Showing posts with label Organizing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Organizing. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

An Attempt to Explain My Spiritual Practice

The following is a letter I wrote to Dave Belden about my spiritual practice.  It is probably the most articulate I have been on the subject yet, so I wanted to share it.


Dear Dave,
I have found it difficult to figure out a good approach to outlining my spiritual practice, because it feels like explaining my life.  I have an urge to tell stories about how I came upon my beliefs, but I think that would be alittle too long.  I have had to resist the urge to tell more of the history of my development.   To remain succinct, here is a simplified version of the principle behind my spiritual practice:

  1. We all change over time.  We change in demeanor, behavior, passions, interests, and what communities we are a part of.  To be human is to be dynamic, thinking of ourselves or others as static limits our capacity and deprives us all of our humanity.
  2. Willful action shapes how we change.   You can become the person you want to be through practice.
  3. You have the power to decide how to act, behave and respond to any given situation.
  4. Every moment is a chance to shape how we change and therefore who we are.
  5. Living by broad, well-thought-out tenets facilitates positive personal change.
  6. Learn from your mistakes.  Reflect on them at length, for days or months if necessary, to figure out what happened and how to change yourself to be more in line with who you want to be.
  7. Reflect on your activities and behaviors and how they impact the world around you.  Try to change your behavior so it changes the people and communities how you want them to change.  
  8. The whole world changes over time.  Our collective willful action shapes how it changes.  Even small scale actions change other people’s lives, and you can never know the full positive impact of a good deed.  Likewise, you can never know the full negative impact of a bad deed.


The practice of this principle is the difficult part.  I have used my conscience to good effect in this, when I have the impulse to do something, I will usually check it against my conscience and a myriad of tenets that I try to live by.  Then I act the way that seems to conform to those tenets, sometimes having to force myself to do it.  The most trying actions where I have to hunker down and really compel myself to do are often the most rewarding.  Self-control and a willingness to forgo other emotions and desires in favor of conforming to my practice has been essential in seeing my ability to shape myself become reality.  Likewise, awareness of what I am doing and keeping my practice always in the back of my mind is essential.

Perhaps my greatest experiment in my spiritual practice has been with the Golden Rule.  I started trying to live by the Golden Rule when I was 15.  And it, more than any other tenet, has pushed me to the limit of being the person I want to be.  It has forced me to do some difficult and crazy things.  When I say experiments, I indeed mean it that way.  Looking at the outcomes when I fail to follow the Golden Rule versus when I keep to it has given me the utmost faith it this tenet’s ability to positively shape myself and my world.  These experiments helped me be able to figure out the core tenet of my life and what I believe to be the answer to the eternal question “what is the meaning of life.”

    “People” are my purpose.  That one word encompasses a wide variety of issues, but in short, it means a devotion to other people, helping them, protecting them, and putting others before myself.  Here are the tenets I feel flow from this purpose:
  1. Generosity is a tenet that has produced more happiness in my life than I can even conceive of.  I now even get great joy from the search for people to receive.  This includes being generous of myself and of my time, not just the property that happens to be in my possession.
  2. Anti-materialism.  This helps alot with following generosity, but it basically means not being attached to possessions and being willing to part with them at any moment.  I have even started trying to re-interpret theft as surprise, unintentional giving to the thief.  Focusing on objects prevents us from seeing the humanity in each other.
  3. Forgiveness of everything as soon as it happens.  This not only helps the other person heal but is of huge value in maintaining strong social bonds and one’s own positive outlook.  
  4. Being stable.  I think this is the Buddhist part of my practice.  I try to remain calm and unmoved by events and maintain an emotional baseline of happiness.  I consciously let go of frustration and anger, which forgiveness is key in.  Being stable helps the people around me immensely, I have found.
  5. Awareness of others and what is probably going on in their minds.  Trying to determine how they feel and what they think based on what I have observed.
  6. Activism.  Personal interactions go a long way in changing the world, and bringing that to a larger arena as part of a group is very powerful.
  7. Investing myself in the projects and activities I do and in the people around me.
  8. Silence.  Being careful with words and listening to other people more than talking.  This shows to other people that you value what they think, as well as makes them value your words more.
  9. Non-violence in word and thought as well as in physical presence.
  10. Truth.  Not lying beyond white lies.  
  11. Humanization.  When I think of other people, no matter who they are or what they have done, I try to humanize them in my mind, not letting myself write them off as bad people.  Seeing myself in other people is another way of saying this.
  12. Faith that the universe is dominated by good, and reminding myself of this.
  13. Reflecting on everything.  On my behavior, others behavior, consequences of any given action, tenets etc.  This includes the development of self-knowledge and an understanding of oneself.
  14. Being non-judgmental.  Being judgmental gets in the way of seeing other people as full human beings, and it burdens you with unpleasant feelings and emotions.  Forgiveness helps alot with maintaining a non-judgmental outlook.  Besides, I feel like reality deals out harsh judgements and punishments to people as it is, I see no reason to add to that misery.

There are probably lots of other tenets, but those are most of the important ones that I could think of off the top of my head.  I would say as far as the practice goes, it is a continuous process.  I am always practicing, trying to make every action deliberate and in-line with who I want to be.  That is really all it boils down to... if you want to become someone else, practice being that person in your daily life and one day you will see yourself a changed person.  I am also always re-examining the principle and tenets behind my spiritual practice, looking for faults or situations that contradict it.   This has helped me maintain confidence in it and improving it when there is an issue.  

I hope that short summary was what you were looking for.
peace,
Will

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Content from a letter to Sarah #5

7/28/09
I have been meaning to finish this for awhile.  I also couldn't think of how to start it.  So, here is the final part of the initial life story I started out with.  I wrote this before a bunch of the other letters I sent.
After high school... I was lucky enough to get into Brown University where I majored in Anthropology. It introduced me to lots of other cultures and way of thinking about the world; I really couldn't get enough of it. While I was there I helped rebuild the student activist left after it collapsed the semester before I arrived (some huge fight between factions of a grand anti-war coalition that caused most of the active people to stop being active). Being in activist groups was probably the best and most meaningful educational experience I got at college. We built a strong community and managed to get a few victories too. I saw such inspirational dedication and courage from my friends, willing to suffer arrest and harassment from the authorities. (I think I told you this part already, but I will leave it in anyway) Our most awesome victory was with financial aid. Now anyone attending Brown whose family makes less than 60,000 doesn't have to take out loans. I am still active with Students for a Democratic Society (sds), and our national democratic and accessible education campaign. After I graduated I moved to California, because the job market is non-existent in Kentucky, my brother is out here, and a bunch of my friends moved here. The job search took me to Tikkun Magazine where I landed a job as Rabbi Michael Lerner's assistant. He is the editor and has a very appealing vision for a better world. It is a good job, I get to build my skills in alot of random areas, and read and make corrections to the magazine before it goes to print.  But it is very time-consuming.

