building a movement, and a lifeboat
Jun. 23rd, 2006 03:31 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chelidonSome thoughts from Peter Montague, by way of Rachel Carson. A bit wordy, and IMO falls into a few classic traps, but there are some real gems in here, too. A few of the things which resonated with me are the concept of precautionary economics (doing things that make sense now, as well as laying the foundation of preparation for possible turmoil ahead), story-based strategies for changing the culture, and this lovely quote:
'As Patrick Reinsborough of smartMeme wrote in Rachel's News #809 "Even
though people might realize they are on the Titanic and the iceberg is just
ahead, they still need to see the lifeboat in order to jump ship."'
Just as with economics (such as the failure of communism and other rigid command-based economic systems) [EDIT: I should make clear I'm referring to the failure of command-based economies here, not philosophical beliefs], I'm not certain that there's ever been a successful (in the long-term) top-down restructuring of society -- despite the existence of some real visionaries from time to time, and some real monsters as well, human society is so complex, and in some ways so hard-wired, I'm not sure anyone is capable of really understanding it fully enough to implement an effective plan for change, even if they somehow, individually or as a group, had the power to do so. Cultural and societal changes almost always seem to be reactive, not proactive, to come from the bottom-up, and from outside factors we don't fully understand until well after the change, if ever -- whether the invention of the telephone or TV, antibiotics and hygene, cheap oil, industrailization, 2-income families, or the advent of the birth-control pill, certainly nobody really knows beforehand what the long-term effects will be. We make the waves, then we ride them wherever they go.
On the other hand, I do like the lifeboat concept, and it's simple enough and on a practical scale that I understand and can wrap my head around. It also seems to fit the concept of precautionary economics. If the ship sinks, you don't have to go down with it...and if it doesn't, you've still got a sturdy little boat in which you and some like-minded friends can perhaps explore some of the less mainstream cultural destinations that the ship you're on isn't ever going to visit ;> My instincts tell me that this concept encourages the same kind of cultural diversity that corresponds to genetic diversity in species -- when extreme enviromental stress hits, it's typically some of the weirder "experiments" that are best suited to survive and thrive. And it seems pretty likely that we're heading towards a period of high environmental stress, in terms of climate, society, economics, energy, and culture. Certainly the winds of change are blowing, harder each year, and it's only a matter of time before something breaks or shifts, in small ways or large. Maybe, just maybe, instead of getting tossed wherever the wind blows, it's possible to harness some of that wild wind-energy to generate power and build something interesting...
-------
I think this is relevant to dealing with post-Peak, and best of all it
shares the kind of optimism that Robert shows, and a formula for action. It
can be applied to the co-op movement for food security. Rachel's home page
is www.rachel.org named for Rachel Carson.
paul NM <tradingpost@lobo.net>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OWL-OldWaysLiving/
-------------------
Environmental Research Foundation, June 10, 2006
http://www.precaution.org/lib/06/prn_movement.htm
GETTING TO PREVENTION AND PRECAUTION: BUILDING A MOVEMENT
[Rachel's introduction: This is the printed handout that accompanied Peter
Montague's PowerPoint talk, "A Few Ideas about Building a Movement," June
10 at the national conference in precaution in Baltimore. This handout was
accompanied by a list of potential allies that we could join with to
develop a social movement for prevention and precaution.]
By Peter Montague
A. Prevention vs. precaution: definitions
First, let's clear up a definition: precaution and prevention. To me,
prevention and precaution are usually not worth distinguishing, one from
the other. Precaution is preventive action in the face of uncertainty.
Taking action to avoid trouble and prevent harm is the main idea. In the
face of uncertainty, we call it precautionary action.
B. The structure of harm: the systemic problem we face
What we've got on our hands is a system that cannot prevent harm
(Thanks to Skip Spitzer of Root Action for naming and describing "the
structure of harm." Skip's original paper can be found here and in Rachel's
News #817 and #818.)
1. Corporations are pervasive, powerful actors compelled to pursue narrow
self-interest within an economic system that forces economic concentration,
creates socially and environmentally harmful models of production, and
requires perpetual growth (which is impossible to sustain on a finite
planet).
2. Those charged with public policy are compelled by corporate influences
and the primacy of economic growth to safeguard corporate interests.
