Social Justice or Personal Salvation?

How often do we hear a conversation where one person claims that personal salvation is the road to happiness and social change, and the other suggests that we must obtain social justice before anyone can be free?  Less often than we might think I would suggest.  Mainly because those on a personal salvation course more often than not do not interact with those seeking social justice.  Thankfully, however, this is changing, and the two ideologies are talking together more often.

Of course, the distinction between the two approaches is an illusory one.  Both are necessary, and neither can work without the other. 

Since the 1960s and 70s there has been a greater awareness growing of the connection between our inner and outer worlds.  We are understanding more and more that everything is intimately connected with everything else.  We are not separate beings.  our lives are connected with the lives of those around us, not only those in our families or living in our street, but also those living in other parts of the world.  Furthermore, we are connected with the flora and fauna of this planet – we are connected with the planet itself.  What happens to another happens to us.  The way we treat the planet affects how the planet treats us.

So it is with social justice and personal salvation work.  They are connected.  We cannot attain personal salvation without seeking social justice.  We cannot work towards social justice without transforming ourselves.

Compassion and Empathy

When we work for social justice we often do so from a sense of compassion or empathy with those (humans, animals, plants) who are distressed or oppressed.  When we seek personal salvation we inevitably arrive at a place of compassion for all sentient beings.  Compassion and empathy, then, may be the point at which the two paths converge, and we see the wisdom of both approaches.

Without compassion in our social justice work we can easily perpetuate the very structures and injustices that we are wanting to overcome.  Think of what happened following the French Revolution – we got Napoleon.  Think of what happened after the overthrow of the Tsar – we got Stalinism.  More latterly we can see similar examples in the Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot, and ISIS.

Ends and Means

There once was a saying that the “ends justifies the means,” fortunately now largely discredited (at least within grass-roots social justice organisations).  The means by which we work for social justice or seek personal must be in harmony with our ends.  Joanna Macy notes that “means are ends in the making,” and Thich Nhat Hanh advises us that “peace is every step.”

In a complex, inter-connected, world seeking personal salvation can only go so far before we need to study and understand the roots of cultural, psychological and historical oppression and privilege.  In that same world, working for social justice can only go so far before we are faced with the limitations of our personal transformation.  Social justice is as much a means towards the end of personal salvation as personal salvation is the means towards the end of social justice. 

No Separation

Just as there is no completely independent and self-sufficient self, there is no separation between working for social change and seeking personal salvation.

If we focus our attention on systemic change at the expense of our personal transformation then we will perpetuate the harmful relationships between each other and the planet.


If we focus our attention on personal salvation at the expense of systemic change then we will perpetuate our individual sense of a disconnected self.

The Myth of Expert Decision-Making

World-wide we are less trusting of our leaders.  We are voting less, we are leaving political parties in droves.   If we do not trust our leaders and politicians to make the right decisions then where do we look for guidance, leadership or action?  More and more we are coming to realise that the ideas, the solutions, and the actions begin with and flow from all of us, from communities and the collective knowledge, experience, skills and wisdom that they contain.

This approach turns on its head the classic western notion of development.  The classic western approach is one in which experts enter a community or nation, assess the needs and then design a program or infrastructure to address those needs.  Classically there was little consultation with the local community and even less of an attempt to involve the community in the design of any program or intervention.  Often this approach led to the program eventually collapsing or the infrastructure being under-utilised.  Many times this collapse could be attributed to the “experts” incorrectly identifying the needs or the problem, let alone the solution.

But, when the process begins with and flows from within communities, then the chances of correctly identifying the issues and then designing the appropriate response are greatly enhanced.

This approach emphasises that power and decision-making shift from the top to the bottom, from the centre to the margins, and from hierarchies to interconnected networks.  It puts connected communities firmly in the role of decision-makers and implementers of policy.

“But what if local communities do not have the knowledge, or skills necessary?” is a common argument raised against allowing ordinary citizens, the man and woman in the street - “commoners” - to become decision-makers.  This quarrel is based on a prejudice that implies that only those with expertise are in the best position to make decisions.  But this is nonsense.