So that is the short history of my life.  Looks like it is only like 25-ish pages.  I think i might have the beginning of an auto-biography :)

Lets see... what else did I want to talk about.  Ah yes, generosity.  So, as people are my purpose (and indeed, i think people are the meaning of life), being generous to others is very much my MO.  Like excessive generosity.  I think it makes people uncomfortable sometimes, how generous I want to be toward them.  It is one reason that I have acquired 5 mattresses over the past year.  I want to have places for people to sleep, especially my friends who lack a job and a place to live.  My friend Jacob might come stay on one of these beds while he looks for a job.  Liz is staying with us right now. Elisabeth stayed with us while she looked for a place to live.  Sidney stayed with us for like 6 months.  It is very important to me to have space for people to stay if they need to.
  
But back to generosity.  I think it is incredibly important to give, and give often.  It is the glue that holds society together, giving.  It makes everyone feel good, it helps people who need help, it promotes and maintains robust reciprocal relationships (which are by far the most evolutionarily stabilizing kind of relationships for people to have).  Giving just makes everything better.  I have gotten to the point where I always keep an eye out for someone I can give to.  (I think I already explained that I have qualms that I am not actually helping homeless people when I give them money... feeding addictions and so on.  If I ever have food on me when I am asked, I always offer that)  There is a passage in "The Prophet" about how the true believers in life give without thought of joy seeking or moral virtue, and give all of the little they have.  I try to aspire to this, although I fail.  I am always on the search for someone to give to.  The search is almost as fun as the giving.  

Much of my thinking on generosity has been shaped by the short paragraphs that are written in "The Prophet."  I have come to see giving as an essential part of life, something that is so inherent in what it means to live that to not give would be like half-living.  I think that is why I have never been a money seeker, it always seemed burdensome and much like a living death... a death of the soul.  Maybe that is too harsh... maybe it is more of an oppression and silencing of the soul.  

The Prophet section on generosity that has stuck in my head for years is "all you have shall one day be given."  I wish more people could intuitively get that (including myself).  I want to bring into question the whole concept of property, because it seems to me like an embodiment of the negative aspects of individualism.  Keeping things from other people for fear you will go without... it is utterly illogical and only "works" (if you can call it that... maybe functions in a semi-predictable manner is a better way to phrase it) when everyone does it, like in American mainstream culture.  I never ever want to be rich.  That is an oppression I have the power to avoid, and so I shall. There was a sign on a wall in one of the buildings at Friends Camp that was quoting a song.  It went "it's a gift to be simple, it's a gift to be free, it's a gift to come down to where we aught to be."  I love that.  I want to live a simple life, to share my little wealth with people, and to live in a supportive caring community.  In my mind, that is the logical outcome of generosity, if everyone were to take it up.  

Oh, there is a great song by Johnny Cash called "Man in Black."  Aside from being a great melody, it has fantastic lyrics.  This one has particularly stayed in my head:
"I wear the black for those who never read,
Or listened to the words that Jesus said,
About the road to happiness through love and charity,
Why, you'd think He's talking straight to you and me." 

The road to happiness IS through love and charity.  I am so happy when I am allowed to give.  It has made my life so fulfilling and rich in so many ways.  I think that is why like 5 years ago I wrote this statement: "The generous life is the happy life" 



My freshman year of college, I really confronted the fear of not living up to my potential and discovered a way to deal with it in a very good way. (btw, I have always fancied my life's work as activism.) Whenever I am afraid that I am not being effective, I think to myself that I have helped lots of people, and even inspired a few.  The MOST important thing I can do to make this world a better place is to be good to the people around me and try to make their lives better.  That is the social change I want, that is the life's message I want to embody.  We may idolize people who lead mass movements, but it is not them that made the change, it is us.  Small groups of people, doing to each other what they thought was right, that is how things are always done.  A few years after deciding this, I discovered an amazing quote by Thomas Merton: "In the end, it is the reality of personal relationship that saves everything." 

Attached to that quote, is another amazing quote, here it is: "Do not depend on the hope of results. You may have to face the fact that your work will be apparently worthless and even achieve no result at all, if not perhaps results opposite to what you expect. As you get used to this idea, you start more and more to concentrate not on the results, but on the value, the rightness, the truth of the work itself. You gradually struggle less and less for an idea and more and more for specific people. In the end, it is the reality of personal relationship that saves everything."   I love Thomas Merton, I visited the Monastery he lived at when he was alive.  He died in 1968, like so many of our prophets.  

So yeah, when I worry I am not living up to my potential, I remember that what really counts is how I live my life and how I impact those around me. Doing that is accomplishing something for humanity, probably the most important thing anyone can do.

That reminds me of a story... the winter after I reached this conclusion, I was walking with my high school friend Ben, talking politics.  He was just turning lefty at that point in his life. And I think he was a bit overwhelmed at the impossibility of the problems we are confronted with.  In his despair he asked something like "but what can we do, what should we do."  So I gave him this answer, about treating others well as being the most important thing.  I think I took him aback, because after I explained it, the convo kind of died.  I think it fits in very well with his brand of Catholicism.  


Hmmm... I looked through some of the old letters I wrote to you, and I need to talk about feminism.  I feel very lucky that my Mom was such an amazing ethics teacher, she imbued me from a very early age with a feminist outlook.  She put alot of emphasis on treating everyone equally (no matter gender, race, sexual orientation, etc.), and would consistently correct my language usage when I said gender-specific things that should be gender-neutral, like fireman or policeman.  She told me to say Firefighter or police officer.  That is one of hundreds of examples of the way she taught me to challenge the status quo and try to live by a feminist set of values.  I think it is because of her (and my Dad, too, but I think my Mom spent more time doing it) that it is my default setting to treat people with as much respect as possible.  She helped me notice how women were treated differently (a skill that I have developed alot thanks to activism and collective liberation stuff), and to try to point it out and do something about it.  Noticing gender roles is very important to me, and can disturbing sometimes when I notice it.  Especially when I feel compelled to point it out to conservatives, to whom I am still trying to figure out how to do it in a constructive way.