3. Mass media, public relations, science, education and the dominant
consumption- and wealth-oriented culture reflect and reinforce the
corporate system.
4. Patriarchy, racism and intolerance are sources of harm that feed, and
are fed by, the corporate system.
5. Corporate interests are projected internationally by economic, military,
political and cultural activities and by a trade and investment framework
(e.g., the WTO) that has undermined the ability of governments to control
corporate behavior.
However, all is not lost.
C. Conditions for deep change already exist and are ripening
** The end of cheap oil is here, or soon will be
** Global warming is upon us.
** Water shortages are worsening in the U.S. and globally.
** Rising inequality divides the top 2% from the rest of us..
** The rising cost of medical care and the high cost of medical insurance
weigh on the minds of most people.
** The promise of secure retirement is fading for many aging boomers (which
of course affects their children).
** The social safety net created after the Great Depression is being
shredded bit by bit year after year.
** Families and indeed the nation are deeply in debt.
** Widespread insecurity afflicts large portions of the populace (good jobs
disappearing, debt rising, the children's future uncertain). For many, the
system no longer delivers the goods.
** A serious time crunch has beset many families.
** Some ecological limits have appeared on the horizon (no place left to
throw away toxics; cost of some critical resources rising, etc.).
** On a finite planet, endless growth in material production is impossible,
so the modern economy, which requires perpetual growth, must sooner or
later give way to something else.
** And so on and so on... This list could be readily extended.
The response to these realities is accelerating now, and this conference is
part of it: the gathering of steam for a broad, popular social movement
aimed at preventing problems, not merely "managing" problems.
The structure of harm is not an impregnable monolith. It is held together
by outmoded myths, misinformation, unexamined assumptions, bailing wire and
chewing gum. History tells us that every system can be challenged and
changed. It just takes a social movement determined to make it happen.
D. Building a movement
What is a movement?
A social movement is a joining of campaigns, associations, organizations
and coalitions that share a common vision and overall goals, symbols,
stories, songs, and information, plus a tremendous sense of solidarity.
A movement involves the major segments of society -- workers, women's
groups, students, youth, intellectuals and others recognizing and sharing a
common set of grievances, often the absence of democratic participation in
decisions. A movement gives rise to cooperative and coordinated action.
A successful movement to change the "structure of harm," to allow a
prevention philosophy to flourish, will be multi-issue, international,
diverse and democratically inclusive, aiming for class, race and gender
justice, environmental and economic sustainability, and fundamental change.
"Greening" the structure of harm will not change the structure, though it
may still be worth doing, especially if it can be done in a way that
reveals the structure and serves some larger strategic goal. (See Reform
vs. Transform, item #11, below.)
Barriers and opportunities for building a movement
#1 Divide and rule is all our adversaries have going for them
We outnumber them at least 2 to 1 and often by far more than that. To win,
we have to get together and stay together.
We have not always paid close attention to the ways in which our
adversaries divide us and keep us divided. We could benefit by studying
this reality because "divide and rule" is our adversaries' only CRUCIAL
strategy. If they fail to divide us, the game is over for them.
#2 We apply prevention narrowly to "chemicals and health" problems, often
not reaching out to people working on other issues who are using
prevention, or where prevention could help (see partial list at the end of
this handout)
We could apply precautionary/preventive thinking to the problems our
potential allies are working on (see partial list at the end of this
handout).
Instead of asking people to join US, we can join THEM.
We can make stronger connections and deeper alliances
Deeper alliances require acts of mutual support that may go beyond a
group's specific mission or agenda. Can your group examine and restate its
mission to make deeper solidarity a more explicit goal?
We can hook up with networks that are doing stuff that is
precautionary/preventive but not naming it -- and we can help them name it
We can hook up with groups that are NOT taking a prevention approach and
help them develop such an approach
Any group that has the capacity to do so could designate an ambassador
whose job is to explore alliances with other groups.
#3 TINA -- There is No Alternative
The whole system is set up to convince everyone that There is No
Alternative. (When was the last time for saw a realistic alternative to our
destructive modern lifeways portrayed on TV?) As a result, most people
can't imagine that another world is possible and that many of the troubles
afflicting our communities could be prevented, not merely tolerated and
"managed."