The Expert Myth

The “expert” may come in various guises: community health expert, education expert, city planning expert, even the community development or social justice expert.  In each case, the expert may have some useful expertise to offer, but that does not make them the best decision-maker in any community setting.  Indeed, an expert in a decision-making role can be disastrous.

A 2006 study found that the more power an individual has or claims to have, the more likely they are to over-value their own viewpoint and are less capable of considering another person’s perspective¹.The same researcher, in 2012, noted that those with a sense of power were often over-confident in their decision-making².

Remember too, that becoming an expert in a subject usually involves knowing more and more about a topic that is more and more specialised.  In short: knowing more and more about less and less.  Our world is a complex, interconnected and diverse one.  We, and it, contain contradictions, anomalies, and inconsistencies.  In such a world our decision-making processes must ensure that a wide variety of perspectives and ideas are taken into account.  The expert has a place in that, but only one place of many.

It is of little benefit if a decision made by an expert is the right one in their view if it does not make sense to those on whom the decision is imposed.

Look around the world.  Often, where we see conflict, bitterness or social isolation, we will also find that a decision has been imposed by someone (or a group) who have done so in the belief that theirs was the correct one to make.  That applies just as much to a local neighbourhood as it does to international conflict.

The tower block building projects that began in the 1950s in England are a case in point.  Architects and city planners in England embraced with zeal the ideas of architects such as Le Corbusier and Walter Gropius who became known for their minimalist approach.  Le Corbusier’s idea was magnified from the simple stripped down villa into stack upon stack of bare, uniform multi-storied dwellings.  Town planning experts and architectural experts embraced the idea with glee, but no-one bothered to ask the potential inhabitants.

Within just a few years the cracks were appearing, not only in the buildings themselves but also in the social fabric.  In May 1968 Ronan Point, a 22 storey tower block in East London, partially collapsed killing 4 people and injuring 17.  It wasn’t the only one.

But it was the tearing apart of social cohesion that was perhaps the biggest failing of this expert-driven approach to housing.  The adults living in these towers experienced high rates of stress, mental health problems, and marriage breakdown.  Their children fared no better.  Tower-rise children had high rates of hyperactivity and were prone to greater levels of hostility and juvenile delinquency (even when socio-economic status was adjusted for) than that of the general population.

Even though much is known about the damage to social infrastructure that these towers create, they are still being built.  There are many commentators and community workers in England who are now advocating for a return to the terraced housing style that England is so well known for.

So, beware the expert, but do not ignore the expert.  They can have useful information or knowledge, but it does not make them the best decision-maker.

Notes:
1. Galinsky, Adam et al:  Power and perspectives not taken, Psychological Science, 2006.
2. Galinsky, Adam et al:  Power and Overconfident decision making, Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Making Processes, March 2012.

I Knew A Race

Do you remember the children's song about the old lady who swallowed a fly?  Well, here is an update on that dire warning.  I call it "I Knew A Race."

I KNEW A RACE

I knew a race who saddled a horse,

With little remorse, they saddled a horse

I don’t know why,

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew a race who built a cart

What a start, to build a cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew a race who played with steam,

They had a dream, to play with steam,

They used the steam to power the cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew a race who invented the engine,

What a din, that infernal engine,

They employed the engine to replace the steam,

They used the steam to power the cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew a race that assembled a car,

That belched and spewed and polluted the air, near and far

They assembled the car to use the engine,

They invented the engine to replace the steam,

They used the steam to power the cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew a race that dug for oil

Beneath the soil, they dug for oil,

They burnt the oil to fuel the car

That belched and spewed and polluted the air, near and far

They assembled the car to use the engine,

They employed the engine to replace the steam,

They used the steam to power the cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew a race that paved the earth,

Full of mirth, they paved the earth

They paved the earth to carry the car,

That belched and spewed and polluted the air, near and far

They assembled the car to use the engine,

They employed the engine to replace the steam,

They used the steam to power the cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew a race that went hybrid

That’s what they did, built a hybrid,

They built the hybrid to replace the car,

That belched and spewed and polluted the air, near and far

They assembled the car to use the engine,

They employed the engine to replace the steam,

They used the steam to power the cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die.

