Indeks dobrih država. Čemu služi? Pa, tu je kako bih pokušao da uvedem ovu reč ili da je vratim u diskurs. Ne želim više da slušam o konkurentnim državama. Ne želim više da slušam o prosperitetnim, bogatim, brzorastućim državama. Ne želim više da slušam ni o srećnim državama jer je i to, na kraju krajeva, sebično. To je i dalje vezano za nas, a ako nastavimo da razmišljamo o sebi, bićemo u velikom, velikom problemu. Mislim da svi znamo o čemu želimo da slušamo. Želimo da slušamo o dobrim državama i zato ću da vas zamolim za uslugu. Ne tražim previše. To je nešto što vam neće teško pasti, možda vam se i svidi i bude vam korisno, a to je da prosto počnete da koristite reč "dobra" u ovom kontekstu. Kada razmišljate o svojoj državi, kada razmišljate o tuđim državama, kada razmišljate o preduzećima, kada razmišljate o svetu u kom trenutno živimo, počnite da koristite tu reč, na način na koji sam vam večeras predočio. Ne dobra, suprotno od loša, jer je to neiscrpna rasprava. Dobra, nasuprot sebičnoj, dobra je ona država koja misli na sve nas. To bih želeo da uradite i da to koristite kao štap kojim ćete tući svoje političare. Kada ih izaberete, kada ih reizaberete, kada glasate za njih, kada slušate šta vam nude, koristite tu reč: "dobra" i zapitajte se: "Da li bi tako radila dobra država?" I ako je odgovor ne, budite veoma sumnjičavi. Pitajte se: da li se tako ponaša moja država? Da li želim da potičem iz države čija vlada, u moje ime, radi takve stvari? Ili mi se, s druge strane, više sviđa ideja da hodam svetom visoko podignute glave, misleći: "Da, ponosan sam jer dolazim iz dobre države"? I svuda ćete da budete dobrodošli. I svi će poslednjih 15 sekundi, pre nego što odlutaju u san, reći: "Gospode, baš mi je drago što država te osobe postoji."
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.
Konačno, mislim da će to dovesti do promene. Ta reč: "dobra" i broj 6,8 kao i otkriće koje stoji iza toga, promenili su moj život. Mislim da mogu promeniti i vaš i to možemo koristiti da promenimo ponašanje naših političara i naših preduzeća i radeći tako, možemo da promenimo svet. Počeo sam da razmišljam drugačije o svojoj državi, otkad sam počeo da mislim na ove stvari. Nekad sam želeo da živim u bogatoj državi, a onda sam poželeo da živim u srećnoj državi, no onda sam shvatio da to nije dovoljno. Ne želim da živim u bogatoj državi. Ne želim da živim u brzorastućoj državi ili konkurentnoj državi. Želim da živim u dobroj državi, i iskreno se nadam da i vi želite isto što i ja.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)