We can help people imagine alternative ways of living and being.
As Patrick Reinsborough of smartMeme wrote in Rachel's News #809 "Even
though people might realize they are on the Titanic and the iceberg is just
ahead, they still need to see the lifeboat in order to jump ship."
We can describe alternatives ways of living in a better world, create a new
story in which people can see themselves working and living in a different
way.
#4 The infrastructure for a precaution/prevention movement could be
strengthened
Prevention is a different way of thinking -- it guides us to search for
root causes, not superficialities.
Building any movement requires an infrastructure -- state-level or
regional-level organizations that can promote communication, offer
technical assistance, and provide a way to discuss organizing, leadership,
training, strategy, tactics, alliances, actions. Because prevention is a
different way of thinking, we especially need such an infrastructure now.
#5 We can develop a common vision and agenda.
Our adversaries know exactly what they want and they are ruthless about
going after it. We should not be ruthless, but we definitely need a vision
and goals. As Yogi Berra once said, "If you don't know where you're going,
you might not get there." A movement needs a vision and goals, so we can
know whether we're getting there.
To be more specific, we lack a foundational economic/political agenda that
systematically addresses the underlying issues of corporate power and lack
of ingenuity, and our hollowed-out democracy. Much of our
prevention/precaution work has focused on government, leaving the principal
actor, the publicly-traded corporation, largely untouched. We can change
this. We don't have to develop this agenda overnight but sooner or later,
to modify the structure of harm, we will need such an agenda to guide our
work.
#6 We've said "No" to stuff for so long that we've got to remember how to
say "Yes."
Precaution and prevention give us all something to be FOR and many
opportunities to say Yes.
#7 Participatory democracy takes practice
We could promote democracy in the workplace (support everyone's right to
form and join a union, and to run unions democratically; we could also
promote worker-owned enterprises and producer coops [as a starting point
for discussion, see David Schweickart, After Capitalism]), in schools
(youth activism), through promoting ownership of enterprises, through
participatory budgeting processes in communities, and through local civic
engagement.
But we can also acknowledge that democracy requires time to participate,
time to think about what is right and what we want. This means our agenda
will include ways to give people more free time in their lives, especially
women. (See Gar Alperovitz, America Beyond Capitalism, for example.)
#8 We have left it to our adversaries to create jobs, which is the main
source of whatever power they hold.
Not all of us need to become expert at local economic development, but we
could make it a priority to form alliances with people that do this
critical work. There are at least two kinds of groups we could make
alliances with:
** those creating early warning systems to learn when firms are in trouble
or their owners are aging, so they can intervene to keep the firms healthy
and stable
** those developing a precautionary economics: To withstand the "gales of
creative destruction" brought on by globalization, communities need
locally-rooted businesses that will stay put. Groups working on such ideas
include the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE), Coop
America, the American Independent Business Alliance (AMIBA), and others.
Without community stability and basic economic security for families and
individuals, neither liberty nor justice is possible.
#9 We sometimes allow our adversaries to define us and of course they do
their best to make us look silly, stupid, extremist, and out of touch with
the lives of real people.
It will be important for us to define ourselves.
#10 We can make sure to include all three environments in our thinking
about any problem:
** the natural environment (water, air, trees, etc.)
** the built environment (sprawl, asbestos, chemicals-and-health)
** and the all-important social environment (low income, disrespect, social
exclusion, pyramids of status, stress, sexism, racism, the sense that life
is out of control...)
By not considering all three environments, we miss huge opportunities to
build our movement.
#11 A central question facing any movement: Reform or transform?
Do we stick with short-term winnable goals, or do we aim for grand,
transformative change?
One answer is, We can aim to do both at the same time.
We can reframe our local issues so they reveal the nature of the system
that gave rise to them. Skip Spitzer of Root Action calls this systemic
reframing: "Systemic reframing places big picture issues in plain view,
raising public consciousness, identifying connections and suggesting goals
and requirements for long-term change."
As Skip says, We can set goals determined not simply by asking the question
"What do we want our campaign to change?" We can ask the broader question,
"What larger systemic changes do we want to achieve toward which our
campaign will move us?" In this way, near-term, winnable goals can be
developed that are important in their own right and serve as a foundation
for or step to broader change.
