Whereas centralized might refer to a single authority of power, management and decision-making, decentralized means several sources (or more) of authority. In this instance, ‘Omnicentralized,’ would therefore refer to every part of a whole being an authority of power. In this sense, it is very similar to decentralized organization where decision-making authority is delegated throughout the organization. Nonetheless, decentralization and centralization are two sides of the same coin and in fact, there are times and places where each of those ‘sides’ are more or less beneficial. Neither side is universally ‘true’ nor absolutely appropriate in a given circumstance. Furthermore, decentralization can be often understood to be ‘the process of dispersing power away from a central authority’ compared to omnicentralization which would be a sharing of power among and as an organization of central authorities. This nuance is key.
In the process of ‘transcending and including’ we are looking to go beyond the polarization and often reactionary stance of centralized versus decentralized, and to preserve the best of each option in a more transcendent model of Omnicentralization where creative authority is honored and each person in an organization is a central point of power sharing that power with the other people.
Omni- means “all” … An omnicentralized system or reality would refer to a circumstance where ‘all and therefore each’ part of the whole is both a single point of authority whilst also being one of many single points of authority. The ‘trick’ is to distribute power, control, and decision-making among the single points of authority in ways which both serve the whole and each singular point. An omnicentralized system or reality could therefore be described as composed of harmonious interdependent parts that maintain various vital processes of the whole.
The equality of an omnicentralized system relies on the uniqueness of each single authority and its ability to be in harmony with the whole as it pursues its own destiny within that knowing; somewhat akin to the beautiful naming of David Spangler on his view of Holarchy.
David Spangler uses the term “Holarchy” in a different meaning: “In a hierarchy, participants can be compared and evaluated on the basis of position, rank, relative power, seniority, and the like. But in a holarchy each person’s value comes from his or her individuality and uniqueness and the capacity to engage and interact with others to make the fruits of that uniqueness available.”
An omnicentralized system therefore requires a level of awareness related to deep ecological, spiritual and physics related insights. From this awareness, it is possible to both be a single source of authority with a unique destiny and also be part of a greater whole which harmonizes these sources together, which can sing from the same song sheet.
One way to live through and create omnicentralization is to understand omnicentric mind as expressed here by philosopher and visionary Yasuhiko Kimura. Through mutual understanding and personal freedom from our own assumptions and paradigms, it is possible to share power and authority among people while simultaneously remaining unique singular points of authority. There’s no need to diffuse or disperse power, authority and decision-making; these activities can be shared, distributed and entrusted through the qualities of omnicentric Mind and the practice of omnicentralization.
When there is no center — every point of authority is a center. This is the beauty, paradox and wonder of omnicentricity. This is how we will transcend and include centralization and decentralization into the bold frontier of omnicentralization.