I knew race who dug for nickel

What a pickle, when they mined for nickel

They used the nickel to power the hybrid

They built the hybrid to replace the car,

That belched and spewed and polluted the air, near and far

They assembled the car to use the engine,

They employed the engine to replace the steam,

They used the steam to power the cart,

They built the cart to harness the horse

I don’t know why

They saddled a horse

Perhaps they’ll die

I knew a race and their technology,

Gadgets, tools and machinery

Where are they now, you ask of me,

They’re gone, extinct, you see.

From Conflict to Creative Collaboration (Book Review)

What would a conference, workshop, or meeting look like if the understandings of complexity and chaos theories ruled?  Perhaps they would look like the meetings Rosa Zubizarreta describes  in From Conflict to Creative Collaboration.  Instead of meetings being brought to a focus point and a decision point, such meetings would widen things and would be choice-creating.  Instead of consensus, these meetings would seek diversity.

Welcome to the world of Dynamic Facilitation.  A world expertly described by Rosa Zubizarreta.  Indeed her book is sub-titled A User’s Guide to Dynamic Facilitation.  Rosa is the founder of Dia Praxis, a US-based consultancy working extensively with Dynamic Facilitation.

So, what is it?  What is Dynamic Facilitation?

Where traditional facilitation seeks to find commonality amongst meeting participants, Dynamic Facilitation seeks to uncover the differences and the diversity.  Where traditional facilitation aims to obtain consensus decisions, Dynamic Facilitation opens up an ever expanding series of choices.  Where traditional facilitation manages conflict in groups, Dynamic Facilitation encourages conflict (although not one-on-one adversarial conflict).  Where traditional facilitation creates and sticks to an agreed upon agenda, Dynamic Facilitation goes with whatever is arising at the moment.

It all sounds chaotic doesn’t it?  it is, and that is its beauty and its strength.

The world does not work in a nice, orderly, linear manner, and nor do our thinking patterns.  At times we will be solving problems and creating solutions, at other times attempting to define the problem, sometimes even when we think we have solved it.  In the next moment we may be recognising the disadvantages and pitfalls of a certain solution, and then we will be seeking further information.  Throw all these thinking patterns into a group setting and it becomes obvious that thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving, are not necessarily as ordered as we might like them to be.  The cautionary tale in all this is that when someone, or some group, attempts to constrain thinking within ordered, linear, so-called logical, patterns, then unexpected or unwanted outcomes emerge.  We may find that some in the group are disgruntled, others withdrawn, some angry and disillusioned, and yet others outright saboteurs.

Dynamic Facilitation, in the manner well presented by Rosa Zubizarreta, understands and works with the non-linearity of our thinking patterns.  Dynamic Facilitation says it doesn’t matter if one thought or expression doesn’t logically follow another – just get it down, record it.

All this is in keeping with emergence – the child of complexity and chaos theories.  Emergence tells us that when a number of factors, players, or ideas come together then sometimes unexpected, even unexplained, outcomes can emerge.  Often, these outcomes are highly creative. 

Rosa Zubizarreta has written an excellent guide to Dynamic Facilitation in an easily understood manner.  She has not portrayed Dynamic Facilitation as the panacea of facilitation, with a final chapter addressing some of the pitfalls and instances where Dynamic Facilitation may not be appropriate.


As a bonus there is a foreword by Peggy Holman who has written much about the power of emergence.  This foreword lays out neatly what the reader can expect over the following 100 pages.

Changing the World One Coffee at a Time

How do you change the world?  There are many emergencies that face us.  Whether the emergency that concerns you is a global one (climate change, refugees, war, famine etc), a national one (the crime rate, domestic violence, teenage suicide etc) or focused at a local level (green space for children to play in, urban development etc) then I suggest we all have a cup of coffee.