#12 As smartMeme reminds us, we can develop story-based strategies for
changing the culture with sympathetic characters that personalize issues,
engage people's values, foreshadow the future and help people see
themselves living and working in a new world.
#13 Our work is based on ethics and can be expressed that way
Our work is fundamentally ethical, and we can express it that way.
1) preventing harm and suffering;
2) seeking justice;
3) protecting the life support system for this and future generations.
We all want to take action to avoid trouble and prevent harm so we
naturally search for the root causes of harm, to know what we are trying to
prevent. This leads us to the structure of harm.
We are all responsible for the consequences of our actions, which means we
think about the consequences of our actions BEFORE we act. We look before
we leap, and after we act we continue to pay attention, alert for signs of
trouble, ready to change direction or reverse course if need be.
We now know that technologies have great potential for good but also great
potential for harm, so we make choices deliberately and carefully to help
our communities avoid trouble down the road.
We seek justice for communities, which means we try to avoid piling new
burdens on communities already living with more than their fair share of
trouble.
We recognize that waste is a glaring sign of inefficiency and design
failure, so we aim to avoid all waste, with zero waste the goal.
So that's my 2 cents, folks. Let's roll up our sleeves are think together
about, "How can we build this movement?"
What are YOUR IDEAS?
'As Patrick Reinsborough of smartMeme wrote in Rachel's News #809 "Even
though people might realize they are on the Titanic and the iceberg is just
ahead, they still need to see the lifeboat in order to jump ship."'
Just as with economics (such as the failure of communism and other rigid command-based economic systems) [EDIT: I should make clear I'm referring to the failure of command-based economies here, not philosophical beliefs], I'm not certain that there's ever been a successful (in the long-term) top-down restructuring of society -- despite the existence of some real visionaries from time to time, and some real monsters as well, human society is so complex, and in some ways so hard-wired, I'm not sure anyone is capable of really understanding it fully enough to implement an effective plan for change, even if they somehow, individually or as a group, had the power to do so. Cultural and societal changes almost always seem to be reactive, not proactive, to come from the bottom-up, and from outside factors we don't fully understand until well after the change, if ever -- whether the invention of the telephone or TV, antibiotics and hygene, cheap oil, industrailization, 2-income families, or the advent of the birth-control pill, certainly nobody really knows beforehand what the long-term effects will be. We make the waves, then we ride them wherever they go.
On the other hand, I do like the lifeboat concept, and it's simple enough and on a practical scale that I understand and can wrap my head around. It also seems to fit the concept of precautionary economics. If the ship sinks, you don't have to go down with it...and if it doesn't, you've still got a sturdy little boat in which you and some like-minded friends can perhaps explore some of the less mainstream cultural destinations that the ship you're on isn't ever going to visit ;> My instincts tell me that this concept encourages the same kind of cultural diversity that corresponds to genetic diversity in species -- when extreme enviromental stress hits, it's typically some of the weirder "experiments" that are best suited to survive and thrive. And it seems pretty likely that we're heading towards a period of high environmental stress, in terms of climate, society, economics, energy, and culture. Certainly the winds of change are blowing, harder each year, and it's only a matter of time before something breaks or shifts, in small ways or large. Maybe, just maybe, instead of getting tossed wherever the wind blows, it's possible to harness some of that wild wind-energy to generate power and build something interesting...
-------
I think this is relevant to dealing with post-Peak, and best of all it
shares the kind of optimism that Robert shows, and a formula for action. It
can be applied to the co-op movement for food security. Rachel's home page
is www.rachel.org named for Rachel Carson.
paul NM <tradingpost@lobo.net>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OWL-OldWaysLiving/
-------------------
Environmental Research Foundation, June 10, 2006
http://www.precaution.org/lib/06/prn_movement.htm
GETTING TO PREVENTION AND PRECAUTION: BUILDING A MOVEMENT
[Rachel's introduction: This is the printed handout that accompanied Peter
Montague's PowerPoint talk, "A Few Ideas about Building a Movement," June
10 at the national conference in precaution in Baltimore. This handout was
accompanied by a list of potential allies that we could join with to
develop a social movement for prevention and precaution.]
By Peter Montague
A. Prevention vs. precaution: definitions
First, let's clear up a definition: precaution and prevention. To me,
prevention and precaution are usually not worth distinguishing, one from
the other. Precaution is preventive action in the face of uncertainty.
