"Wade's Journal: 10/29-12/30/07"
CONTENTS:
Oct. 29, 2007
Nov. 5, 2007
Nov. 25, 2007
11/30/07
"Engaging Elected Officials" and Reader's Comments
My Problem with Carlos
12/26/07
Policy on Quotations
WJ: Growing Home-Based Communities - 12/30 Draft
Wade's Journal - Oct. 29, 2007
Living in San Francisco for fourteen weeks confirmed my worst fear: egoism spreads like a plague. People talk and talk, but they rarely talk from the heart -- because they don’t really listen from the heart. Something is missing. We need to learn how to be more real, honest, caring, spontaneous, present, attentive, and responsive.
When people talk from the heart, they’re in touch with their compassion (for themselves and others). And when they’re in touch with their compassion, they don’t talk only about themselves. They’re interested in others and want to understand them.
They ask questions like “How do you feel about that?” And they ask follow-up questions to understand more deeply. But most often these days, people run around indifferent to the people in front of them.
Most informal conversations involve people telling stories, gossiping, or engaging in intellectualism (talking abstractly). Many of these so-called “conversations” are a series of competitive monologues that involve little or no mutual exchange, which is necessary for a real conversation.
Most other conversations are work-related, whether about paid or unpaid activities, so they are future-oriented and narrowly focused.
Workaholism and intellectualism are interwoven with egoism. This obsession with goal-oriented activities induces lifelessness. I, for example, have become relatively distant and unexpressive (at least until I trust that the other is truly interested in me). We inflate the importance of our projects and become obsessed with them.
Faced with urgent threats, activists fall into habitual analytical thinking, desperately trying to make an instant difference -- not realizing that in so doing they undermine their efforts, for they fail to nurture compassionate communities that can sustain activists over the long haul.
“The Invasion of the Body Snatchers” is all too real. In “Radio Nowhere,” Bruce Springsteen yells, “Is there anybody alive out there?” And in “Shiny Apple,” The Waifs sing, “It makes me feel helpless to stand and watch while you rot away.”
The reasons are many. Lifelessness provides a way to cope with a dehumanized world. People shut down for good reason. I try to understand why.
I think the basic reason is fear. But fear of what?
Certainly economic insecurity is one factor. In order to make it financially, people become robots, careful not to offend others, especially people with power. And they work long hours to hedge against the future and find a niche in this hyper-specialized world. Competition is pervasive. Early on, we learn to feel that we always have to prove ourselves to someone. These pressures smother self-esteem and the ability to slow down, relax, be present, and enjoy life.
Economic insecurity and hyper-competition produce widespread intellectualism, as people are obsessed with being productive. They become reduced to instruments, stuck in their heads, unable to stop thinking (except when they sleep). This dynamic produces a fear of feelings, including the fear of being held accountable (by their own conscience and by others) for inactivity and mistakes. People become afraid of really getting in touch with their feelings and expressing them, not realizing that the consequences of repressing feelings are usually worse than what they feared.
During my fourteen weeks in San Francisco, on numerous occasions, I interacted with old friends for 2-3 hours, often around dinner, without them ever asking me one question about how I felt about the release of my latest book and the reaction to it, even though they were well aware of the book and knew that I had put my heart and soul into it for quite a while. One friend whom I saw quite a bit actually asked a third person how I was feeling about the reaction to the book but never asked me.
I used to be disappointed and hurt by this kind of indifference. Now I mostly just notice it with amazement and curiosity -- and try to be attentive and responsive in a helpful manner to others as they talk about themselves and their own interests, while remaining available for a more soulful connection which would include some attention to my concerns. And on occasion, I’ll try to assertively shift conversations into a more heartfelt focus (with some success that has largely been temporary). In general, however, I don’t talk about myself unless the other (or others) indicates real interest, and that doesn’t happen often.
Sometimes I think the problem is me and/or my circle of friends. Maybe we are all fucked-up products of dysfunctional families who end up interacting with each other because the healthy people stick to themselves. Or perhaps others believe that I’m living in a fantasy world and don’t want to reinforce my fantasies, but don’t want to tell me directly, so they just avoid the subject of me and my concerns. Or maybe they feel that I’m being judgmental about them and resent it, so they shut me out.
Basically, however, I believe that this indifference is a characteristic of modernization. George Simmel described it vividly in 1900 in Germany. Since then, the process has accelerated and the rate of acceleration seems to be increasing.
I’ve received enough reputable positive feedback on my book to reassure me that it is solid and important. My observations are not irrational. A number of my taxi passengers have volunteered similar complaints about people not really listening. And scientific studies report that the number of people with whom people discuss personal problems is on a downward trend.
The advent of email and text messaging seems to have contributed to this breakdown in heart-to-heart communication. People get used to spending relatively large amounts of time expressing themselves by writing emails and text messages, and then read communications from others rapidly and often carelessly. This pattern carries over into the real world. And cell phones are constantly interrupting conversations, leading to short, superficial bursts of communication.
The September 15 Strategy Workshop, at which I sought feedback on my book only reinforced my pessimism about modern styles of communication. We quickly fell into classical left-wing intellectual dissection of fine ideological points, arguing about who is more radical or politically correct than whom.
With my book and other communications, I’ve been proposing a particular approach and asking if that approach should be one element in an overall progressive strategy. The response of many, including most of the people at the Sept. 15 workshop, has been, “No. I’m not interested in that,” -- rather than, “Yes. That could be one component in our overall strategy. I’m not interested myself, but I think many people would be and implementing those proposals could help move us in the right direction, so I would endorse, support, and spread the word about that approach, although I wouldn’t give it much time and energy myself.” It’s like someone proposing that we reach out to young people by throwing a party with rap music and others respond by saying, “I don’t like rap.”
Most of my life, I’ve wrestled with the tension between “liberals” and “radicals.” I remember in 1970 taking LSD with a Methodist minister from Kansas City, going to a Grateful Dead concert, and discussing whether to work “inside” or “outside” the System. He advocated forming alliances between both groups, with those inside pushing institutions to live up to their stated ideals. What he said made sense to me, but I never really sorted out that conflict in my own life until recently, and tried to articulate the resolution in my book. However, I don’t seem to have persuaded many of my friends who fancy themselves more “radical” (I suspect they don’t appreciate the radical potential of my perspective).
I very much appreciate the time and effort that participants in the workshop devoted to reading my book (or some of it) and I appreciate the kind words they expressed. But I find their overall lack of support to be another example of self-centeredness. My way or no way. Somehow, it seems to me, we need to learn how to be more supportive to one another, while acknowledging and accepting differences.
Fortunately, a number of people have provided me with strong support for the direction I’m headed, which has heartened me considerably.
Most recently an old friend, who’s very smart and tends to be cynical though he has a big heart, told me:
I've read parts of your new book, and today I appreciated reading this[email] message [the book excerpt “Beyond Ideology”] -- I'm forwarding it to my kids (I'll quiz them later). I'm not sure that you have everything nailed down (but, you know, Einstein never could find the grand design of the unified field theory, and the Pope keeps showing that his feet are completely of clay), but you are wrestling with very important issues. I respect and admire you for your courage, intelligence, and your ability to pull together so many strands into a thoughtful, articulate consideration of the challenges we all face (in our present)…. Anyway, you hearten me.
After reading that, I cried, partly because I didn’t expect it from him because of his cynical tendencies and partly because of his reference to my “courage,” for I feel that I really went out on the limb with this book in several ways.
Bernard Weiner, Ph.D., co-editor of The Crisis Papers, commented:
Those of us bloggers engaged in daily analysis tend to be locked into the daily grind, political and military atrocities, partisan strategies. We hardly find time to delve into longer-range perspective and developments. "Global Transformation" displays evidence that Wade Hudson is a rare deep-delver, exploring long-term solutions for how to transform ourselves and our society and our planet. He's helping create the intellectual framework for how to think about these vital matters, with idealism and hope.