But this is not just any coffee.  Coffee here is a simple acronym that helps us think about how we undertake change in a complex, chaotic world.  COFFEE stands for: Creative Opportunities Flow From Encouraging Encounters.  Let’s tease out each of these words a little:

Creative.  To paraphrase Einstein, we cannot solve the world’s emergencies with the type of thinking that built them.  We will need our collective, diverse creative talents.  Creativity implies being open to new and unexpected thoughts, ideas and intuitions.  It is also worth noting that the idea of left brain – right brain is a myth; so we can all be creative.  The creativity we need is not of a technological nature either.  We need a creativity of spirit, a creativity of consciousness.  We need soul-centred and eco-centred creativity.

Opportunities.  The word derives from old Latin: ob = towards, and portus = harbour.  So, opportunity represents movement towards a favourable place.  It means seeking, being inquisitive and curious.  It means not accepting the status quo.  We can find opportunity in many guises, even in adversity.

Flow.  “Go with the flow” is a common phrase and here it has a similar sense.  Why battle the current?  Why not, as many Eastern martial arts practitioners advise, use the energy that exists.  It does not mean that we are always heading towards our goal, occasionally the flow may become an eddy, a whirlpool or cataracts.  As any kayaker knows, fighting against these flows will often end in disaster.  Going with the flow means staying in the now, the present.  However, it does not imply a non-thinking, laissez-faire, laid-back approach.  It is active.  Much like the kayaker, who knows that to stay in the flow they must keep paddling, making sure that the kayak does not get swept against the rocks or flipped upside-down by a standing wave.
  
From.  What we do emerges from our encounters.  Our actions are not pre-determined or planned by a far-away authority and then dictated to us.  Change starts with and flows from us, and it flows from the present; we are not dictated by the future.  This means that we must be wary of the cult of expertness.  Certainly listen to and use the knowledge of experts, but when it comes to decision-making, we all have a role to play.

Encouraging.  Who operates better when praised, acknowledged or congratulated?  Most of us think and create at a higher level when we are encouraged. This means that we are encouraged not just in our successes but also in our failures or mistakes.  There are many skills and techniques involved in being an encouraging person: creative listening, empathy, being present, building trust, speaking thoughtfully, appropriate use of humour, offering food.

Encounters.  In a world of complexity we need to embrace our diversity of experience, knowledge, skills, and wisdom.  This means we must encounter one another.  We must join in respectful dialogue, in circle discussion.  There are a myriad techniques for encouraging encounters (e.g. World Café, Appreciative Enquiry, Open Space Technology, Future Search, Citizen Juries ….)  Furthermore, our encounters are ones in which power shifts from the top to the bottom, from the centre to the margins, from hierarchies to interconnected networks.

Although I’ve just thrown out some thoughts about each of these six words, the power of the acronym is in its whole.  It tells us that if we create open, and caring spaces (Encouraging Encounters) then the solutions (Creative Opportunities) to the many emergencies we face are able to emerge (Flow From).

Thus, if we are going to overcome the emergencies that face us, we are going to have to embrace complexity, chaos and emergence.  We are going to have to meet one another, discover each other’s skills, share our collective wisdom.  Mostly, we are going to have to talk with one another (including strangers) over COFFEE.

You’ll notice that this acronym says nothing about applied techniques,  nor does it offer a step-by-step process.  Instead, it talks about a way of thinking, a mindset if you like.  This is deliberate.  In my professional work I have not presented solutions; rather I have sought to create spaces within which people can discover their own solutions.  I’m not about to change that here.  But I do have a challenge for you.  That is this: how can COFFEE assist in your own work for social justice and sustainability?

This acronym is at the heart of a book soon to be published.  OPPORTUNITIES EMERGING: Social Change in a Complex World goes into greater depth on each of the words of the acronym, as well as looking at the overall meaning of the acronym.  The book also provides a context within which complexity can be readily understood so that those of us dealing with complexity are better equipped to understand its nuances.  Check out the facebook page here.