Taking action to avoid trouble and prevent harm is the main idea. In the
face of uncertainty, we call it precautionary action.
B. The structure of harm: the systemic problem we face
What we've got on our hands is a system that cannot prevent harm
(Thanks to Skip Spitzer of Root Action for naming and describing "the
structure of harm." Skip's original paper can be found here and in Rachel's
News #817 and #818.)
1. Corporations are pervasive, powerful actors compelled to pursue narrow
self-interest within an economic system that forces economic concentration,
creates socially and environmentally harmful models of production, and
requires perpetual growth (which is impossible to sustain on a finite
planet).
2. Those charged with public policy are compelled by corporate influences
and the primacy of economic growth to safeguard corporate interests.
3. Mass media, public relations, science, education and the dominant
consumption- and wealth-oriented culture reflect and reinforce the
corporate system.
4. Patriarchy, racism and intolerance are sources of harm that feed, and
are fed by, the corporate system.
5. Corporate interests are projected internationally by economic, military,
political and cultural activities and by a trade and investment framework
(e.g., the WTO) that has undermined the ability of governments to control
corporate behavior.
However, all is not lost.
C. Conditions for deep change already exist and are ripening
** The end of cheap oil is here, or soon will be
** Global warming is upon us.
** Water shortages are worsening in the U.S. and globally.
** Rising inequality divides the top 2% from the rest of us..
** The rising cost of medical care and the high cost of medical insurance
weigh on the minds of most people.
** The promise of secure retirement is fading for many aging boomers (which
of course affects their children).
** The social safety net created after the Great Depression is being
shredded bit by bit year after year.
** Families and indeed the nation are deeply in debt.
** Widespread insecurity afflicts large portions of the populace (good jobs
disappearing, debt rising, the children's future uncertain). For many, the
system no longer delivers the goods.
** A serious time crunch has beset many families.
** Some ecological limits have appeared on the horizon (no place left to
throw away toxics; cost of some critical resources rising, etc.).
** On a finite planet, endless growth in material production is impossible,
so the modern economy, which requires perpetual growth, must sooner or
later give way to something else.
** And so on and so on... This list could be readily extended.
The response to these realities is accelerating now, and this conference is
part of it: the gathering of steam for a broad, popular social movement
aimed at preventing problems, not merely "managing" problems.
The structure of harm is not an impregnable monolith. It is held together
by outmoded myths, misinformation, unexamined assumptions, bailing wire and
chewing gum. History tells us that every system can be challenged and
changed. It just takes a social movement determined to make it happen.
D. Building a movement
What is a movement?
A social movement is a joining of campaigns, associations, organizations
and coalitions that share a common vision and overall goals, symbols,
stories, songs, and information, plus a tremendous sense of solidarity.
A movement involves the major segments of society -- workers, women's
groups, students, youth, intellectuals and others recognizing and sharing a
common set of grievances, often the absence of democratic participation in
decisions. A movement gives rise to cooperative and coordinated action.
A successful movement to change the "structure of harm," to allow a
prevention philosophy to flourish, will be multi-issue, international,
diverse and democratically inclusive, aiming for class, race and gender
justice, environmental and economic sustainability, and fundamental change.
"Greening" the structure of harm will not change the structure, though it
may still be worth doing, especially if it can be done in a way that
reveals the structure and serves some larger strategic goal. (See Reform
vs. Transform, item #11, below.)
Barriers and opportunities for building a movement
#1 Divide and rule is all our adversaries have going for them
We outnumber them at least 2 to 1 and often by far more than that. To win,
we have to get together and stay together.
We have not always paid close attention to the ways in which our
adversaries divide us and keep us divided. We could benefit by studying
this reality because "divide and rule" is our adversaries' only CRUCIAL
strategy. If they fail to divide us, the game is over for them.
#2 We apply prevention narrowly to "chemicals and health" problems, often
not reaching out to people working on other issues who are using
prevention, or where prevention could help (see partial list at the end of
this handout)
We could apply precautionary/preventive thinking to the problems our
potential allies are working on (see partial list at the end of this
handout).
Instead of asking people to join US, we can join THEM.