Van Jones, President & Founder of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, the most prominent individual who has made a substantial comment on my book, said:
thank you for sending me a copy of the book. upon a quick scan, it looks great. a lot of things i have been thinking about, but never wrote down. i am with you 100 percent. can't come in september, but i am so glad that you are stepping forward and leading us into a more sane and loving space in this work. what a huge gift to our movement!
Taj James, the Executive Director of the Movement Strategy Center, a solid, thriving outfit, commented:
Thank you so much for taking the time for putting your experiences and thoughts down in writing! We would love to help distribute the book over here. I am sure that as many (complimentary copies) as you feel like you can spare - we can move. I would have loved to come to the event on Sept 15th but that is the week that my wife is due so I cannot make it. I hope we can find time to talk soon!
My best critic, Leonard Frank, described the book as “fantastic,” which was reassuring.
Claudia Horwitz, head of Stone House and stone circles, bolstered my confidence early on when she said:
What an awesome accomplishment. I have skimmed it on line; i will need to actually read it more completely in a hard copy. It is truly amazing, Wade, and I'm looking very forward to (1) reading it myself; (2) recommending it to folks; and (3) thinking with you about some kind of event at The Stone House around this. The cover is amazing, too, by the way.... Much peace and congratulations and thank you for doing this very substantial and important piece of work for all of us.
And I really appreciate the invitation that was extended to me by several old friends who were unable to come to my book-release/birthday party, most of whom are people of color, to participate in a house meeting to discuss my book. We had a good discussion and then during dinner, one of them suggested that we experiment with a “holistic support group” of the sort I propose in the book. With some interruptions during dinner, we did, and I felt that it worked well, as each of us simply reported on what we had done (or not done) recently in terms of self-improvement, social service, and political action.
This experiment reinforced my suspicion that this format could be viable for a close-knit group of friends who would share a commitment to steady, comprehensive transformation. A report from another friend who has participated in a men’s group for many years also supports this conviction. He says that when they get together monthly for their gatherings, which are deeply meaningful to them, most of them often simply want to “check in” – that is, report on recent events in their lives.
I have no illusions about the prospects for growing a network of holistic, home-based communities. I recognize that I’m swimming upstream against the tide of modernization. Relatively few people share my interest in this project.
In particular, most political activists aren’t interested in self-improvement. It seems that they don’t want to change -- either because they’ve given up or because they believe they already have it together. Half-way through the Sept. 15 Strategy Workshop, for example, I pointed out that only one person had said anything about self-improvement, which is a central thrust of the book, and still hardly anyone had anything to say on the subject the rest of the workshop.
Most people who are committed to ongoing self-improvement aren’t interested in regular political action.
And most of those who are interested in both compartmentalize their lives and work on self-improvement with certain people and work on political action with other people.
I remain convinced, however, that my proposal could help nurture deep community, which could boost our effectiveness, in terms of both self-improvement and political action (as well as social and cultural change). Many of us want to share more of the same experiences with the same people, even if it takes only several hours a month of structured activities and several hours a month of unstructured activities. Doing so could result in lives that are more joyful, relationships that are less impersonal, and organizations that are more effective.
So I’ve tried to summarize my proposal in an essay, Growing Holistic Communities, and with inspiration from Bernie Weiner, I’m planning to condense my book into a short manual geared toward the general public, tentatively titled “50 Ways to Transform Yourself and the World.” If progressive activists aren’t interested in what I’m saying, maybe the general public will be, if I can get it into their hands.
The response to my presentation at the “Writing for Change” conference was very positive. But only one person bought the book (a lawyer working on a global human-rights project with Boalt Law School who gave me enthusiastic feedback the next day). Their response leads me to believe that a shorter, more accessible book might attract more readers from among the general public.
But I continue to refrain from trying to organize anything myself. It seems hardly any of my old friends and associates really “gets” what I’m saying, or even has much interest in it. When I discuss key issues with people, it’s like we’re talking past each other. The more I change, the more it seems most everyone else stays the same.
Modernization and egoism also afflict Mexico, at least with the English-speaking people with whom I interact. I notice the same patterns here that I do in the States.
Finally facing and accepting my relative isolation, I’m liberated from trying to help make anything happen. I’ll try to respond affirmatively to invitations from others. But mostly, now that I’ve bought a small piece of land here in Mexico, I’ll probably focus on research and writing, taking care of myself, trying some to find more people who share my interests, and thinking long and hard about how I might connect with people more deeply face-to-face and be more persuasive in what I write
So I’m going to hole up in the woods, become a semi-hermit, and see how well I manage being more alone than I ever before. I would prefer to participate in a deep community, but it’s not happening.
So I will try to accept reality and compose some material that might be useful some time in the unforeseen future (perhaps long after I’m dead) when people wake up from their egocentric addictions -- whether hung-up-in-the-head intellectualism/workaholism or self-indulgent hedonism.
If I learn to love my woods, I may not even go into Cuernavaca for my weekly cinema fix.
++++++++++
This email is the first entry in a new series titled “Wade’s Journal” that I plan to post at: http://progressiveresourcecatalog.org/index.php/Personal/WadesJournal If you want, you can visit that page at your leisure.
However, if you want to receive these entries via email, merely reply to this message -- by saying, “Yes,” “Thanks,” or anything else that you wish – and I’ll keep you on the list of subscribers.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I know my friends care about me, and I appreciate their friendship and support. Since I'm still learning how to be more constructive in my criticism, I largely left that point out in last week's Journal entry, for which I apologize. I just hope I did not offend too many people, for I'm as critical of myself as I am of others.
Nevertheless, though I may have been too harsh, a considerable number of people responded to that email with affection, sympathy, and understanding. One response was particularly illuminating. It reads:
More recently, I've been trying to do this as a practice -- to listen, to take a genuine interest in others. I find that if I cultivate it as a practice, I'm happier & less lonely. I think that I've often assumed that my "job" in conversation with people was to either impress them or entertain them (then they would like me), which is hard work, and a hopeless exercise most of the time. This way is easier and more enjoyable.
That comment reminded me of my experience cab driving. Often, when I get tired, bored, and silent, if I start asking my passengers questions, trying to learn from them whatever I can about any special knowledge they may have or their opinions on one thing or another or just trying to get a glimpse of who they are, I find that my energy level picks up and my mood improves.
Other comments included:
- Don't know why it's so hard - this being human thing. Or why so many people seem to avoid it. You are an inspiration to many, many people.
- ...everyone's making their way through their complex lives as best they can....
- thanks for sharing this thoughtful, soulful essay.
- I couldn't agree more about the narcissism of Americans.
- I see your point about people being distant from heartfelt communication, from intimacy.
- I don't think many people want to transform themselves. Certainly a lot of activists seem to think that they have the answer and it is up to the listener to change.
- Nice to hear from you and that you are still pondering over the same themes. Life is much simpler when your mind isn't so full...but I guess when it's so full you can't let go, and you like it that way.
I've also been reflecting on some criticism of me that others have voiced. One person said:
Sometimes I think that you distance yourself from people in ways that makes honest communication difficult. Along that line, I think you are being passive, i.e., waiting and counting how people have not asked you about you while listening to them talk about themselves. Tell them, they want to know and they care about you. A LOT!!! Even if they do talk about themselves.
I find that comment thought-provoking. It seems to relate to another response, which was, "How does one express interest in one who doesn't initiate a shared comfort in expressing themselves?" This correspondent suggested that if I said a little something about my feelings, it would stimulate interest in my feelings.