There are so many ingrained things in our society that are hard to even recognize, much less fight, that I feel very blessed that my Mom started developing my recognition tools very early in my development.

I get quite annoyed at egotistical men who always try to dominate discussions and prove their points.  It really bugs the hell out of me.  And it is really hard to deal with productively in a group setting.  I have seen groups dissolve because of the problems that arise from men doing this.  It is a really selfish thing to do, to push and push your point just because you think you are right and that everyone needs to agree with you.  They really disempower those around them, and make them feel apathetic.  I have seen it in activist groups, in corporations, and in friend groups.  There is probably a corollary with women, but I have not had it destroy my communities in the same way that it has happened with this phenomenon in men.  It is really scary how unaware so many of these men are this effect on others too.  sigh.  

So that is something I fight against.  The communities I have helped build have tended to be supportive and caring and have managed to deal with these issues in a way that has allowed them to survive instead of completely collapsing (which i have seen happen from a distance several times). Brown sds did this about a year and a half after I left. The activist communities in the Bay that I have hung around with have tended to be really cool and aware of these problems.  And for the most part, there aren't any men in them that do this, which has been lovely.  You know, I should really write an article on this and try to get it published. 

For some reason I am reminded of a quote I once heard... this idea has stuck with me powerfully ever since I heard it uttered.  In the context of something that was happening in their family the person said "the greatest sin someone can commit is to intentionally hurt someone else, either physically or mentally."  And I was like yeah!  that is so true.  It seems to me that so many selfish people do this on a daily basis, and it is not only destructive to their communities, it is an oppression unto themselves as well.  See, that is something most people have not yet realized, that the oppressors are greatly harmed by the oppression too.  Doing bad things to people hurts you as well as them.  Freeing the world from oppression frees the oppressors as well.  A large segment of the left does not realize this, they are too overcome with the Us vs. Them mentality.  They believe that through defeating your enemies, you will win.  This set of means is a false prophet.  I do not believe that in defeating your enemies, you win.  Only through mutual freedom can we ever hope to achieve justice.  Winning should be defined as converting your enemies to your cause.  I think Christ grasped that, which is why he told us to love our enemies as ourselves.  Loving our enemies allows us to free ourselves from our egos, and our need to have our beliefs be publicly vindicated as truth... and to act in the best interest of all. It allows us to treat enemies in such a way that they will be forced to cease to consider themselves our enemies.  Atleast, that is the way I see it, and have seen it work.    

Friday, July 23, 2010

Content from a letter to Sarah #4

Where was I... oh yes, activism. So, Brown SDS(Students for a democratic Society) started out as a vehicle to unite the left. We had long talks about it, and the fall of 06 we had a network formed which started having regular potlucks. We had a diso guide produced, which we distributed to the freshmen at the beginning of spring semester. We had held several anti-war protests and we were toying around with student rights issues. We held several solidarity events for things that were happening nationally. We collected signatures when that Arab American student was tazed like 8 times at UCLA. We did lots of solidarity stuff with other groups, we went to a Democracy Matters event at the state capitol (a half an hour walk from campus) and helped push for reform of the disenfranchisement of felons law. We tried to storm a corporation meeting with SLA (Student Labor Alliance), but only managed to get onto the balcony. We threw leaflets over the dinner tables. SLA was pushing for food services to stop labor squeezing part time workers, and give them full employment and benefits. I will talk more about what I did with SDS in a little bit.

With OIF (the anti-war group), we attended a bunch of protests, and brought some speakers to campus. We held several protests ourselves, and some of our group, including Bucky, got arrested at a Senator's office for refusing to leave until he signed a statement giving his support for ending the war. It was an action organized by the American Friends Service Committee. I love Quakers. One of the cooler things we did was we managed to get an art grant from the art department so we could buy steaks to put into the ground. We bought enough wood for 655 steaks, and the cold night of March 18th (or 19th) we hammered them into the ground. Some of the ground was frozen, which made it difficult. Let me tell you, even with 6 people there, it took us a few hours to hammer that many stakes into the ground. It took up a half acre, i would guess. Each stake represented a thousand people who had died. (There was a big report that estimated that 655,000 Iraqis died, and had pretty good science behind it) Three stakes represented American fatalities at the time. People said it was one of the most powerful anti-war things they had seen, that it really brought it home.

Spring of 07 SDS started looking at Brown's dealings with war profiteering companies. We found out that Raytheon (makes missiles, among other things) was going to be at the career fair about 4 days before it happened. So, impromptu protest! It was actually surprisingly well-planned. We had about 20 people with signs make a soft picket in front of the Raytheon booth. It was alot of fun. The career fair people called the campus police on us, so we had a nice battle of words with the cops. They brought 5 people up on charges of some bs rule, and dragged out the proceedings all semester. But we won, every charge was dropped, cause we had the right to be there. They did not bother the protest that happened in fall of 07 (I had left by this point, but I heard through word of mouth).

But the Raytheon protest turned into a big media spectacle in the college paper. We won lots of coverage and some sympathetic press. It really got the war issue to be talked about on campus. Amazing how something as simple as that can get people talking.

After the success with the Raytheon protest, we looked into other local war profiteers that we could target. We found Textron. Textron seems much less scrupulous than Raytheon, they make cluster bombs. Cluster bombs are nasty, if you dont know what they are, you should look them up... but they kill way too many civilians. Textron also gets like 90% of its business from the DoD (Department of Defense), and most of the rest from the IDF(Israeli Defense Force). So, we had a die-in in front of their international headquarters which happens to be in Providence. It was so much fun. About 40 of us marched down to downtown Providence, took the street in front of their building, and all lay down and wailed. We had fake blood (raspberry jam, I believe) (also, i just realized that you spell raspberries with a "p". I always thought it was just rasberry cause it is always pronounced "raz-berry") and it was alot of fun. The police showed up and formed a line in front of the building. I was video-tapping the whole thing, staying mostly on the police to make sure they stayed within the law. After we had died for awhile, everyone got together, put jam on their hands, and rushed the building, plastering it with reddish handprints. It is quite amazing to see people non-violently rush through a police line. There are a bunch of pictures I will have to show you.

We got alot of media attention for this. Even a one line reference from Good Morning America. National Media! So exciting. And we were just like 20 committed kids, who managed to get some friends together to do this. Who knew it could be so simple.
But, as we were leaving the protest, we didn't realize that one of our number was staying behind to talk to reporters. Because he was out of the group, the cops were able to arrest him for "disorderly conduct." The charges were eventually dropped. But it just goes to show how there is safety in numbers.