We can make stronger connections and deeper alliances
Deeper alliances require acts of mutual support that may go beyond a
group's specific mission or agenda. Can your group examine and restate its
mission to make deeper solidarity a more explicit goal?
We can hook up with networks that are doing stuff that is
precautionary/preventive but not naming it -- and we can help them name it
We can hook up with groups that are NOT taking a prevention approach and
help them develop such an approach
Any group that has the capacity to do so could designate an ambassador
whose job is to explore alliances with other groups.
#3 TINA -- There is No Alternative
The whole system is set up to convince everyone that There is No
Alternative. (When was the last time for saw a realistic alternative to our
destructive modern lifeways portrayed on TV?) As a result, most people
can't imagine that another world is possible and that many of the troubles
afflicting our communities could be prevented, not merely tolerated and
"managed."
We can help people imagine alternative ways of living and being.
As Patrick Reinsborough of smartMeme wrote in Rachel's News #809 "Even
though people might realize they are on the Titanic and the iceberg is just
ahead, they still need to see the lifeboat in order to jump ship."
We can describe alternatives ways of living in a better world, create a new
story in which people can see themselves working and living in a different
way.
#4 The infrastructure for a precaution/prevention movement could be
strengthened
Prevention is a different way of thinking -- it guides us to search for
root causes, not superficialities.
Building any movement requires an infrastructure -- state-level or
regional-level organizations that can promote communication, offer
technical assistance, and provide a way to discuss organizing, leadership,
training, strategy, tactics, alliances, actions. Because prevention is a
different way of thinking, we especially need such an infrastructure now.
#5 We can develop a common vision and agenda.
Our adversaries know exactly what they want and they are ruthless about
going after it. We should not be ruthless, but we definitely need a vision
and goals. As Yogi Berra once said, "If you don't know where you're going,
you might not get there." A movement needs a vision and goals, so we can
know whether we're getting there.
To be more specific, we lack a foundational economic/political agenda that
systematically addresses the underlying issues of corporate power and lack
of ingenuity, and our hollowed-out democracy. Much of our
prevention/precaution work has focused on government, leaving the principal
actor, the publicly-traded corporation, largely untouched. We can change
this. We don't have to develop this agenda overnight but sooner or later,
to modify the structure of harm, we will need such an agenda to guide our
work.
#6 We've said "No" to stuff for so long that we've got to remember how to
say "Yes."
Precaution and prevention give us all something to be FOR and many
opportunities to say Yes.
#7 Participatory democracy takes practice
We could promote democracy in the workplace (support everyone's right to
form and join a union, and to run unions democratically; we could also
promote worker-owned enterprises and producer coops [as a starting point
for discussion, see David Schweickart, After Capitalism]), in schools
(youth activism), through promoting ownership of enterprises, through
participatory budgeting processes in communities, and through local civic
engagement.
But we can also acknowledge that democracy requires time to participate,
time to think about what is right and what we want. This means our agenda
will include ways to give people more free time in their lives, especially
women. (See Gar Alperovitz, America Beyond Capitalism, for example.)
#8 We have left it to our adversaries to create jobs, which is the main
source of whatever power they hold.
Not all of us need to become expert at local economic development, but we
could make it a priority to form alliances with people that do this
critical work. There are at least two kinds of groups we could make
alliances with:
** those creating early warning systems to learn when firms are in trouble
or their owners are aging, so they can intervene to keep the firms healthy
and stable
** those developing a precautionary economics: To withstand the "gales of
creative destruction" brought on by globalization, communities need
locally-rooted businesses that will stay put. Groups working on such ideas
include the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE), Coop
America, the American Independent Business Alliance (AMIBA), and others.
Without community stability and basic economic security for families and
individuals, neither liberty nor justice is possible.
#9 We sometimes allow our adversaries to define us and of course they do
their best to make us look silly, stupid, extremist, and out of touch with
the lives of real people.
It will be important for us to define ourselves.
#10 We can make sure to include all three environments in our thinking
about any problem:
** the natural environment (water, air, trees, etc.)
** the built environment (sprawl, asbestos, chemicals-and-health)
** and the all-important social environment (low income, disrespect, social
exclusion, pyramids of status, stress, sexism, racism, the sense that life
is out of control...)