I'll have to think more about these comments. It may be that sometimes people hold back because they're afraid that I don't want to discuss a subject. Maybe they think I'd rather not discuss it. Or maybe they feel awkward. Or maybe their ability to be present is limited (at least momentarily). In these cases, I could help by talking about my feelings freely.
On the other hand, it seems to me that in this overwhelming, over-stimulated, increasingly fast, multi-tasking world, people simply aren't that interested in others, myself included, often for good reason. And if others aren't interested in me and my thoughts and feelings, I'm inclined to just manage on my own and/or find others who are interested when I need support.
Why should I impose my feelings on people if they aren't really interested?
A few months ago, I went to hear Jacob Needleman talk about his new book, Why Can't We Be Good? I have a number of differences with Needleman, but I also believe he holds many valuable insights. During the time for discussion, I asked him a question about how his thoughts apply to politics. His reply included an expression of desire to see "a grassroots movement to promote listening." It seems that he too feels that the growing trend toward not really listening to one another is a fundamental issue. Some people are addressing the issue with workshops of one sort or another, like with "nonviolent communication" and "active listening." I think those efforts are helpful. We can get training to recover our ability to be good listeners.
But I'm more interested in simple, easy-to-learn techniques and attitudes, like the correspondent above who is doing "this as a practice -- to listen, to take a genuine interest in others." I don't think it's all that complicated, once one gets in touch with their compassionate curiosity.
Regardless, after getting all that off my chest with last week's journal entry, I've been feeling better, and the responses have helped as well. But I'll stop harping on the subject, however much I believe that we need to learn how to be better listeners if we're to grow the kind of communities that will be needed to sustain us and help us become better persons in the hard times ahead (they're already here).
I'm reading an excellent book, Political Ecosystems, by a Bioneers staff person. So far, it's the closest I seen to what I try to say in my book.
I've been talking and thinking about the nature of gossip and what kinds of gossip are harmful. I've also been thinking about scapegoating and how it's a strong drive in so many aspects of our lives, and about Americans desire for instant success and our fear of being held accountable (points made to me by a friend in San Francisco).
I really appreciated Paul Hawken's comments on ideology that I encountered recently:
Ideologies are beliefs that frame economic and political activities, and this [global progressive environmental] movement is collectively about ideas. ... I distinguish between an idea driven movement and an ideologically driven movement. Right wing fundamentalism, whether it be religious, economic, or political is ideological. When you try to impose your view of the world on others, it is no longer an idea but an ideology. All ideologies, right, left or center, dictate and constrain where as ideas expand possibility and liberate.
http://npogroups.org/lists/arc/wadeswire/2007-10/msg00037.html
I look forward to reading his new Blessed Unrest.
I was encouraged by the long article, The Evangelical Crackup, though the threat from radical-right Christians is certainly far from over. http://npogroups.org/lists/arc/wadeswire/2007-10/msg00035.html
I will be nauseated if Hillary gets the nomination. Hopefully voters in Iowa will become more aware other weaknesses, and the fact that she would hurt Democratic candidates nationwide by motivating her enemies to vote (a lot of them would stay home otherwise). Today's CNN poll shows a seven-point drop in her lead.
I've also been thinking about what I mean by "personal transformation." I certainly don't believe that it necessarily means a dramatic, total conversion. It's more often a subtle shift in perspective that leaves one feeling like a new person. As Bob said, "He not busy being born is busy dying."
The LA Times has a long, accurate article about the town where I live: A bit of the divine in Tepoztlan, Mexico.
http://travel.latimes.com/articles/la-tr-tepoz4nov04
I'm developing plans for the house I plan to build. It will have one large, circular room about 18 feet in diameter attached to a bathroom with a bathtub. In the future, I can add up to three more rooms that would also be attached to the same bathroom, like a honeycomb.
I hope to move to a cabana near my land Thursday and then go to the Pacific coast for two weeks (without my laptop!), during which time I may not send these journal entries. Thereafter, they will be no more than once a week, on average, and about the same length as this one.
If you received this email, I've not yet added you to my permanent Wade's Journal list. If you reply to this email with "yes," "thanks," or any other comment, I'll subscribe you.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wade's Journal - Nov. 25, 2007
Scapegoating permeates modern society. Individuals, families, communities, workplaces, organizations, and nations hold themselves together by pointing the finger. They treat scapegoats as enemies to be attacked or victims to be rescued. In this triangle, different people play the role of aggressor, victim, and rescuer. Sometimes the same person plays different roles at different times. On occasion, roles switch permanently. If a key player dies or moves away, the social system involved typically finds someone else to play the open role.
This process reinforces existing power dynamics, evades personal responsibility, and distracts people from working on significant changes in their relationships. Through it all, the game remains the same. We need to change the game.
In politics, common scapegoats are called the elite, the governing elite, the ruling class, rich people, special interests, capitalists, the American Empire, free market fundamentalists, conservatives, neo-conservatives, radical rightwingers, Republicans, Republicrats, Wall Street, the military-industrial complex, politicians, corporations, and other such targets.
This scapegoating confuses the nature of the problem we face. Our problem is a global social system that involves all of our institutions (not just the economy and the government), our culture, and ourselves working together toward the same purpose -- namely, to enable those who are already most wealthy and powerful (including the U.S. middle class) to maintain and increase their wealth and power regardless of consequences.
These various elements of the dominant social system, like other systems, are mutually interdependent, complementary, and reinforce one another. Each plays an important role and no one element dominates the other -- as the brain does not dominate our bodily system and the sun does not dominate the Earth's ecosystem. The governing elite whose hands are on the levers of social power at any particular time are not in control. If the overwhelming majority of people did not actively collaborate, the elite's apparent power would evaporate.
Blaming scapegoats discounts the responsibility of others and perpetuates the illusion that merely replacing, reforming, or controlling the scapegoat will offer a solution, when in fact these measures will leave the existing social system in place. Systemic reform, on the other hand, must involve complementary changes in every institution, our culture, and ourselves. Broad-scale self-improvement, including getting over our tendency to scapegoat, is essential -- however satisfying it may be to vent our frustrations by directing anger at one element in the system.
By railing against corporations, for example, economic populists emphasize helping the middle class to get a larger share of the pie. These appeals typically throw a bone to some poor people as well, but the emphasis is usually on the ¨middle class.¨ In this way, economic populists reinforce the system, which relies on the selfish pursuit of personal gain. Trade unions in the United States are a perfect example of the consequences of this approach. Their decision to concentrate on getting higher wages and benefits for their own members to the neglect of other working people contributed greatly to the fragmentation we see today.
A more positive approach based on the universal interests of all people would set a much different tone. We could address the wealthy primarily with compassionate sympathy, appeals to their enlightened self-interest, and illustrating the advantages of a less short-sighted, greedy attitude -- all the while we calmly, steadily pursue measures such as progressive taxation.
Secondly, economic populism inflames anger. I accept that anger has a role to play. If handled properly, it can help energize people. But a balance is needed. Experiencing or observing injustice prompts suffering, but suffering need not necessarily lead to anger. Our emphasis needs to be rooted in compassion for the Earth community, not on negative attacks. As violence breeds violence, anger breeds anger. Given the large number of people who to some degree identify with and support the wealthy and want to strike it rich themselves some day, direct heated attacks on the rich will provoke counter-reactions, deep divisions, and attempts to fight back.
Thirdly, economic populism emphasizes materialism, which reinforces the dominant social system.
Fourthly, economic populism is ideological. It attempts to fit everything into its pre-determined ideology and talks only in those terms, rather than really listening to other viewpoints and being flexible and pragmatic.
To my mind, rather than aggravating divisions unnecessarily, we can emphasize universal values, affirm a vision that would benefit all people, and prioritize policies that serve the Earth Community.
