Thoughts on Self-forgiveness

I have come to truly admire religion's almost magic ability to facilitate people's self-forgiveness. A great example of this is the born-again experience or even something as simple as confession... from what I have observed, people who had wronged others and go through a religious ritual concerning being forgiven find it much easier to forgive themselves. I do not think secular people have anything that compares, or atleast I have not noticed it.

Many have little compassion for people who do wrong. I see no logical reason to hold that position. Everyone does things that are not right, and judging them for their trespasses does no good for anyone. We all have weaknesses and failings. Whether they acknowledge it or not, everyone is emotionally impacted in a negative way by their wrongs. Everyone is human so we are all deserving.

Forgiving oneself is much harder than forgiving others. The absence of self-forgiveness causes personal anguish that can adversely affect people's behavior, leading them to act out of this pain. This negative behavior can take many forms, usually providing only short-term relief while only adding to their long-term burden of guilt. Some behaviors I have noticed:

*people often try to belittle others to feel superior,
*hurt people so they don't feel alone in their pain
*being on-edge and easily roused to anger
*pushing people away - socially isolating behavior
*seeking attention through negative behavior
*when others expect negative things from someone, they react by conforming to that standard.
*identity shifting toward viewing oneself as a wrong-doer, reinforcing a cycle of pain
*feeling the necessity to act wrongfully to prove ones identity.

I think this and other similar behavior stems from the following emotions that run through people when they are saddled with a lack of self-forgiveness.

*Guilt
*Anguish
*Fear
*Anger, hatred
*Resentment
*Feeling isolated, and a fear of loneliness
*Social paranoid - expecting no one to like them
*A feeling of helplessness and like they are condemned for life.

The only way out of this that I can see is self-forgiveness. Making amends and seeking the forgiveness of those who one has wronged is, of course, essential in being able to forgive oneself. But usually this is just the beginning of the process. The pantheon of emotions above are powerfully strong and take serious effort to overcome. However, there is no way around it. People who do not forgive themselves end up adding the the cycles of pain that exist in our society and riddle their lives and the lives of people around them with difficulties.

This is why I always cringe when people say they won't help people because they aren't deserving. No one is an island, we are interconnected and refusing to forgive someone for their wrongs and help them actually just hurts society in general.

It seems to be a hidden trend in human culture, that when one person or a group of people harm others, they themselves are harmed as well, but in different ways. I see it in capitalism where the rich suffer a kind of horrid isolation and fear of loss of property while the poor struggle to survive. I see it in patriarchy where men suffer from a prison of false-emotionlessness and isolation while women are objectified and dehumanized. Wrongs by one party hurt everyone including themselves whether they realize it or not.

Forgiveness, self-forgiveness and reconciliation are the only logical way I can see to heal the wounds in our society.

A Snippet of Wisdom.

Perhaps the greatest lesson I have learned from the ten years that I have really been awake:

The world is a place of cause and effect. You can never know the full extent of the consequences of your actions. However, the general effects can be distinguished... good creates more good, bad creates more bad. I have run numerous experiments in my life on this and it is very clear to me.
This is why the ends do not justify the means, you will never reach the fullness of the end you want through unjust means, you will only achieve a narrow end at the expense of the greater good.
In everything you do, try to do the right, and you will change the world for the better. This helps us muddle through the incalculable causes and effects in our lives to allow us to produce the ends we want. It is the golden rule in its fullest sense, treat others as you would want to be treated, not just because it is the right thing to do, but because it is practically the most effective thing to do to achieve good ends.

Wars are Arguments #2

Building on my last post, I would like to explain more about Satyagraha which is a method of conflict that goes to the very roots of social ills. Satyagraha's focus is to change society at a very basic level through organizing the populace to both improve their own lot and to act in concert to improve the society. This can take an infinite variety of forms, from encouraging better diet and exercise habits to developing and implementing better political systems. It even takes the form of civil resistance and disobedience. But the main thrust is a transformation of society itself, which is not the government, but the population. Changing minds and people's daily activities is the primary goal. Everything else is secondary to that focus.

Many may question why one should prioritize changing society instead of focusing on taking over the institutions that run society and then use those as a tool to change it. A careful look at history will show that whenever a movement focuses on taking the reigns of power, it always loses sight of the initial goal of improving society and becomes corrupted by the very means they sought to achieve their end, and in most cases fail to achieve the end anyway. Focusing on direct programs and campaigns to improve society has a two-fold benefit. It actually achieves the end of improving society and it brings the added benefit of building political power almost unconsciously. This political power will then almost naturally bring the institutions of power into its orbit over time.

