It seems like the positivism movement was extreme employment violence in disguise because it created the impression that ideas coming from employees were negative. However, it may have been the intentional perception or interpretation of negativism that kept them from being included. Everyone in the lower hierarchies has been through very challenging, enduring, stressful, discouraging, disappointing, enslaving, and frustrating survival zone conditions associated with extraction, exchange, exclusion, and cycle, so when they try to contribute, it is labeled as coming from a “negative” source. Too often, there is the labeling of positive or negative truth or falsity when all contributions ought to be considered as either a hypothesis, alternative hypothesis, or null hypothesis, all of which have tremendous value, benefit, and positive energy contribution potential. Therefore, the reality is that all the uniquely diverse contributions should be considered positive energy inclusion because they eliminate extreme monoculture perspectives and provide for natural checks and balances. Monocultures are at extreme risk of perturbation and are very resistant to change. Transitioning beyond the planet Earth’s monocultures should be a major concern because of the extreme risk of perturbation to people, families, communities, the natural environment, and planet Earth itself, as well as extreme resistance to change reasons for at least the last 200 to 500 years.