I embraced economic populism for more than 40 years. It now seems to me, however, that a new approach is needed -- one that declines to scapegoat but rather affirms holistic, systemic transformation.
+++++
NOTE: You are not yet on my "Wade's Journal" list. If you want me to add you to that list, please let me know. I'll probably send you only one more of these sample entries.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: Please let me know if you want to continue receiving Wade's Journal. This email is the last of four samples. As illustrated by this series, the content may vary widely in terms of content. I expect the frequency will be about once a week. Unless I'm mistaken, you have not yet indicated that you want to remain on this list.
+++++
Two wonderful, silent weeks on Mexico's Pacific coast led me to conclude that I've been taking life too seriously. I need to lighten up and remember that whatever happens will be tiny from the perspective of the universe. Regardless of the amount of suffering in the world, the beauty of the universe heals.
Even as a child, I did not PLAY baseball. I was dead serious, always focused on becoming first-string shortstop for the New York Yankees. While watching television with my family, I constantly told them to stop talking. In high school, I became obsessed with reading and playing chess. My life has been too damn serious.
My strategy for overcoming my seriousness is to catch myself when I start having grand dreams, remind myself that not knowing what will happen can be fun, remember how humble my place is, tell myself "There you go again," and laugh.
Talking about Leonard Cohen, Bono said, "There aren't maybe people who can go up to the edge of the Abyss, look in, and laugh." In Democracy Matters, Cornel West speaks about the value of a tragi-comic awareness, which has been well expressed in African-American blues, as well as many other places.
As Claudia Horwitz summarized the primary message of the Bhagavad Vita in her excellent book, The Spiritual Activist, which I read during my recent retreat: "...become unattached to the fruits of your own labor." The ability to experience fully while retaining a certain degree of detachment is a tricky balance, but it is possible..
The Lifelong Activist by Hillary Rettig -- a manual for self-actualization, community building, and political activism -- helped crystallize this awareness for me (Many thanks to Eva Paterson for recommending it!). To help me in my effort to be less serious and for your information, I take note of the following quotes from Rettig's book:
"Strive to step freely and lightly around your activism, to plunge into it and back out of it at will, and enjoy taking risks around it, knowing that some of those risks will inevitably lead to failure. Yes, there will be stress--an activist career is perhaps the most stressful around--but it is essential that you not only learn to handle that stress gracefully, but recognize that, at any given moment, you are making a choice as to how stressed you feel."
That comment how we make decisions about our level of stress prompted me to reflect on how feeling sorry for myself is a way for me to inflate my importance. "Poor me, if only people realized how great I am." Inflating the importance of one's work also inflate one's ego, which increases stress. "Step freely and lightly." Yes, indeed, or as Thomas Merton and Bob Dylan said, be freewheeling.
Rettig: "[Todd] Gitlin again: "'f you're giddy with expectations..., your giddiness will work on you like a drug....'"
Gitlin goes on to say that this "rapture" can lead activists to mistake their "dizzy desires" for real prospects. I take from this that whenever I find myself getting "giddy" with "dizzy desires," I need to remind myself to minimize my expectations. The point that is new here for me is not that having high expectations is dangerous because they can lead to disappointment. Rather, the new insight is that being excited about future prospects also diverts attention away from the present moment, which reduces awareness of reality. Once again, "No expectations" and "be here now" ring true, however hard they are to honor.
Rettig: "...the cure for hypersensitivity is to replace dysfunctional thoughts and behaviors with functional (objective) ones..., (which) is always a variation on I'm going to calm down and do what I'm supposed to be doing.'"
That resonates with the Bhagavad Vita: just do your duty.
Rettig: " ...our being miserable isn't helping those suffering beings at all--not one bit. But our being happy, free, and joyful will help us to become better activists, so that we can help them more. All this is not to say that we should repress or ignore our sadness and other "dark" emotions; they are often appropriate responses to what we see and experience, and we shouldn't be repressing anyway. But it is important not to let those feelings overwhelm us, and one way to do that ... is to work consciously and conscientiously to locate, and grow, our more positive feelings....
Locate your joy, and nurture it. Practice feeling joyful even in situations where you might not ordinarily experience that emotion, so that you can increase your capacity for experiencing it. This will not only help you cope with the inevitable disappointments and discomforts of the activist life, but provide you with one of your most persuasive tools. People are naturally attracted to, inspired by, and driven to emulate joyful people--and are naturally repelled by those who are morose, bitter, sad or otherwise afflicted."
So, not only does happiness and the appreciation of Beauty correspond to Truth, it is pragmatic as well, for it furthers Justice.
The last part of Rettig's book deals with how to relate to those whom one is trying to mobilize to take action. She emphasizes finding out what their perceived needs are and presenting them with proposals that help them meet those needs. With this approach, she relies extensively on commercial marketing and sales techniques, including market research.
This approach differs from simply trying to persuade others to do what you want them to do, which is the traditional activist approach. Rather, like John Carver's board-management theory which recommends that the chair concentrate on helping the board decide what it wants to do, Rettig relies on helping people figure out how to do what they want to do more effectively. This approach harmonizes with the majoritarian strategy I proposed in Global Transformation.
I want to connect with the mainstream--so we can act together more effectively. I'm tired of trying to be the radical vanguard that will lead the masses into the Promised Land. Others can still play that role. Our differences are complementary.
The Lifelong Activist may inspire me to re-engage with activism with certain new twists along these lines. Maybe I can use my next few months in Mexico to prepare for some efforts when I return to Frisco. I may give it a shot anyway and see how it goes.
++++
By the way, the Hotel Villa Nirvana in Pie de la Cuesta 45 minutes north of the Acapulco airport is a great place for a large family gathering or a retreat for an organization. I suspect that a group of 20 people could secure the whole place for $30-40 per person per night. It's right on the beach with beautiful grounds and a swimming pool. The beach is seldom crowded. Breakfast is available at the hotel and good, affordable food is available at nearby restaurants. Boat rides through a nearby lagoon and bird sanctuary make for a day trip. Some good museums in Acapulco make for another day trip. Their website is at: http://www.lavillanirvana.com/ Some more photos are at: http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotos-g150787-d301466-Hotel_Villa_Nirvana-Acapulco_Pacific_Coast.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
WJ: "Engaging Elected Officials" and Reader's Comments
The following is the latest draft of an article I’m working on that could help promote a Community Dialogues Project (Trial Period). As always, I welcome feedback (I may quote comments anonymously unless explicit approval to identify the author is granted).
+++++
Engaging Elected Officials – 12/10/07 Draft By ?
Do you at times want to tell some politician what you think, face-to-face? Or ask a question? Would you like to have a fair chance on a regular basis to communicate personally with one or more of your elected representatives?
Do you believe that your representatives should report monthly, in the flesh, on what they’re doing? Might you want to hear what your neighbors think and observe how your one of your representatives responds?
Following gatherings of this sort, might you want to talk informally with your neighbors? Might you want to browse literature tables where community-based organizations present information about their activities?
Do you belong to an organization that would want to distribute literature at these events? Might your organization on occasion mobilize its members to make their case on a pressing issue?
Do you believe that all people are entitled to these opportunities?
If your answer to one or more of these questions is yes, you might want to support the Community Dialogues Project (Trial Period), which aims to persuade elected officials to convene monthly two-hour Community Dialogues.
As envisioned, these events will be fair and orderly. Each elected official’s staff secures the facility and necessary equipment, selects the moderator, handles all logistics, and sends out news releases, community-events bulletins, and other publicity. In addition, community-based organizations publicize these Community Dialogues.
To make it easier for people to participate, each Dialogue takes place at the same time each month, such as 12 Noon on the second Saturday. In larger districts, the location may be rotated to facilitate broader participation.