But this is a slow process and not for the weak. A movement must be strong-willed as well as undogmatic in their approach to how to change society. Ever-improving the methods through practical application and revision is essential. This work will bring a movement into conflict with many groups, but through the judicious use of non-violence, these groups can be successfully turned to either acceptance or support. The weak will resort to violence while the strong remain indomitable in the face of oppression. Oppression and other such evils must be met with principled resistance. I found this sweet video introduction to civil resistance from Waging Nonviolence here is the article: http://wagingnonviolence.org/2010/08/a-succinct-introduction-to-civil-resistance/ the video itself is embedded below. I agree with most of it, but, similarly to what was said in Waging Nonviolence, I disagree with the supposition that nonviolence is not about winning over your opponents. Most successful revolutions whether they are violent or not have won over atleast large parts of the military and police. Look at the French Revolution, there was basically no internal military support for the King. Anyway, the video is still a good watch.

Civil Resistance: A First Look from ICNC on Vimeo.

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

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.    

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.

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.

A Revolution is Just a Spinning of the Wheel

I mistrust the notion of revolution.  Far too many people put stock in it as an effective way to change society, but even a brief gloss-over of history tells me that it is not particularly effective. Take Russia for example.  They have had several revolutions in the past 200 years both violent and peaceful, yet they still have an authoritarian government, it may be composed of different people, but it is still essentially the same as the Tsar monarchy or the Soviet-style government. China too, several revolutions, still authoritarian.  Then there are countless third world countries that have had revolutions galore, and we can see how well that has worked out for them. We could take the French revolution as the archetype of revolution.  They overthrew an absolute monarch and large, powerful factions such as the Sansculottes pushed for direct democracy.  The core of the intellectual support for the French revolution supported more democracy, and indeed has inspired the rest of the world with its idealism.  Yet they ended up empowering Napoleon in the near absolute power of an Emperor.   If there were to be a revolution in the typical sense in America, I do not believe it would achieve the ends we desire. 

I am reminded of the analysis provided in 1984 about before Oceania's type of government:  there were always revolutions that would overthrow one group of oligarchs and replace them with another group.  Indeed, a republic is designed to institutionalize this process, stabilizing the switching of control and reducing disruption.  It also stabilizes the groups who maintain power, allowing them to entrench themselves more effectively and simply change places with each other every few years.  Kind of scary to think that a republic, what we have now in America, is an institutionalization of the cycle of revolution.  I am not particularly interesting in changing who has the reigns of power, which may be why I am never had a particular interest in working to elect politicians or bothering rich people to do things.

  

True to its definition, revolution is just the spinning of the wheel, you always end up where you started.  Myself, I am not interested in spinning my wheels... what I want to do is change the wheel itself.  History, again, can aid in understanding this.  There have been numerous wheel-changing events in history, among the most prominent are the industrial revolution and the enlightenment.  They both defined the lenses that the world has been seen through since they came about.  What is phenomenal about them is that they were not specifically directed at the power structures themselves, they were simple shifts in our view of the world and how one acts in it.  

I have come across the idea of wheel changing events before; something that happens that changes everything.  For indigenous populations, exposure to western civilization has been wheel-changing, their cultures are disrupted, and they are often forced to abandon their way of life.  Forced in the military sense, or in the generational shift-sense when the next generation has to stop living the way they did to survive.   But, the best description of a wheel-changing event that I have come across yet comes from literature.  The Riverworld series describes how an ancient society accidentally developed an artificial soul generator that automatically bound souls to new sentient beings.  So, this society changed its newborns without even knowing it, and in the space of only a couple generations, all the beings without these souls were gone because of old age.   This is a great metaphor for generational change.  One generation develops something, the next generation is imbued with it and it becomes an indestructible part of our society.

This seems to be the main wheel-changing method that humanity has at its disposal, and it can be boiled down to mass education, motivation, and changes in each of our ways of life.  To change society, you really have to change the way people think and act, because what else is society but the aggregate of all of our thoughts and actions.  

The industrial revolution was a revolution of mind, it shifted the priorities in life more directly toward profit, productivity and self-interest away from the typical human priority of social networking and the reciprocal economy.  It manifested itself in the day to day behavior of people and in their way of life.  It was compelling enough to spread like a plague across the earth, infecting all those it touched.  

I also think that the 60s was a wheel-changing event in opposition to the industrial revolution's, as it prompted people to change their priorities away from profit.  In fact, I believe that the old sds's long-haul strategy of radicalizing (educating) young people was key in the effectiveness of this specific event.  Without a de-centralized yet organized education and motivation effort, wheel-changing events are much harder to produce.  

Without this hard work of changing minds, we will not see success in our movement.  In the eternal words of Monty Python: "Power is derived from a mandate from the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony."  Too often people on the left focus on the power structures in a society, when we should be focusing on the real power in human society - each other.

sds National Conference Account I Wrote up for Tikkun

The following is an account of the sds National Conference which I wrote for Tikkun.  It will probably go up on the Tikkun website under Current Thinking soon.  