Emergency and Emergence

What follows is an excerpt from a book I am due to publish in May this year (2017).  OPPORTUNITIES EMERGING: Social Change in a Complex World offers a simple way of thinking about social change, how we act, the consciousness we bring to social change work, and the very process of social change itself.  Critical of traditional top-down, hierarchic, self-centred, technological approaches to social change this book suggests working with emergence.  Emergence is an aspect of Chaos and Complexity Theories and allows us to understand our role in the world, how we influence that world, and crucially, how we acknowledge our part in social change.  This excerpt is from the beginning of the first chapter and the start of chapter 3 and asks us to consider the many emergencies facing us in the 21st century.  I hope you appreciate this introductory snippet.

How many of us worry about the state of the world? When we read the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report we get worried. When we read of thousands of refugees fleeing across the borders of Afghanistan, Syria, or Somalia and into Europe, we get worried. When we turn on the television and watch paramedics struggling to contain Ebola in western Africa we get worried. When we hear Prime Ministers speak of “imminent terrorist threats” or watch the violence erupt in Iraq, Syria, the Gaza Strip or Ukraine, we get worried.

Closer to home, we read daily newspapers reporting on the growth in youth suicide, the obesity problem or the increase in rates of depression and anxiety disorders. These reports are worrying.
We don’t have to dig very far to notice that the amount of plastic in our landfills and our oceans is growing rapidly or that e-waste is now a concern. All worrying.

We look around our own neighbourhoods and communities. We see people living off the street, we see young men sitting outside the Courthouse on Monday mornings waiting for the bailiff to call them before the judge. We see elderly people, or people with disability, struggling to cope with the kerbing or the steps into buildings. If we think of what it is like for all these people, we get worried.

We look to our leaders; the Prime Ministers, Presidents and Premiers of nations. We watch as they debate the issues at Climate Change Summits, G20 meetings or within our own parliaments, senates and congresses. In our own cities and towns, we watch and listen to our mayors and councillors debating and deliberating in Town Halls and council chambers.

Then we really do get worried, because we realise that very few of our leaders have any idea of how to avert these emergencies or, worse still, have no interest in doing so. Many times we may even wonder if they are contributing towards the emergencies - grinning like the pale rider of death, racing full tilt towards the apocalyptic abyss.

Now we have another emergency to add to the growing list: our public decision-making institutions and bodies, or what we otherwise know as government. Democracy (or at least we call it that) is in a state of emergency. We don’t trust politicians, we are wary of the lobbying power of powerful, rich corporations; we are withdrawing from political processes by not voting and joining traditional political parties in fewer and fewer numbers.

In fact, with all the ills of the world only apparently getting worse and no-one seeming to care, it looks as if the world and we humans along with it are on the brink of a series of serious emergencies.
Is this our fate? To collapse from a multi-faceted emergency? Is there an alternative? Perhaps there is.

Instead of EMERGENCY we might look towards EMERGENCE.

Emergence is an aspect of chaos and complexity theory. Although these theories arose within the mathematical and scientific arenas, they have useful insights for those working for social justice, community development and/or sustainability.

…

Emergence – what’s emergence? Let’s begin with a simple example that illustrates some of the features of emergence.

Everyone has heard of the elements hydrogen (H, oxygen (O and carbon (C). What do we know about each of them? We know that hydrogen is bitter, sour smelling, and explosive. We know that oxygen is tasteless, odourless and a vital ingredient of the air that we breathe. We know that carbon is also tasteless, inert, and cold.

Now, what would we expect to get if we combined these three elements like this: C2H5OH? (Those of you who understand chemistry, please put aside your acquired knowledge for the time being and assume that all you know is the properties of each individual element as outlined above). From our knowledge of each of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon we may expect to get a compound that is largely tasteless, perhaps slightly bitter, with a very faint smell. Knowing what we know about hydrogen we may want to be wary of the compound – it could be explosive.