If the elected official is unable to participate in a particular Dialogue, he or she selects a top-level representative to take his or her place. Usually, however, the elected official participates.
As people arrive, those who want to speak or ask a question present evidence that they live or work in the district represented by the elected official convening the event and place a card with their name on it in a box.
When everyone is registered, the moderator welcomes everyone, explains the agenda, and introduces the elected official (or his or her representative), who gives a ten-minute report on his or her recent activities. Following this report, the moderator selects speakers from the audience by drawing cards randomly.
Speaking in the order selected, speakers have three minutes to make a statement and/or ask the elected representative a question. If they ask a question, they can interrupt the representative at any time to ask another question or make a statement. Regardless, each speaker has only three minutes, including time for responses from the representative.
One hundred ten minutes after beginning, the moderator asks the representative to respond to what he or she has heard by making a ten-minute closing statement, after which the formal Dialogue adjourns.
Participants then have at least 30 minutes to visit with one another and browse literature tables that have been set up by community organizations. Space for tables is allocated randomly by the elected representative’s office one week prior to the Dialogue.
With this approach, these Dialogues restructure our government to make it more democratic, increase community involvement and awareness, enable concerned community members to meet and network, hold officials accountable to the desires of the people they represent, and provide community groups with an organizing tool to help communicate their concerns to one or more of their representatives without having to spend lots of time and energy trying to schedule a private meeting.
By having an open agenda, audience members are free to address whatever concerns them. By having a clear structure, elected representatives don’t dominate the event. By providing community members with the opportunity to speak, representatives have the opportunity to listen and learn. By selecting speakers randomly, representatives don’t unduly influence the event by selecting the speakers themselves. By having a moderator, elected representatives are better able to listen. By allowing time for informal interaction, community members can network on neutral turf and develop new relationships.
Throughout 2008, the Community Dialogues Project (Trial Period), sponsored by [name], will persuade elected officials in the Bay Area to experiment with this approach. Participants will be invited to send evaluations of their experience to the Project, which will post these evaluations on the Web. Toward the end of 2008, the Project will digest these evaluations and develop recommendations for changes in how the Community Dialogues are conducted, if needed. If the results from these experiments are positive, the Project will then expand its outreach and encourage all elected representatives throughout the United States to conduct Community Dialogues.
Individuals and organizations can endorse the Community Dialogues Project (Trial Period) and find more information by visiting: http:// (to be added later)
+++
Following is a draft of the resolution that individuals and organizations could be asked to endorse:
Resolution in Support of the Community Dialogues Project (Trial Period)
Whereas:
Elected representatives should report regularly face-to-face to their
community and listen to community members’ concerns.
Community members deserve a fair chance to tell their representatives
what they think, ask questions, and get answers.
By having an open agenda and a clear structure, community members will
be free to address whatever concerns them.
By selecting speakers randomly, all community members will have a fair
chance to speak.
By providing community members with the opportunity to speak,
representatives will have the opportunity to listen and learn.
By allowing time for informal interaction, community members will be
able to develop new relationships and network with colleagues on neutral
turf.
By having a moderator, elected representatives will be better able to
listen.
By providing space for community organizations to set up literature
tables, community members will be able become more informed about
community activities and volunteer opportunities.
Each elected official’s office will secure the facility and necessary
equipment, select the moderator, handle all logistics for the events,
and send out news releases, community-events bulletins, and other publicity.
If the elected official can’t participate, he or she can select a
top-level representative to take his or her place.
These Dialogues will:
- Restructure our government to make it more democratic.
- Increase community involvement and awareness.
- Enable concerned community members to meet and network.
- Help hold officials accountable to the desires of the people they
represent.
- Provide community organizations with a way to communicate their
concerns to elected representatives without having to spend lots of time and energy trying to schedule private meetings. At the end of 2008, the Community Dialogues Project, sponsored by [name], will evaluate the results of this approach and develop recommended modifications, prior to expanding its outreach from the Bay Area to the rest of the United States.
Be it therefore resolved that
I/we endorse the Community Dialogues Project.
++++
NOTES:
1) The approach I take with this article is influenced by Hillary Rettig’s book, The Lifelong Activist, which emphasizes responding to the felt needs of one’s audience. When I return to San Francisco in April, I’ll probably work on advancing this proposal. If some existing organization has adopted it, I’ll be available to assist them in whatever way they choose. Otherwise, I might take a different approach.
2) These Community Dialogues could provide home-based communities with a focus for their joint political action. If the Community Dialogues Project has persuaded their Congressperson to conduct Dialogues, home-based communities, when they form, could go to the Dialogue in their district to make their case on an issue. If the Community Dialogues Project has not persuaded that Congressperson to conduct Dialogues, home-based communities could undertake efforts to persuade that Congressperson to conduct Community Dialogues. Successful Dialogues happening elsewhere could provide those home-based communities with evidence to strengthen these efforts. Between now and when I return, I may try to help initiate some experimental home-based communities.
3) One purpose of the home-base communities project is to “reach beyond the choir” and provide people who aren’t already regular political activists with some ways for taking one or two small steps that could help promote positive change. Some of these people might later do more, maybe with other organizations. Some home-based communities might do more collectively than the minimum envisioned. But either way, if enough people were to meet with their Congressperson (or a top-level staff person) once a month to advance the same demand, the impact could eventually be enormous. Another purpose of the home-base communities project is to encourage political activists to pay more attention to self-improvement and provide one another mutual support in that effort.
4) On a personal note, my mood continues to be improved following my mostly silent visit to the coast. We had a wonderful blessing of my land yesterday with 16 people, mostly Mexicans. We formed a circle around a fire and expressed gratitudes.
5) You received this email because you are on my Wade’s Journal list. I anticipate sending these entries about once a week with “WJ:” as a prefix in the Subject line. If you want me to remove you from this list, just let me know. No hard feelings.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READERS' COMMENTS:
In response to the 11/30/07 entry on not taking life so seriously:
Yay. I deeply feel you are on the right and LIGHT path. Yay.... Just had a chance to read this thoroughly. AMAZING and uplifting. I would like to send it out to the 4000+ folks on the EJS list serve. There is much wisdom here. Can you look at it and see if you would want it send out to our network? I can do a short foreword. When did I recommend that book to you? Take care and be well.... (Eva Paterson)
+++++
Nice.
+++++
The innocence and sincerity of your quandaries is endearing.... You MUST read Blessed Unrest by Paul Hawkin asap. Why will become apparent immediately. I will double whatever you pay for it if I've wasted your time.... There's nothing like fresh air for despair. Natural beauty helps too.
+++++
enjoyed this letting-go piece, wade; i could almost hear your release of stressed breath, as you connected to the universal giggle.
+++++
Nice entry. Have you read Eckhart Tolle? I prefer to listen to him much more than to read him, and I prefer his "live audience" talks to his book readings. Mostly. I also prefer to refer to him as Elk-heart the Troll. He is good for something, at some point in time, if you happen to be at that particular point in time sometime. Please give a long loving look at the ocean for me.
+++++
nice, insightful reflection....
+++++
nice to start receiving your journal entries again. You don't ever need to confirm with me as to whether I want to remain on the journal list, the answer is yes.
+++++
In response to the 11/25/07 entry on scapegoating:
+++++
I was interested in your Nov 25 entry,... I always had trouble with applying a [world view] framework to an issue, rather than looking at the dynamics of that issue. I still can't subscribe to a single theory of How The World Works. In some ways, [where I live] is a small town, and working on local issues, I have been on the same side and on opposite sides of issues with the same people at different times. One of my political mentors long ago advised me not to burn bridges on an issue, as I might find that same person agreeing with me in the future and need to work with them. I grew up with a mother who looked for the common ground and found something to like about most people, and a perfectionist father who limited my parents' social life because he held one thing against someone who Mother enjoyed in another area. I can be a chip off the old (Dad) block, and part of my life's work has been to find a way to hold standards and still forgive or find ways to work around problems.
