It isn’t a perfect model, and there’s a little of crossover, but I think it’s more or less correct to say that (1) the only tool of clergy to motivate people is guilt; (2) the only tool of corporations to motivate people is money; and (3) the only tool of politicians to motivate you is fear.
And of course, guilt and money are really just specific instances of fear: fear of not having enough, fear of not being good enough.
The prevailing context of life today is that these are the “always and only” motivating forces for human beings: if you want to get someone to do something, you have to pay them, guilt them, or scare them into compliance. It’s pretty damn cynical.
I suspect that if you give a person everything they really need–which, in the grand scheme of things, isn’t very much–they’ll become motivated by forces much more interesting: expressing love, and contributing to their community.
(Okay, define “need.” Easy. A person’s needs are met If and Only If their fears no longer have power over them.)
This is a first draft since I need to get going, but I’d really like some feedback. Just grunt so I know you heard me.