Another project SDS worked on was the creation of a student union. It got off the ground pretty well, we managed to sign up one fifth of the school in the matter of a month. We held a general assembly and talked about tuition hikes and how we wanted to organize ourselves. I hear that the organizing around this got too connected to sds to get off the ground, but it was still pretty awe-inspiring. It did contribute, though, to some significant reforms in the student government, which was essentially entirely undemocratic and worthless.

The student union was also part of an overarching accessibility campaign to lower the cost of tuition so that the school could be more economically diverse. We started off pretty well with this campaign. We got alot of signatures on a petition. We formed the student union. We really managed to build support and make it publicly noticeable that we had a ton of support. And perhaps my greatest college activist accomplishment was that I helped start this campaign. After a year of organizing for this, sds won. In spring of 08, Brown announced that students whose families make under 60,000 will not have to take out loans. So amazing. When I started being an activist, I didn't think it would be this easy. Apparently all you have to do is make a big enough stink about something and it will happen. I feel soooo good about helping start this. It seems to be in the tradition of activists at Brown. The only reason I was able to go was because of needs-blind admission. And that was an initiative of the Young Communist League, who managed to get a big coalition on the left together and push for it. So I continued the tradition, by getting better financial aid for those who come after me, just as those who came before me did for me.

Activism has kind of calmed down for me, since I came to Cali. Sadly. I haven't been able to find a large group of people to work with. Plus, my job takes up so much of my time, it is really hard. I do have a few activist friends who I do stuff with, but it feels like there is no time and too few people.

I have always been on a path toward being an activist and raising a stink about injustice. I may try to be polite all the time, probably too often, but I have a very powerful urge to confront what I consider wrong. My friends from high school were not surprised that I was near the center of the re-invigoration of the left on Brown's campus.

I would credit alot of this reinvigoration to the intentional way I went about building community in the group and how other people took up the task. I tried to set a tone of caring, fun, joy and just general support. Most lefty groups do not have that, and they suffer greatly for it. When there is big trouble, they attack each other. Not the groups I helped build. When they have difficulties, they stick together and support each other. They don't blame each other for mistakes and are ready to forgive each other. At the 2008 national convention that I went to, there was a workshop on group emotional support and caring (yeah, sds is fucking awesome like that!), and the 5 members of Brown's chapter that were in attendance went to that one. Cause they know how important it is. And I feel greatly responsible for setting that tone. I am so proud of what Brown's sds chapter did after I left.
Now I just wish I could get the whole organization to understand it. And get them to use it against injustices, not just for good internal dynamics. Love is a far more powerful weapon than anything hate can throw at you. Love will win over enemies, hate has no such power. I really love Harry Potter's portrayal of this fact. Anyone who had any smidgen of love in their hearts could not be a true follower of Voldemort.

I still do stuff with sds. I would have gone to the national convention if it had not fallen on the same weekend as my cousin Jodi's wedding. Lets see, what do I do. I welcome new sign-ups to sds in the western half of the country. I work to try to maintain communication between chapters out here, which is tough cause they are few and far between. And I maintain a news archive of everything that gets reported on sds nationally (google alerts are amazing for this!). I am constantly amazed at how much news we get. On average, during school semesters, we get about 3 news stories mentioning us every day. Utterly fantastic. (I have stepped back from most of these in mid-2010)

One of the reasons I have remained so committed to sds is because of its willingness to approach things like emotional support. And because it is the only group I have seen where people of differing ideologies come together and manage to get along somehow (how the Maoists and the Anarchists get along in sds, I still don't know, but they do it, somewhat). This is not a common thing on the left. Plus my job does not provide me with the organizing fix that I crave, so I help out sds the little bit that I can all by my lonesome out here.
In case this hasn't become apparent, I will be an activist for the rest of my life. It is my career, so to speak. The life path that has seemed apparent to me ever since I discovered my purpose. I know I will never be defeated by any momentary burnout I feel. I have survived years in the wilderness in KY, and years of overwork at Brown. Those two extremes are often the cause of burnout. I have survived unpleasant organizing environments and managed to convert them into good ones. That is also a prime burnout causer, bad social environments.

Just so you know, i didn't used to be so confident about all this stuff. It has taken me years of self-reflection to really KNOW all this, and understand it, even if my intuition has pointed me in this direction since I can remember.

Monday, May 25, 2009

Thoughts on Non-Violence

Social proof, that is what it all comes down to. Without a significant number of people believing something, it isn't going to happen. Non-violence needs more social proof to be seen as a mainstream solution. Luckily, even the under-developed ideas that currently constitute non-violent thought show how powerful it can be at creating social proof.

The best way to do this is to develop a body of knowledge on how non-violence works, as well as a group of people to go around and exercise these methods. It is only in acting on these ideas and principles in a very public way that we can prove their effectiveness. So, we need to both develop an institute to study the subject (already a few in existence!) and a systematic group to practice and refine methods. There are plenty of groups using non-violence out there, but they do not do it systematically and experimentally, nor do they take meticulous notes on it. Non-violent Peaceforce comes as close to this as I have seen. As much as I love them (they are friggin' amazing!) I wish they would put more effort into smaller scale trainings that would empower locals to fight their own battles as well as be part of the NP network. While I totally dig their interventions in the Phillipines and Sri Lanka, I think there is so much more potential than only in those two places. I want something with the capacity to train thousands in the U.S. every year.

I also think that NP focuses too much on peacekeeping as a third party activity. Part of what makes non-violence so powerful is employing it to fight a conflict, not just as a third party peacekeeper. I want to prove to the public that we can fight and win a war non-violently. And to do that, I think it will take thousands of people across the country using non-violent techniques against violent attackers and winning... and making the point that the only reason they won was because of the use of non-violence.

I will give some examples of what I have in mind... I want an organization that can train:
Unions to be more effective at their struggles.
Groups fighting for civil rights issues (racism, sexism, homophobia)
Poverty fighters
College activists
Copwatches - I want them to have the legal authority to intervene if a police officer is doing something illegal, and they will have to win that.
Environmental activists.
People to deal with day to day conflicts in their own lives...
The list could go on for awhile.

I want to help develop an alternative to the violent military and something that can win against the military-industrial complex. I want to disabuse the global public of its infatuation with and belief in violence. I want to give the movement a weapon more effective than violence so that we can transform this world.