+++++
This is an excellent piece! Please add me to your journal list if I am not already on it.
One suggestion: it might 'round out' this piece to add a few sentences about the scapegoating that goes in the other direction. That is the scapegoating that the proponents of the 'system' point to as the problem. For example, currently Bill Cosby is getting recognition in some quarters for "calling out" poor Blacks as betrayers of the Civil Rights struggle. There is a - what I would call - 'blaming the victim' scapegoating. There is a pick-your-self-up and self-responsibility scapegoating. As you so wisely point out that is NOT the whole story or a sufficiently just assessment to stand on its own. Neither the scapegoating on the left or the scapegoating on the right can stand justly on its own.
+++++
why not both?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Carlos Slim, the richest man in the world and the owner of Mexico’s telephone company, Telmex, has been testing my resolve to be positive. For more than a month, I’ve been trying to get DSL service to the cabana where I’m living (100 yards from the land I purchased).
First, Maria, who sold me the land and lives nearby, suggests a cell phone company. I check it out and determine that its service is too slow and unreliable. Then Silvia, my Spanish teacher, suggests another phone company who has a wireless connection. I check it out and determine that a phone line is necessary with that company just like with Telmex and they only serve Cuernavaca. So Maria places an order to have the phone line to my cabana reactivated. I tell her I don’t want to move to the cabana until it is certain I can get DSL. She assures me that it will happen, so I give notice at my house in town and go to the beach for two weeks five weeks ago. When I return, still no phone line. Maria says that she’s been calling every day and they say, “Tomorrow.” After a few days, I call Fernando, a bilingual Telmex employee who had helped me once before. He checks his computer and makes a call and tells me the order has been canceled because there was inadequate equipment in the neighborhood. I tell Maria. Two days later, she reaches her contact, who tells her that a line had been activated but it was the wrong line. Maria calls that number and, sure enough, someone (other than me) answers. So we consider, instead of placing another order to activate my phone line, which could take some time to happen,just placing an order for DSL service in her house and getting some help to set up a wireless network which our neighbors could use. She had DSL once before but canceled it because it was too slow, and is concerned that we are too far from the necessary equipment, causing the signal to weaken by the time the line reaches our region. So I call Fernando and he inquires and assures me that speed will be no problem. And I know that with Silvia’s slow connection, I was able to prompt a solution when an English-speaking worker in technical assistance had me change some settings so that when we connected to the Internet, we connected with a computer in some country other than Mexico. So thirteen days ago, last Monday, I order the fastest service (it costs twice as much as the normal service, $70 per month), hoping that with the combination of paying more and falling back on calling the Internet outside Mexico, I can get adequate service. Fernando tells me that the connection will probably be active within a day or two but definitely within five days. He says that I can tell that the service is active when the DSL light on the modem stops blinking. I connect with Johnny, who owns a very good Internet café in town. He says he can help me set up the wireless network. The next day, rather than wait for Telmex to deliver the modem which might take forever, I go to a nearby town to pick it up (Fernando had assured me it would be easy but in fact it takes almost 30 minutes, including a phone call to Fernando). Johnny comes to my place Wednesday and decides that we need a more powerful router to place on Maria’s roof to send the signal to my cabana. I tell him what Fernando said about how to determine if the service is active, but he tells me instead to simply connect my laptop to the modem with a cable and see if the computer tells me that the Local Area Network is connected. I do that and tell him the DSL service is active. But when he goes to Mexico City, he can’t find the more powerful router, so he plans to connect my neighbors (Carlos and Karla) and me with cables instead. One day, when I’m in town, I get a phone call from Maria’s housekeeper that Johnny is at the house, not at our scheduled time, (he has never come when scheduled and has never called me to let me know). When I get there, he has started to string cable to Carlos’s house. His eventual plan is to drill a hole into Maria’s office, which I doubt Maria will approve, but fortunately we discover there is already a pipe providing access. When the cable is strung, Johnny tries to open a web page but is unable to do so. We are puzzled. He tries to resolve the problem. After 30 or 40 minutes, I persuade him to call Telmex, who tells him we need to wait another day or two until the DSL service is activated. The next day, I call Fernando, who tells me that Johnny’s method for determining if the service is active is invalid, for it only tells us that the computer is communicating with the modem, not if the modem is receiving the DSL signal. Fernando inquires with the regional Telmex office and is informed that DSL service to my neighborhood is impossible because we are too far from the necessary equipment (no one bothered to call Maria or me to tell us). I tell him that until fairly recently, Maria had DSL, which contradicts that analysis (the service may be slow due to the distance, but it is possible). On Wednesday, he says he’ll inquire further into the matter. On Friday, he says he has confirmed that Maria had DSL for two years but is still waiting for the regional manager to resolve the contradiction.
I apologize for going on so, but the only way to appreciate the absurdity of my situation is to know the details. I really want Internet in my cabana. I like to be able to research stuff on the Web, make phone calls, send emails, and such at the drop of a hat. But maybe the gods want me to free me of my "addiction" to the Internet. My frustration gives way to laughter. The whole scenario is ridiculous. Now Maria doesn't even have regular phone service to her house. I can adjust by working off line and going to an Internet cafe three times a week for two or three hours each time. And spend more time reading books and communing with my trees (sometime around a fire, as I envision it). At least until I get a satellite out here in the wild.
So Mexico’s magical synchronicity is often balanced by its frustrating inefficiency and corruption. As a Mexican, Carlos Slim should invest in his country’s communication infrastructure, for doing so would boost its economy. But his telephone and Internet service, which he got for a rock bottom price when Mexico privatized, is both mediocre and expensive, largely due to inadequate equipment.
The turning point for me was Friday evening. I had pretty much decided that I should just accept not having Internet here when I headed into Cuernavaca. Along the way, Luis, the seven-year-old son of Maria's housekeeper, Lupe, who lives with Maria, surprised me by speaking to me out of the dark. He softly said, "Senor Wade." It was the first time he called me Senor. We chatted a bit and I was warmed by his sweetness (today he said he'd like to play soccer with me sometime when I asked (he seems to spend a lot of time alone.)
Then I went to wait for the local bus, a van. But before it came, a truck pulled up next to me and after several seconds, the driver rolled down his window and offered me a ride. I told him I needed the express-bus station to Cuernavaca and accepted his ride. We didn't talk much but when he learned that I was going to Cuernavaca, he simply took me to the outskirts without asking, for he was going the same way.
After catching a local bus, when I noticed that it wasn't going exactly where I expected, I asked the middle-aged woman sitting next to me for directions. She told me, but when we got to my stop, she got off also and showed me the way while we walked. I'm sure she went somewhat out of her way to make sure I didn't get lost.
I was a bit early, so I got a hot chocolate at a cafe with fascinating art work on display. They served me my drink on a beautiful, curved platter. The cafe was filled with young people engaged in conversation. I soaked up the atmosphere and loved it.
Some friends from Tepoz were at the concert, which was amazing, as eventually some 15 performers ended up participating and most of the audience was on its feet dancing. The concert was outdoors, in the courtyard of a large building that used to belong to the government and later was owned by John Spencer, an English artist, and is now being restored as a cultural center.
All in all, a great evening which helped me remember that even if I don't get Internet in my cabana, there is much magic around me that I can appreciate.
Being without Internet at home has its advantages. I'm better able to enjoy solitude, especially in my woods during the day and staring at the stars in my front yard at night. When I do go online in town, I have to be more thoughtful, for my time is limited because they close at nine. So I have a To Do list and use my time efficiently. Since I can compose email messages offline at home and I need to shop and socialize anyway, going into town three times a week is not all that inconvenient, though the round trip takes 30-60 minutes. And I may have more time to read more books. So objectively speaking, I don't have to have the Internet at my fingertips.