The new incarnation of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) is alive and thriving.   SDS convened its third national convention in College Park, Maryland on July 24th 2008, with the mandate to pass a national structure.  The University of Maryland chapter of sds along with the help of other DC sdsers, played host for over 140 sds members from across the country.  The long plenaries were broken apart by singing, meals, collective liberation activities, workshops, caucuses and socializing.  After trudging through a very long and rushed two days of discussing structure, the convention passed a resolution outlining a National Working Committee as the administrative (and possibly somewhat executive) body of the organization.  This structure will need to be ratified by the chapter base to go into effect.   

Political/Spiritual Analysis

SDS is a complicated political entity.  It has a very politically diverse membership, ranging from Anarchists to Maoists to a smattering of mainstream liberals.  The majority of the membership is anti-authoritarian and very distrustful of hierarchy, and yet we managed to compromise on structure to allow for some hierarchy when it comes to coordination of the national organization.  This bodes well for the future of sds. Being able to unify a diverse group of political outlooks toward positive social change will build the power of the organization and encourage membership growth.

SDS has a very strong vein of spiritual analysis in it, although very few sds members would frame it that way.  Recognizing how people are disenfranchised and dehumanized, having compassion for those suffering around the world, feeling compelled by their consciences to resist an unjust system, believing a better world is possible, and developing human-need-oriented structures are all key elements of a spiritual analysis of society which sds has whole-heartedly embraced. It is still discussing spiritual issues surrounding the humanization of one's opponents, suffering as a method of social change, and interfacing with the spiritual/religious community. 

Religious/Spiritual Issues

Like any community of left-leaning people, there is a certain amount of anti-religious fervor.  This is mostly directed at religious institutions for their role in oppression and causing injustice.  There is however, some deriding of religious/spiritual people as simplistic and foolish.  Sds has taken a mature approach to this issue through starting a discussion around stereotyping religious/spiritual people and the counter-productivity of blindly attacking religions as monolithic-ally bad.  The discussion touched on the extremely high standards that religions are held to by anti-religious people.  The point that religion institutions are run by humans, so they have the same flaws as every other institution was made.  Unfortunately there was not much time for discussion and the development of a mutual understanding to develop, so continuing the healing of this rift will have to wait for another day.     

Community

More impressive though, is the role that sds has been able to play in the lives of political activists.  That is, the establishment of a national community of like-minded people.  Connecting new people into the network, and having groups for across the country for sdsers to join when they move.  Prevention of the overwhelming feeling of isolation is essential to the health of the movement, and sds's network fulfills this beautifully.   Whenever a high school sds chapter graduates a class of sdsers, they spread like seeds across the nation to build new or reinforce existing sds chapters.  When students transfer, they can plug into a nearby chapter.  When a college chapter graduates a class of sdsers, they inject veteran organizers into the real world, organizers who often believe they will dedicate their lives to the pursuit of social justice.  This community causes dedication like none I have ever seen.  It effectively shields its members against ghastly burnout and provides a sense of security that is hard to find in the present social system. 

And this community is often deliberately created and cultivated.  There was a workshop at the convention titled "Building a Community of Support within sds" where the group discussed what in sds made them feel isolated and dis-empowered and what made them feel hopeful, fulfilled and empowered.  This discussion was very healing for those who attended.  Events such as this will help us develop the behavioral technology to protect our communities from the corrosive effects of isolation, fear, mistrust, personality clashes and misplaced anger.  In addition to this excellent workshop, the organizers of the conference created an emotional support and conflict resolution team to attempt to heal many of the frustrations, anger, and miscommunication created during the convention's decision-making process.  While sds does not always focus on how to adapt its current structures to fit human needs, this conference did a substantial job of creating a setting that facilitated the creation and protection of community.

Campaigns

The National Convention gave its seal of approval to one campaign, the "Student Power for Accessible Education" campaign.  This national campaign will, in the short term, push for fewer loans for students, tuition freezes, more grants, lower textbook costs, and many other needed changes to the financial interactions between students and their colleges. Mid-term goals include establishing student unions across the US, and building student power.  The long term goals include fair and free education for all, since after all, education is a right.  Individual sds chapters, as well as any other organizations that want to join us, can plug into this campaign simply by beginning to act on their own campus.  The idea is to not only push for change in the education system, but to build a student movement with the confidence and the skills to be able to have a decisive impact on the greater society. National coordination or activity is a possibility, but that will likely wait until there is a significant presence of chapter campaigns. 

Funk the War on the Poor

On Monday the 28th, DC sds hosted an action for those attending the convention to attend.  It was a roving dance party (essentially a march) that protested the construction of the NAFTA Superhighway, I-69, through many poor communities in the Midwest and South.  This highway is actually going to pass about 60 miles from my home town, so it was surprisingly relevant to me.  The tactic of dancing was quite effective in keeping a good group energy and appealing to on-lookers.  The police showed up in force, nearly 50 of them to our 100.

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.