Monday, May 18, 2009

The Futility of Violence

Over the decade of contemplating the issue, I have really come to see violence as futile.  (I would like to make a distinction here, violence is completely different than resistance and force.  Both of which can be done more effectively without using violence).
  
The state has a monopoly on violence, and holy crap, do they exploit that monopoly.  They can easily harm and kill thousands without taking a single causality.  Their tactics have been refined over 5000 years of testing, and they have a institutional research infrastructure second to none.  Even from a violent standpoint the military and police arm of the government is so vast and so effective at violence that it is pointless to hit back.   Many may despair at the armies arrayed against the forces of social justice.  Not I.  For they may have the homefield advantage when it comes to violence, but they are so constricted and captured by the idea of violence that they are unable to fight any other way.  They are a prisoner of their own beliefs.  

By believing that violence is the only way to force people to do things, believing that it is the most powerful force known, and believing that it is, with all things considered, effective, is the key weakness that will allow non-violent resistance to triumph.  Non-violence performs a kind of ideological jujitsu on violence.  It turns what violence believes to be its greatest strength into its greatest weakness.  

Lets see, how to put this.  By committing acts of violence, people make themselves targets for the state to oppress.  The state's monopoly on violence is so ingrained in our society that when violence is committed by anyone else, that person automatically loses the moral high ground in the eyes of the public.  They are seen as a danger to the public, justifying the use of violence against them by the state, in the eyes of the public.  That is the typical scenario violent revolutions face.  Non-violent revolutions, however, totally throw off all the government's preconceived notions of conflict.  

How do you fight people who refuse to comply and refuse to respond violently?  With even partially effective politicking they can maintain the moral high ground against the government, making any violent sortie against them publicly deplorable.  They can non-violently provoke violence from the state in such a way that will undermine the population's belief in state supremacy.  Non-violence uses the violence of an oppressor to undermine their legitimacy. Turning their weapons into liabilities, and their attempted oppression into a PR disaster.  

A non-violent army would be 100x as effective as a violent one.  Imagine if we poured 200,000 unarmed people into our enemies' country?  What would they do?  What could they do?  They could try to kill them, but this would only cause them to lose prestige and support.  They could try to imprison them, but there are not enough prisons to hold them.  Deport them, they just come back.  Confine them and they will drain resources and sneak out.  Leave them alone and they will convert your population.  It is a lose/lose situation for a government.  None of their usual tools of control work against non-violence, and they are left utterly frustrated and stumped as to how to effectively fight back.  

There are some caveats to non-violence, however.  The cause has to be just, or one cannot maintain the moral high ground which is essential to victory.  The means have to be compatible with the end which is sought.  The people have to believe they are doing the right thing.  And, like anything else, it has to be organized, media-saavy, financially supported, and be able to maintain a certain base of support. 

So, this has been my most recent addition to the violence/non-violence debate.  As pre my previous post, I tried to write it in a non-competitive way that would not cause people who believe in violence to dig in their heels. 

The Violence vs. Non-Violence Debate

Wow, I haven't posted in awhile.  Oh well, I will try to make up for it.  

The debate over violence in the left gets pretty ridiculous sometimes, and has been the cause of way too many hurt feelings and splits.  It may seem like a fruitless debate, because there will not be consensus on the issue in the foreseeable future, but I think it is still important to have.  It can be a lesson in how to treat people who disagree with us.  If open to the lesson, one can learn a great deal about how to approach people and try to change their minds.  Analyzing their world-view and beliefs, one can practice adapting arguments to fit the target.  The real challenge in these discussions is not proving the other party wrong, but disarming them and planting the seed of one's idea.

Too many egotistical lefties just want to prove the other side wrong.  It is understandable, it is a nice ego boost to "win" an enraged argument.  But it is not likely to get the opposing party to change their mind.  It is more likely to get them to dig in their heels and refuse to concede.  It becomes a contest, and that is just counter-productive.  Playing verbal jujitsu is necessary to escape this trap.  Do not frame the discussion as a contest of who is right and who is wrong, switch the frame to something that is non-competitive, whatever form of that which is appropriate for the discussion.  

This is particularly hard to do since the American way of speaking, especially the male and academic ways of discussion are often framed as contests.  It has even been hard for me to come up with an example of a different way to frame a discussion.  In fact, I would deem this a great oppression, in a most Orwellian sense, in that our very manner of speaking has been corrupted to such an extent as to limit our capacity to imagine alternatives.

I wish the proponents of non-violence would take this tack on their discussions.  It is far more compatible with the style of non-violence than that of violence, plus I am definitively on the side of non-violence and would like to see the idea win more hearts and minds.  

Thursday, November 20, 2008

sds at Brown

8 members of Students for a Democratic Society at Brown are being brought up on disciplinary charges for entering University Hall when The Brown Corporation was meeting and trying to present them with a petition signed by 1000 students, faculty and staff. They are being charged with allegedly hurting Brown University employees (i.e. Brown police). None of these injuries required hospitalization. But this raises some questions. Why are only 8 of them being charged? Does the University administration think that sds intentionally hurt people? Or is this just some authorities scared to lose their power, so they are trying to make an example out of a few people to scare the others off. That is what it seems to be. They are just out for retribution for a very public disruption of a Corporation meeting and the threat that 1000 supporters wanting democracy presents to this governing group.

These charges are arbitrary and unjust, and it just seems like they were created to have something to charge sds with. I am happy, however, to see Brown sds in the news so much, and making such a large impact on the minds of students. That takes organization, time and effort. I know that if sds keeps this kind of pressure up, they will have some measure of success.

I hope, though, that sds arranges a face-saving way out for the Corporation to take. Giving them an out will allow sds to determine the way this ends and provide a win-win situation for sds and the Corporation. Sds will get some consessions, and the Corporation will get this embarrasing issue out of the news and out of people's minds. Then sds can start another round of demands, make a big fuss about it, get alot of media coverage and support, and give the Corporation a way out that benefits both groups. That way, we achieve their consent to doing what we want, without the often fruitless battle of chicken that two groups with indomnitable wills tend to fall into. There is no sense in a total war mentality that demands the complete surrender of an opponent when one's opponent has a strong sense of pride that will always prevent them from taking a step that they feel will humiliate them. Better to understand this about one's opponent and use it to one's advantage than to try to force capitutlation, because that almost always will never come.