But, what do we get? We get ethanol – an alcohol that most of us associate with wine, beer or spirits. The result of this particular mixture of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon is unexpected and unable to be explained by our knowledge of the individual elements. That’s emergence.

Emergence is a coherent structure or property that arises from the organisation of component parts where the emergent structure or property cannot be predicted from knowledge of the individual component parts.

As well as being unpredictable, other features of emergence are that:

· It creates an order out of disorder,
· It is sensitive to initial conditions. Meaning that very small changes in the initial state can produce massively different outcomes. (Often known as the Butterfly Effect discussed in the previous section),
· It is often spontaneous,
· It is not simply the sum of its parts,
· It is often dynamic and continuously evolving,
· It is a bottom-up process, not a top-down one. The process is an emergent one rather than one that is compelled.

The book will be published in May 2017 and readers who may be interested in obtaining a copy will find more detail on this site when the time comes.

What If We Stopped?

We rush out the door, glancing at our watch.  We’ve got to run.  Next appointment is set to begin in five minutes and its at least a ten minute walk.  We finish that meeting, only time for a quick coffee-to-go.  Drink it as we get into the elevator.  Glance at our watch again.  Oh no.  Late.  We’ll have to apologise for being late.  Lunch is eaten whilst checking the mornings emails.  Many can be deleted.  Check our watch again.  Time for the afternoon session.  Rush, rush, rush.

What if we stopped?

Our mobile phone beeps and vibrates.  We open the message.  Read it quickly.  Respond with urgency, maybe adding an emoticon at the end, to show we care.  We’re stuck in traffic.  Cars rush by in the other lane.  But we can’t get out, besides its our turnoff coming up soon.  Behind us someone toots.  Road rage – the anger of the times.  Off the freeway.  Stop quickly at the Supermarket.  What’s needed?  Oh yes; milk, flour, maybe a bottle of red.  Back in the isolation of the car.  Pump up the volume on the stereo.

What if we stopped?

Home at last.  Turn on the tele.  War in the Middle East, famine in Africa, dozens killed in an avalanche somewhere.  The dollars down.  Our favourite footy team lost at the weekend.  Reality TV.  Are those people for real?  Son wants to borrow the car this weekend.  Daughter presents us with a fund-raising leaflet from school.  The dogs barking at something outside.  The wine is okay.

What if we stopped?

Try reading.  Read a few pages and realise we haven’t taken a word in.  Throw the book aside and pick up a magazine.  Flick through it.  Celebrities, sports stars, politicians caught in compromising situations.  What a boring life we lead.  Time for bed.  Brush teeth, set alarm.  Toss and turn.  Get up, drink a glass of water.  Try sleeping again.  The alarm buzzes, rudely disturbing our dream.  Another day.

What if we stopped?

What if we stopped?  What if we had a Stop Hour?  We have Earth Hour, why not a Stop Hour? 
What if we all just stoped for one hour?  What if we all just stopped exactly where we are and asked ourselves “who are we?”  What if we turned to the person next to us and asked “who are you?”  And, what if we were to give honest answers and expect honest answers from the other person?

What if we stopped and continued that conversation.  What if we then asked “what are your dreams?”  What if we asked “what are you here for?”

What if we all stopped for one hour and looked around?  What if we stopped and noticed the blue sky, or the grey clouds in the distance promising needed rain.  What if we looked at the children playing in the playground?  What if we looked at the vibrant colours of the flowers?  What if we sniffed the breeze and caught the scent of those flowers?  What if we just looked?

What if we stopped for one hour and ran and danced in the rain?  What if we stopped and rolled over and over in the grass?  What if we felt the sand between our toes?  What if we touched the hand of a child?

What if we had a Stop Hour?  What would it be like?  What would we do?  Would we know what to do?  Would we see something we have never seen before?  Would we hear a sound that is unusual?  Would we smell a fragrance that delights us?  Would we learn something?  Would we notice something about our self that we didn’t know before?  Would we discover something new about the people around us?

What if we stopped?  Just for one hour.
What would we do when the hour was up?