I still miss it, however. Having Internet at home would boost my productivity, especially when I start reaching out more to strengthen my network. And I enjoy researching stuff on impulse, and watching and listening to some sporting events (go Warriors!) and such. So if I have to, I may lease a high-speed Internet satellite, which would probably cost me $110 per month annually, because I could suspend service when I'm away and some of my neighbors could use it and help pay for it.
As the Presidential campaign heats up, I'd like to follow it more closely online. Each time I go to an Internet cafe, the first thing I do is read news about the campaign.
Ever since his speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, I've been optimistic about Barack and I remain optimistic. Several months ago, when odds were 75 to 1, I placed a bet that he would win the nomination (unfortunately, I gave the ticket to my cab driver). Even during Hillary's peak a few months ago, I argued with friends that he would still win, partly because of her weaknesses, which would become more apparent over time, but mostly due to his strengths. My record as a political prognosticator is poor, but my prediction that Barack will be our next President may well prove correct.
No other politician has ever prompted me to cry, and he has, twice. He has a remarkable ability to connect with people emotionally, while maintaining a healthy degree of detachment rooted in intellectual and moral convictions. I don't always agree with his policy positions, but I believe that his heart is in a good place and, as with FDR, he would be open to persuasion given grassroots pressure for more progressive positions. He wants to advance progressive proposals that are already supported by most Americans (as do I, now), which means he wants to avoid getting too far out in front. But since most Americans affirm progressive positions on most issues, he could help us achieve a great deal with this approach. And he could open doors, help build momentum, and inspire people, especially young people, to have hope and become less self-centered, as did JFK, who boosted the movements of the Sixties.
To those who say FDR and JFK helped capitalism save itself from itself, I say, True enough. We're going to have some form of capitalism into the foreseeable future, so we need to control, regulate, and reform it so that it does less damage and benefits as many people as possible, while using the public sector to meet needs that are left unmet. Even Naomi Klein, perhaps the best young writer on the scene and a very strong critic of unbridled capitalism, has been taking a lot of heat from hardcore anti-capitalists who object to her embrace of a mixed economy. I believe there are many roles to play and these differences are usually complementary, but I side with Naomi.
To those who say that a fatal, global crisis affecting everyone is a necessary precondition for social transformation, I say that crisis is happening right now. There's no need to wait and wish for more suffering. More than 40,000 people are dying needlessly every day. The polar ice caps are melting. Egoism is corrupting souls right and left. Social fragmentation spreads daily, inflamed by countless forms of fundamentalism. Waiting for some revolutionary moment is a cop out. The time to build solid face-to-face communities committed to a shared worldview, self-improvement, social service, political action, and mutual support is now -- even if it is "reformist," so long as it's moving toward fundamental reform. And the only way to do that is to do it -- step-by-step.
Spontaneity is not sufficient. We need structure -- disciplined organizations that maximize both self-determination and solidarity. We need to create structures that encourage and support mainstream people to take baby steps toward social involvement (and away from egoism) -- like "home-based communities" and "Community Dialogues with Elected Officials." If and when the crisis worsens, these structures will be in place to support more dramatic reform.
I wrote Global Transformation: Strategy for Action to make my case for this approach, by presenting a thorough, comprehensive, logical, step-by-step argument. Although the amount of feedback has been less than what I had hoped for, the quality of the feedback has encouraged me. I've been particularly encouraged by those people who've told me that they appreciate my analysis of the global social system, which is one aspect of the book that is original. With particular help from John Vasconcellos, who helped clarify my thinking on the matter, I believe that I have developed particular insight into how our global social system operates -- and how we could transform it.
Some time ago I read Charles Reich's Opposing the System and recently I've read some more excellent books by some solid thinkers -- Paul Hawken, Todd Gitlin, and J.P. Harpignies -- that talk about "the system." But these writers, like most others, talk only about the "political-economic system." Society, however, consists of more than politics and economics. And Marx was wrong about economic materialism. Neither the economic system nor any Elite controls society, which is self-perpetuating and consists of many interdependent elements, with no one element in control. As Hawken writes, "any finger-pointing is inevitably directed back to ourselves."
Merely fighting political and economic injustice is not enough. Personal growth, social solidarity, cultural change, transformation of all of our institutions (not just government and the economy), and the adoption of a new central purpose for our society are also essential. To my mind, this involves much more than matters like rejecting consumerism and becoming a political activist. It requires some very DEEP changes in HOW we engage in activism.
A good number of sharp, well-informed people have read my book and given me feedback, most of which has been very supportive. So far, the only substantive criticisms have been few and predictable -- ultra-leftist dogma or rationalizations for inaction (like the claim that we have to wait for the system to collapse).
So altogether, the feedback I've received has strengthened my confidence in the direction I'm taking. I'm no longer reluctant to assert my opinions and plan to try to help put into practice some of the new ideas that have emerged during this process that I have spearheaded.
So I'm preparing to talk with people face-to-face about these ideas. With these conversations and some new, much briefer written materials, I hope to generate more interest in this project than I have so far -- relying primarily on Internet communications and my book (though I have built a sizable network of people who share my concerns). In this way, I hope to connect more strongly with people who share my interest in growing holistic communities that address the whole person and enable people to share more experiences with the same small group of people, thereby overcoming the fragmentation associated with meeting different needs with different people. That kind of specialization is necessary to some degree, but it undermines a deep sense of community if relied on exclusively.
At some point in the next year or two, I might travel throughout the States to talk with people and experiment with some of the new methods I've been developing.
We shall see. As Gitlin says in his excellent Letters to a Young Activist, "Experiment. See what happens."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
COMMENTS FROM READERS:
Re: Wade's Journal - 11/30/07:
This just went out to close to 5000 people.
Merry Christmas.
From: Eva Paterson:
Dear Friends,
Our friend, activist Wade Hudson, is currently in Mexico reflecting on how activists can do this work for a lifetime. He sends missives from Mexico from time to time to his friends. I found the insights in the following message very helpful. This is the time of year when the days are shorter and people slow down. Hudson refers to a book The Lifelong Activist. I think you will enjoy this essay.
Happy New Year!! Here's to a wonderful 2008.
[What followed was a slightly edited version of my 11/30/07 Wade's Journal entry. It is on the Web at: http://equaljusticesociety.org/email/email_20071220_activist_mexico.htm ]
I really, really like this post - naturally. Your description of play and joy and their connection to service - all of great value to the world at large.
Is this posted online as well? I'd like to blog it at some time.
One more thing I might want to add along this theme:
I started teaching "fun" when I realized that I didn't know enough to make people happy. I did know enough, however, to make people have fun - that is, if they want to.
So, I figure this: maybe you can't choose to be happy. but you can choose to have fun. you can choose to enjoy yourself, to enjoy the amazing world you're getting to play in and with. and it's more likely, then, at least, to feel happy, genuinely happy, to be reminded, at least, of what happiness is for.
--Bernie DeKoven http://www.deepfun.com http://www.majorfun.com http://www.junkyardsports.com http://www.coworking.com
You often discuss community and organizing a group of people to gather regularly to share a meal and discuss politics. How about taking a different approach and doing this informally, spontaneously, without structure? I think in people's "busy" lives of today, even if they like the idea they may not initially be ready to commit to such a group. It may also come across as too serious. Too intellectual. Too many expectations. If you start with baby steps maybe it will develop into the type of group you envision. Or maybe you will be surprised by something else forming.
I may be way off, but my interpretation is that you want to create a group that shares a connection. The common theme you would like is political activism, because that is where your passion lies. Ultimately I think the goal is to be among a group of friends that have something in common and can understand you, your feeling, and your ideas, and of course you would value theirs as well.