The same goes for the Corporation. If they understood sds, they would try to work something out, because sds is not going to be cowed by a disciplinary hearing or even having some of its members suspended from school. That will only back sds into a corner and cause them to fight harder. But no, the Corporation is arrogant enough to think it can ignore the widespread wish for more democracy at Brown and do as it wishes because it is the authority. More democracy would teach Brown students how to be better citizens and how to compromise and resolve conflict. This would be an objective improvement in the atmosphere at Brown as well as the educational environment. It is so sad to see a group charged with improving and sustaining the Brown community can have its vision of clouded so thouroughly by pride.

Monday, October 20, 2008

Politicians and power

Real power is not a commodity, it is consent.  Specifically, consent from large groups of people. Power can only be bought when people consent to being bought off, and it can only be stolen when people consent to giving it up through some form of intimidation.  But there is a difference between active consent and apathetic consent.  Active consent produces real, tangible power that can move mountains and change the wheel.  Apathetic consent produces the shadow of power, people go along with it, but their hearts aren't in it.  Consent to the activities and policies of politicians fall into the second category.  Only half the population is motivated to spend one hour or less to do something as easy as voting, now that is apathetic consent to be governed.   

Too many people believe politicians are able to do things, that they have power enough to make decisions themselves.  That is not the nature of the beast.  It was the nature of Monarchs and Emperors, back when people put more stock in the authority of their leaders and were much much more willing to act on their leader's wishes.  But it is not so today.  If a politician asked me to do something, I doubt I would do it unless it was something I was going to do anyway.  I bet the same is true for most of you out there.  We are forced to apathetically consent to their existence, because there is no alternative, as of yet.  Because they receive this type of consent, politicians do not have latitude to do what they wish.  We have stripped them of that power by our lackluster enthusiasm.  Like most of us, their hands are tied, they are stuck in Weber's iron cage of rules and regulations, and without support, they are unable to do what they want just as much as we are unable to create what we wish. 

I am reminded of a story about FDR.  During the early days of his administration, he met with labor leaders, they gave a presentation to try to convince him to adopt their policies.  At the end, FDR told them that they had convinced him and he completely agreed with what they were saying, and that now they had to go out into the public arena and force him to do it.  Hating politicians for being spineless and unable to do what we want is like hating grass for being unable to remain rigid against the wind.  If we want to shift the way the grass bends, we have to change the direction of the wind.  

I don't bother getting angry at politicians anymore.  Not worth the effort, they just do what they do and that won't change until we change our system of government.  Getting some active consent going for a policy will change policy, but it will not change the anti-participatory nature of our republic.  

It seems to me that too many people on the left focus on the people at the top levels of our government, and focus on them for failing to live up to America's ideals.  But they don't have the real power.  The population that apathetically consents to their existence has the REAL power, and they nullify it by being apathetic.  If we ever want to change our society, we have to change the minds of the population and get them organized and acting.  Politicians are a moot point, when the population's minds are changed, the minds of politicians will be changed. Just look at the environmental movement's success in converting the general population.  Even Republicans are now trying to appeal to green-minded voters.  We shouldn't waste our emotional energies decrying politicians and fighting the power-structures unless these activities are aimed at changing people's minds and mobilizing them.  And unfortunately, they often are not aimed at this, they are aimed at forcing authority figures to do what we want.

Monday, September 22, 2008

Bread and Roses

I have been listening to some classic labor songs lately, and they are so awesome. One of my favorite lines is from the song "Joe Hill." It goes like this: "Takes more than guns to kill a man, says Joe 'I didn't die'... says Joe 'what they can never kill went on to organize'"
This is such a powerful message, that when people stand up for something and die in its defense, that their spirit lives on in others. They inspire people with their sacrifice and their selflessness. Joe Hill was a Swedish-American labor organizer and a Wobbley (term for a member of the Industrial Workers of the World aka the IWW) in the early 1910s. He traveled around the country organizing people to fight for their rights, and penned songs, poems and speeches. He coined the term "pie in the sky" referencing religious figure's claims of rewards after death but apparent apathy toward the living conditions of the average person. His execution was a sham of justice. He had recieved a gun wound (he said it was over a woman) the same night that two people were murdered. During the crime, one of the two murders was wounded, and of the five people with gun shot wounds who went to doctors in the area that night it would be the labor organizer who was tried, convicted, and executed. No motive could be determined for why Hill would have committed the crime, and many of the facts just didn't fit. But he was still convicted. The trial was very controversial and the media made a big deal about it. Hill gained a bit of fame from it, and his loss has been morned in the labor movement since he was murdered by the government.

Another song which tugs at my heart strings is "Aragon Mill" by Peggy Seeger. It describes the economic desolation caused by the closing of the mill in a small rural town. The mill was the main employer, and once it pulled out, it left a void of unemployment. It reminds me alot of my hometown, with its 23% poverty rate, and the darkness that a lack of jobs creates in a community. This lyric always gets me, sometimes I tear up from it: "Oh, I'm too poor to move, and I'm too young to die, and their's no where to go for my family and I, cause the mill has shut down, its the only life I know, tell me where can I go, tell me where can I?" There is such pain in her voice in that lyric. The level of helplessness that she is expressing is really staggering. Maybe if I had not seen this type of economic situation with my own eyes as I was growing up, I wouldn't be as sympathetic. But this song plucks my heart strings like few others.

Then there is "Bread and Roses." People need more than just subsistence. Earning a wage just for survival is not the way people were designed to live. My favorite lyric in this is "hearts starve as well as bodies, give us bread, but give us roses." People need beauty, fun, and love in their lives or they will starve as assuridly as if they did not get their daily bread. I have seen many people whose hearts are starved. Interestingly, most of these people are not in economic need, they are quote well off. But they have no time for the things that are truly important in life. And this leaves them starving. They try to fix this hunger with material goods. But that is like eating empty calories to fight malnutrition, it does nothing to heal the body, just fills the stomach for a short time. True and lasting happiness comes from other people and the beauty in human interactions, not from consumption.

Monday, August 4, 2008

sds National Convention

The sds National Convention was a great time.  It was a very reinvigorating experience.  I have really missed a strong political community.  It was also wonderful to see my old friends from Brown and Providence, and to meet some of the new people there.  I am SO SO proud of them.  When we decided to start an sds chapter, I had a sense of the kind of organization I wanted to push Brown sds to become.  An organization that provided a space for a strong community that supported its members, and knew how important community is.  Well, I have to say, the organization has become what I hoped for.  The members of Brown and Providence sds emotionally support each other when they are feeling down, stay together and not explode at each other when they are dealt a set-back, and strongly interweave friendship and fun into their activities.  
And so, because the culture of Brown/Providence sds is so strongly community-oriented, they turn out more people, they work harder without burning out, they are ambassadors for the organization wherever they go, and they have incorporated sds into their identity.  Our small chapter turned out 9 people (10 if one includes me) to the convention, which is comparable to much larger cities, and more than came from the entire Northwest.  There was a workshop at the conference that focused on building a community of support within sds, and almost the entire chapter attended, because they realize how important it is.  SO AWESOME.  