By not considering all three environments, we miss huge opportunities to
build our movement.
#11 A central question facing any movement: Reform or transform?
Do we stick with short-term winnable goals, or do we aim for grand,
transformative change?
One answer is, We can aim to do both at the same time.
We can reframe our local issues so they reveal the nature of the system
that gave rise to them. Skip Spitzer of Root Action calls this systemic
reframing: "Systemic reframing places big picture issues in plain view,
raising public consciousness, identifying connections and suggesting goals
and requirements for long-term change."
As Skip says, We can set goals determined not simply by asking the question
"What do we want our campaign to change?" We can ask the broader question,
"What larger systemic changes do we want to achieve toward which our
campaign will move us?" In this way, near-term, winnable goals can be
developed that are important in their own right and serve as a foundation
for or step to broader change.
#12 As smartMeme reminds us, we can develop story-based strategies for
changing the culture with sympathetic characters that personalize issues,
engage people's values, foreshadow the future and help people see
themselves living and working in a new world.
#13 Our work is based on ethics and can be expressed that way
Our work is fundamentally ethical, and we can express it that way.
1) preventing harm and suffering;
2) seeking justice;
3) protecting the life support system for this and future generations.
We all want to take action to avoid trouble and prevent harm so we
naturally search for the root causes of harm, to know what we are trying to
prevent. This leads us to the structure of harm.
We are all responsible for the consequences of our actions, which means we
think about the consequences of our actions BEFORE we act. We look before
we leap, and after we act we continue to pay attention, alert for signs of
trouble, ready to change direction or reverse course if need be.
We now know that technologies have great potential for good but also great
potential for harm, so we make choices deliberately and carefully to help
our communities avoid trouble down the road.
We seek justice for communities, which means we try to avoid piling new
burdens on communities already living with more than their fair share of
trouble.
We recognize that waste is a glaring sign of inefficiency and design
failure, so we aim to avoid all waste, with zero waste the goal.
So that's my 2 cents, folks. Let's roll up our sleeves are think together
about, "How can we build this movement?"
What are YOUR IDEAS?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-06-23 06:20 pm (UTC)A few sources you might be interested in:
http://www.constitution411.org/ (focused on taking down corporations)
http://www.midwestacademy.com/ (old school, Saul Alinsky stuff)
In my own organization we are focused on a)building grassroots citizen power, through effectively executing local grassroots organizing campaigns around local and national conservation issues, b)building one-on-one relationships around local and national environmental issues, c)promote visionary solutions to environmental problems, d)hold local and national government leaders and corporations accountable for their environmental decisions and actions.
It's the same stuff. It's about relationships, it's about going deep. It's about engagement, where you are. It's about opening up. It's about visiting with each other and talking. It's about dreaming our own future and building the power to create it.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-26 12:55 am (UTC)I think you've just encapsulated the secret to life right there... ;>
And it's true, everything old is new again. Sometime if you have a chance, a chat with Katrina Messenger about what it was like to be a civil rights activist, Marxist, NOW chapter President in the D.C. area, etc, during the 1970s, is likely to be fascinating to you. *So* much of what we do is standing on the shoulders of those who went before...
...but it all still needs to be done, more than ever. We need to organize in ways that inspire people to get involved and engaged, and stay involved and engaged.
One of the people I learned from, when we were both active in a subversive and troublemaking organization a fair number of years ago, gave me one of the best definitions of leadership I ever heard. He said that in a "pedal democracy" (any organization where you are involved voluntarily), you vote with your feet. Leaders in such organizations have no way to push people to do anything. All you can do is find something that fires you up, fills you with passion, then go up on a nearby hill, jump up and down, and say, "hey! There's some really great stuff we can do over here!" If you make your case strongly enough, some people will come and join you. If you deliver on your promise, to make a space where people can do cool stuff and feel like they're making a difference, some of those people will stay and help. If nobody comes up and joins you on the hill, you need to go do your own thing, soemthing that makes you happy, and go find another hill -- without bitterness, without getting angry at others for not following your lead. It's not their "fault" for not seeing the "truth," it's your fault for not having a compelling enough vision, not making your dream something others really wanted to buy into. St Augustine had his "City on the hill," the City of God, and that's kinda how I see this.
Thanks for the links, and for sharing your experience.