--Tami Brown
Re: WJ: "Engaging Elected Officials" and Reader's Comments
It's a great idea. Best of luck with it!
Onward!
Mike Larsen
I agree with your ideas for the Community Dialogue. I would suggest a 3-hour venue rather than two. Two hours will fly by, and the number of areas to cover is vast. Then there needs to be a 15 minute break.
More importantly, however, Community Dialogues should be the cornerstone for a much broader strategy that is positioned to deal with the vast scope of government today as well as with the accelerating rate of change. The broader strategy would contain at least these elements:
1. Community Dialogues - provide the face-to-face relationship so necessary to building trust.
2. Community Email Network - proactively connects with its member on a continuous basis. Email 'reaches out' to the members and provides continuity between Community Dialogues. All members are encouraged to share ideas and information that they believe will interest other members.
3. Community Blog and/or Wiki - provides a mechanism where members can actively dialog on a continuous basis regarding specific issues. Well moderated blogs/wikis are a vehicle for the longer discussions/debates so essential to complex issues.
4. Community Website - collects and preserves the valuable 'nuggets' that arise from the Community Dialogues, the email exchanges, and the blog/wiki.
5. Action Groups - are formed dynamically as issues are raised. An action group can arise from a Community Dialogue, the email exchange, or the blog/wiki. Action groups set their own agendas, meeting times, schedules, etc. They report back at the Community Dialogues, through the email network, and/or through the blog/wiki.
This broader strategy (and maybe it needs even more parts) has unlimited capacity as it is structured to engage its participants dynamically and continuously and it includes action groups that focus on obtaining specific results.
Thoughts for now.
Larry Walker
Re: WJ: My Problem with Carlos
good story ....not all that much different service in northern vermont, i can assure you.
--Barry Rossinoff
Wow! Sorry for the frustrations, but it does make for a great tale! :-)
--Steven Shults
Boy, can I sympathize! We were supposed to have two lines hooked up when we arrived at our winter place in Hawaii on Dec. 2. Not only weren't we connected to either of them, we were on our neighbor's line (used to be ours, but Hawaiian Telcom gave it to them.) After a lot of um, discussion, they are saying we should be good to go by the 28th. We're not holding our breath. Meanwhile we drive sixty miles or so to Kona, where there's wi-fi and we can at least deal with our e-mail. Maybe we should check our horoscopes? Merry Christmas!
--Peter Childs
Freddi Fredrickson replied with her horror story in the Los Angeles area, but I can't find my copy.
By the way, I participated in a wonderful Xmas dinner, with twelve fascinating people representing nine countries.
Dear Wade's Journal Subscribers:
In the future, when I quote feedback, I plan to identify the author unless there is a specific request for anonymity, or I decide that anonymity is better for some reason.
Also, feel free to tell me not to quote you at all, but please do so each time.
I figure this way subscribers might get a feel for one another. (There are 34 subscribers.)
Please let me know if you think this approach is not advisable.
Thanks, Wade
WJ: Growing Home-Based Communities - 12/30 Draft
Growing Home-Based Communities - 12/30/08 Draft by Wade Hudson
Do you want a deeper sense of community in your life? Would you like to share more experiences with a small group of good friends (for at least two hours a week)?
Are you committed to becoming a better person? Do you, or would you like to, directly assist people in serious need (for at least two hours a month)? Do you, or would you like to, help improve the policies of our federal government (for at least two hours a month)?
Might you like to share a meal once a month with close friends who are also engaged in community service and political action? Following these meals, might you like to discuss your efforts at self-improvement, community service, and political action with those people (and listen to them report on their efforts)?
Do you largely agree with the following statement of principles?
++++++++++
What We Believe -- And How We Choose to Live (12/14/07 Draft)
Our commitment is to promote the common good of the entire human family, help make the nations of the world more just and democratic, and protect the environment.
Because life is mysterious, wonderful, and awesome, we cherish beauty and the experience of beauty. We encourage everyone to help make the world more beautiful.
The Earth is a living system composed of many interdependent elements. Our responsibility is to safeguard it and participate creatively in its evolution.
We aim to avoid both selfishness and self-sacrifice by loving others as we love ourselves. We will enjoy life, spread joy, and assist people who are less fortunate.
Being fully human involves learning how to become a better human being. By taking care of ourselves, we can better serve others and help prevent suffering.
We respect others as equals. When we criticize people, we do so constructively without condemning them, for all of us are imperfect.
By coming together freely, we can have better relationships. We should use force only to protect life or prevent physical injury. If and when we use force, we should use the minimal amount necessary.
We appreciate what is true about all points of view. No one person or group monopolizes truth. By sharing facts and opinions, we can better understand reality.
No words fully express what is true. Ideas only point to truth. So we are willing to experiment with what works best.
As a nation, we are responsible to assure that all of our people have the means to live decently. As individuals, we are responsible to help shape our nation’s policies. All people are entitled to have a real voice in public decisions that affect them. Our elected officials should listen to their constituents, help them find common ground whenever possible, and support the growth of supportive communities that nurture personal development rooted in shared moral values –- so we can better overcome egoism, consumerism, greed, and the temptation to be deadened by passive entertainment. As well as earning a profit, private businesses should serve the public interest, care for the environment, empower their workers, and treat them fairly.
Strong individuals need strong communities -- and strong communities need strong individuals, healthy families, supportive friendships, democracy, justice, a sustainable environment, safe neighborhoods, and national governments that protect human rights and manage the economy wisely.
The nations and the people of the world must cooperate with one another. By growing a loving, global community based on inclusive, democratic local communities, we can steadily improve the quality of life and eventually transform our social system –- including our institutions, our culture, and ourselves –- to better serve humanity and protect life on Earth.
++++++++++
If your answer to those questions is yes, you might want to join the Network of Home-based Communities once it is formed.
The current plan is for the initial organizers of this project to ask all Network members to begin by following the same simple steps, which will be presented in “Growing Home-based Communities: A Step-by-Step Manual.” Doing so will provide everybody with a shared experience that will provide a common basis for discussion. After completing the manual, members will choose whatever methods they prefer.
The basic idea is to form small groups of neighbors who live in the same Congressional district, twelve or so in number, who: · Endorse the “What We Believe” statement of principles. · Are committed to steady self-improvement. · Take action together at least two hours a month to persuade their Congressperson to do something concrete. · Engage in community service at least two hours a month to assist people in need. · Share a meal once a month (two hours), following which they will (confidentially) discuss these activities.
The main purpose of this post-meal interaction is to provide mutual support by listening to each other put into words what they have been doing and how they feel about it. In addition, if and when people want advice, feedback, or other support, they can ask for it.
These sessions are not designed for problem solving, whether it be personal problems or interpersonal conflict. Any such problem solving will be addressed later, whether one-on-one, in a sub-group, or with the whole home-based community.
One goal driving this project is to mobilize a significant number of people at the same time throughout the country to pressure their Congresspersons to take the same action. Achieving this goal will often require many people to set aside their personal priorities for two hours a month to support other objectives in disciplined, joint action – while trusting that the Network might well later support their own priorities.
The eight-hour-per-month commitment is designed to enable people who are already very busy to share meaningful experiences with others. Over time, even an eight-hour monthly commitment can nurture deep connections.
Whether on their own or with other organizations, many members of these home-based communities will likely do more than the minimal required commitment. Some home-based communities might do more together as a group, including social and recreational activities.
The organizing manual, which is currently being written, will present methods concerning how to organize or join a home-based community.
If you are interested in helping to organize this project or might be interested in participating, please send an email to Wade Hudson at wadehudson@progressiveresourcecatalog.org.