I met alot of really awesome sdsers at the convention, and while the structure that was produced isnt ideal, I do hope that it manages to get things done and help coordinate the working groups.  I have the feeling that we will need strong organization to be able to absorb the influx of members that is likely to occur after Obama is inaugurated and is unable or unwilling to get things done.  
There is such a diverse group of people in sds, while I worry that the organization would turn in a direction that I am opposed to, I wish more people would acknowledge that every organization that has people in it is going to be messy.  There is way too much pure-ism on the left, people are way too willing to simply wash their hands of an organization that doesn't completely agree with them on everything.  That is such a prideful move... essentially saying that the only reason people would disagree with someone, that those who disagree are both stupid and monolithically unchangeable.  This is where sectarianism comes from, when people are more concerned with their own righteousness than with the health of the community.  It is so self-centered, and it is why there are so many splinter groups on the left.  People are so certain they are right, and so concerned about remaining pure and in a pure organization that they completely disassociate themselves from each other.  You can't organize a fundamental change to society if you can not even work together, much less compromise on something that enough people like that it could have traction in the general society.     
I want to make sure people don't think I am ranting at sds... while there are some people in sds who are self-righteous and anti-consensus, the vast majority of sdsers are awesome and flexible.  That is why I am still able to spend time with them without going insane, they generally understand that democracy is not about forcing one's views on others, but about dialogue and coming to an agreement with opposing parties.  
I also heard that there is a group at UCBerkeley that is thinking about affiliating with sds, which would be amazing.  I have so hoped that there would be an sds chapter around here that I could go to.  
So, here's to sds! 

Thursday, July 10, 2008

RYM and societal change.

RYM.  The Revolutionary Youth Movement.  It is something I have been thinking about alot lately, analyzing and reflecting upon its historical impact. 
RYM was a strategic vision that SDS laid out in the 60s, not to be confused with the sds sectarian groups that named themselves RYM I (which eventually became the weathermen) and RYM II (that went maoist and communist and eventually gave birth to countless splinter groups).  Now, I don't think I am getting this exactly correct... but what Michael Lerner described in one of his unpublished books is the basis for this understanding of RYM...  The strategy was simple and very long-term.  The idea was education based: you make a concerted and structured effort to teach as many young people as possible about progressive politics, ethics, and ideas.  You convince them and give them a reason for investing themselves in those politics. When they leave school they will go into the world and spread the ideas, and live their lives by them as much as is possible inside the system.  This will have a culture shifting impact.  Their actions will shift the perceptions of those around them.  Their contributions to their communities will change localities.  

This strategy combines the finest strengths of the left.  Strength of ideas, education, embodiment of principles, decentralized structure and grassroots action are all combined into an extremely long-term strategy that appears to have been quite effective.  It acknowledged the shifts that always occur when generations turn-over.  As new generations come and older ones leave, culture changes.  RYM takes advantage of this natural process of culture change by attempting to reform society by reshaping the minds of new generations.  

Unfortunately, RYM was only practiced for... perhaps the better part of a decade, if not less.  But it's impact is striking.  Take the issue of racism for example.  50 years ago, racism was the dominant viewpoint among large swaths of the American public, including in my hometown of Edmonton.  But now, racism has been forced underground.  It is now a shameful thing to be seen as or acting as a racist.  
But aside from issue oriented changes, I would also like to see how 5 to 10 years of RYM affected the life of a single person... me.  I am proud to say my parents were both products of RYM, whether they know it or not.   The ideas they garnered from the 60s allowed them to move to rural Kentucky and raise me there.  My mom's strong strain of feminism probably would have not been able to develop had it not been for RYM, and I would have lost one of the major positive influences on the way I structure my behavior toward everyone.  My Dad's political side also had an immense impact on shaping my perspective and direction in life.   
The compassion and dedication both of my parents have shown through their social work were, in part, inspired by their politics which were shaped by RYM.   Their dedication to helping others, even if you have to live "in the trenches" as my Dad has said, has consistently inspired me to live up to their example.  

Now lets look at the town I grew up in.  It is a town of 1500 people in rural Kentucky.  The poverty rate is nearly 25%. According to my Dad, there were duels in the streets in the 50s.  However, over the past 3 decades things have calmed down.  There are still plenty of problems, but since the influx in the 70s of hippies and people shaped by RYM, the culture of the county has changed.  Many of these hippie settlers have become community leaders.  Their children have gone on to change the minds of their peers and further the reverberating effects of RYM.  I can see the culture-shifting affects in my hometown of the concerted efforts of relatively small group of tens of thousands of young adults over the course of several years trying to institute RYM.  If between 5 and 10 years of instituting RYM can so drastically change our society that a small rural town in the middle of no where Kentucky is impacted this much, then imagine what a organized effort of 20 years of RYM could do.  With this technique we could restructure the very foundations upon which our society rests over the course of the next 100 years.  


Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Strategy for Changing the US... Take 1

I wrote most of this about a month ago, and was going to add more, but life became really busy, so I decided to publish this as is, since it has been a month an a half since I wrote something.

The question in front of us is not naming the system, or even understanding it, but figuring out how to rebuild it and our society to reflect our highest vision. The people exist to do it. The resources exist to do it. The motivation exists to do it. The only reason it has not happened is because we don't agree on how to do it and we are not organized enough to implement it. We need to understand
This is my first try at setting down a skeletal strategy to restructure our entire society to make it more human, democratic, sustainable, and a generally affirming way of life. This strategy is still in bits and pieces at this point, but I think there is some worth in writing it down so i dont forget.
1. Create local democratic structures. Not sure what these will look specifically, but I imagine them as General Assemblies for non-administrative decision-making, with working groups (open to everyone) to execute tasks. If working groups become too large (What a problem that would be! Too much participation, is it possible?), then they can be split into several working groups that coordinate activity. The judicial system would stop being punitive, and become a rehabilitating presence. It would consist of a system where people would share their grievances and perspectives with each other, as well as consensus-based sentencing.
This really needs further study and experimentation in my opinion, hopefully with some resources behind this endeavor.

2. Non-violent Army. Just a really cool idea that has been stuck in my head for a few years now. They would have the discipline and cohesion of a regular army, minus the extreme hierarchy and violence. They would put their lives on the line for others, just like violent army soldiers and they would be extensively trained in conflict resolution, non-violent tactics and strategy, as well as human behavior. The non-violent army would be trained to confront violent forces as well as other non-violent forces. They would go on campaigns against various injustices across the country, mobilizing thousands. Again, resources are the key problem, as well as research into how to do it. The know-how is extremely important. Hopefully we will be able to create the equivalent of army manuals for the nv army.

3. Parallel Structures. With some local democratic institutions in place, these towns and counties could start forming parallel structures to state and federal governments. These would do everything that an organization composed of the entire community should do, including provide social services (police, hospitals, firefighters, general social support, protection and help)

Sunday, March 23, 2008

The Importance of Organization

I have talked some on organization alittle before on this blog. But I want to reiterate how important being organized is.
Maybe I should define what I mean by being organized. To be organized is to do the following:

1. Keeping your word. When you say you will do something, do it. This will give you a good reputation and inherently further your goals.
2. Hard work. Cliche as it is, hard work will get things done. And in the world of activism where it feels like not much gets done, this is a crucial attribute.
3. Coordination. Stay in contact with people and coordinate your efforts. Avoid duplicate tasks and work out a system by which everyone can be working toward a goal, and know what they need to do to make sure the whole group gets it done.
4. Community. Help, protect, care for, and love each other. No other facet of being organized will motivate people more than being a part of a strong caring community. It will also provide an unparalleled sense of security that is very hard to find in life.
5. Courage. Acknowledge and accept your fears, but do not let them interfere with your activities. Change takes the courage to fight (ever non-violently) despite the seemingly insurmountable odds. Of course, courage must be partnered with understanding and vision to prevent brave but pointless acts.
6. Understanding. To be organized, we need to understand the cause and effect relationships or our actions, and how our actions will impact different audiences. Understanding other people, and how they think is also crucial. Also, a general understanding of the world is important. Overall, the more knowledge and problem solving skills you can fit into your brain, the better. It is much better to build a sturdy net to catch fish than to try to catch them with your hands.
7. Mass numbers. To truly be organized, you need lots of people working toward a common goal. They do not necessarily have to all be coordinated, but it helps.
8. Planning. Use all of your understanding to plan a campaign to actually reach the goal. Make contingency plans and make sure everyone knows what the plan is.
9. Love. By far the most important. This one encompasses everything we seek to change in the world. It can remake our entire world if we have the courage to embrace it. Love everyone, and only denounce actions. Forgive and give whenever there is the chance.


If we look at corporations, who have a massive amount of power in our society, we see that they are very very well organized. However, they concentrate on only: understanding, hard work, coordination, planning and keeping your word. Because they have mastered these 5 skills, the relatively few people under any given corporations employ have managed to affect the other 6.5 billion people and often not in a good way. However, their lack of concern about mass numbers, community, courage, and love leaves them vulnerable. An organization that embraced the vision of organization I have laid out here would easily out-power them and be able to wield the fiery-sword of influence to truly slay the injustice that wreaks havoc in the hearts of so many.

There is a strength to this outline that may not be obvious at first. It will bring people in by the droves. Having an effective and loving group actively seeking change, one that fulfills its members deep need to care for each other will be an earth-shaking movement that will fundamentally remake civilization. I have tried to outline my view on organizing, that couples the "professionalism" of corporate America with the love, courage and community that I have found to be amazingly effective at motivating and improving people.

I hope to see a movement that embraces all 9 factors, because, I believe, if I do see it, then we will be able to heal the world.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Reflections on Organization

I am convinced more and more that effective organization combined with a vision for the future are essential to changing this society. Nothing short of this will have the ability to shift the debate decisively toward justice. My college experience has taught me this vital lesson.
The first student group I started in college failed because it was all vision and no organization. I learned so much about organizing by doing that, and taking that responsibility. It was a crash course in organizing, and I am so glad that I had that experience. The next clubs I helped found showed me the importance of organization. Operation Iraqi Freedom (Brown's anti-war group, abbr. as OIF) and Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) gave me a good contrast to look at what effective organization can do. As much as I love OIF, it does not have as much of a vision as SDS, mostly because it is narrowly defined as an anti-war group. SDS is multi-issue and is able to articulate a much broader and more compelling dream of a better world. OIF was able to draw alot of attention to the war issue, but I think it has been unable to significantly shift the debate about the war in the Brown community (yet!). It is almost like preaching to the choir. Brown students already mostly agreed that the war was terrible and needs to be ended, so raising awareness did not need to be the primary goal. The primary goal would have needed to be trying to mobilize people, creating a forum for people to discuss what they could do, and setting goals to achieve. I feel that OIF has not managed to do that, and I think that is because its politics did not embrace a vision for the future that would have spawned goals.
SDS was better able to push the public dialog because it could look at a problem, apply its vision to the problem, and come up with a novel goal that was generally new to the dialog on Brown's campus. Presenting new ideas and giving people a concrete, local goal to "hope for" and work toward will mobilize people. And if there is effective organization behind that mobilization, it can really do amazing things (like signing up 1/6 of the student population into a new student union in two weeks. YEAH SDS!).
So, having had experience with groups that had vision, but no organization; organization but no vision; and one with both organization and vision, I have found that having both is far more effective at changing things. These groups are also more appealing (to me).

Governments are an interesting entity to analyze through this lens. They have plenty of organization, but no vision. Even when certain politicians have vision, and actively express it, the organizational inertia of the government often seems to be unmovable. This may be why so many people are cynical about government, because even if you have strong organization, you cannot do much without the proverbial compass of vision to point you in the right direction. However, like all organizations, governments are movable through outside pressure. A large movement of people can push a government toward doing something.
But this is not the way governments are supposed to be. Theoretically, a government is supposed to be
a forum to discuss the issues on people's minds, a representation of the collective will of the society, and the organ which is supposed to act on that will. People always blame the government when social problems arise and/or continue to exist. That is because
the government is the institution charged with protecting, reinforcing, helping and stabilizing society (and the people within it). It seems that the current governmental structure in these United States does not fulfill its goal. I think that part of the reason for this is because government is no longer defined as just another institution in society that has a specific purpose.
I am not sure what the government is now defined as, but I have the feeling it varies between different groups of people.
Anyway, I want to figure out how to structure a government so that it can really be what it is supposed to be.