Building Communities Worth Having

Posted by Gerry Gleason

"Building Communities Worth Having" - That was the subtitle of the Recent Changes Camp.  At each gathering of this type that I attend I meet many who are already engaged.  They are in action and generating new ideas and creating new on-line resources and gathering locally with other activists.  We could use more resources, but it is already happening.  Let me take on Peter's questions one by one:

   * What does it mean to build a movement of substance and meaning around a critical social issue?

Engage people directly in the issues that they actually care about.  Starting with local issue leaders supporting each other and moving outward to engage their communities.  First let the communities define for themselves what their critical social issues are, then building a movement is a simple matter of providing some supports and resources.

   * What are the strategies for change that have proven effective?

The best strategies are just emerging, so I would be careful about looking exclusively to past experiences.  We have some evidence of what will prove even more effective as we develop more experience.  Open Space gatherings, small local gatherings around issues and tasks. Learning from each other in these spaces, and continuing the conversations on-line.

Much of this fits well under Benkler's description of "peer production", an organizational strategy that has proven effective in creating millions if not billions of lines of Open Source software and an on-line encyclopedia.  These projects rival and then soon exceed the quality and scope of their commercial competition.  Everything we do must take this into account.

   * What are the lessons learned in collaborative efforts?

I don't think it is possible to summarize at this point.  Lessons learned are individual and fragmentary.  We know a fair amount about what works and what doesn't in collaborations, but the information isn't widely known.  Eugene Kim has created a "Think Tank for Collaboration", but has very limited resources to work with.  We continue to work with whatever resources are available.

I suppose the most general lesson is that you can do a lot with a little when you engage groups in collaborative production.

 

* How has advocacy changed in an era of the increasing use of technology-driven networks?

Network awareness and savvy are critical success factors now.  The network is becoming part of the connective tissue of communities.  It allows for collaborations not limited by time and space, and it is an amazing tool for education.  More and more it brings the worlds libraries and more to every teacher in every town and village across the planet.  Many are unconnected still, but the costs are dropping to where it becomes almost too cheap to meter.  Even places that have been bypassed can be connected with a few donated resources.  NGOs operating in these places could even do it by pooling resources and they might even save money.

Note by Phil C:

Peter - Gerry, an MIT trained Technologist, is tapped into the Open Source Movement. He is active on Omidyar.net and was one of the participants in the Open Space for Giving Conference a few years ago. He, Laure Dillon, Julie Evans Caldwell, and Ted Ernst, among others are involved with Emerging Futures Network.  Gerry and his wife, Debbie, are Dumpster Dweller in good standing at Wealth Bondage. When the word "giving" comes up, I think of them, for all they give in love, care, and connection. In the "crew" assembling around The World We Want you have people who met online, met face to face in low cost Open Space gatherings, and are now looking to do some good in the world. For these people this is more than talk, or business as usual, or a job-function, or a resume builder. We are essentially desperate to make a difference. We could assemble around any rallying point that offered a shred of hope and a respite from propaganda and rich branded blarney. The reason we (Ted, Michael, Chris, Gerry, Laure, Julie, and others who have chimed in here) keep stressing Open Space plus Online Spaces is that this is how our  crew has been formed and solidified over the last several years. So, we have experienced what can come out of such interchange, on such a tiny budget. Your circles are more august and as they say more "resourceful" - but honestly - who do you know who can match this crew for pluck, talent, and passion? Can you imagine the force that would be unleashed if we could connect our social networks?

Comments

[Debbie]

Dumpster Dweller reporting in.

Peter,

Gerry keeps asking me what kind of a life I want. Want kind of a world I want. And I keep ducking it, much to his chagrin. I am not trying to annoy him. But the question is so big. I feel like the beauty contestant at the Miss America pageant. I'm inclined to say something vapid like, "I would like to see world peace and an end to world hunger." That's certainly the crowd pleasing answer. And another part of me wants to sink into selfishness and answer, "I wanna vacation, dammit." Main thing is, it's difficult to visualize the future when you tell yourself that you haven't really contributed anything to society, so are you really entitled to answer the question. And how many people are there like me, who really feel kind of unworthy to even remotely answer the question. Never mind about the world we want. I cannot even answer what I want my life to be within my own family. And the world is such a big place. Ummmm, yeah, I want to see us clean up the environment. I want to see world peace. How can I answer the larger questions when the smaller questions need to be answered first and foremost. Before I can wish for world peace, I need to look at ways I can achieve inner peace. Ways for me to slow down and decide it's OK that I am just one person.

I feel so woefully inadequate. I feel as if I somehow managed to find Gerry (we met through my newspaper ad), and through him, I have connected with these truly amazing people. Gerry would protest this, but I feel like such an imposter. I am the weak link among all these intelligent people. Sometimes I feel the best I can do is cheerlead. Urge Gerry, Julie, Laure, Ted and others on in their visions and their good works.

For the short term, the world I want is one where initiatives like Gerry's and foundations like Julie and Laure's receive so much funding they don't know what to do with it. That they have an embarrassment of riches. The world I want is one in which all connections made lead to something spectacular. The world I want is one in which the meek really do inherit the earth. More than that. That we shy and retiring types can spend our days being stewards for this great planet. The world I want is one where all children have an equal chance at receiving an excellent education, regardless of their economic situations. The world I want is one where all people have equality and no one is barred from entry, regardless of what personal obstacles they face. The world I want is one where all voices are heard, even if the voices are synthetically produced because a kid, like our older daughter, literally cannot speak for herself. The world I want is one where all beings are recognized for their uniqueness and no one is ignored or swept under the rug. The world I want is one where imagination is value, and dreamers are encouraged to dream. The world I want is one where drops of justice and mercy fall like rain, nourishing our parched society.

Thank you, Peter, for coming here and listening.

[Eugene Eric Kim]

Thanks for the mention, Gerry. A quick protest, then a comment on Debbie's comment. I have limited resources in the same way that everyone else has limited resources. The scope of what I'm trying to do in acting as a catalyst for knowledge sharing about collaboration will require more resources over time, but I'm confident that they will come. In the meantime, I'm thrilled at what we've been able to accomplish.

Debbie, if raising two daughters under some exceptional circumstances in a family overflowing with love while contributing to worthy conversations and causes like this makes you a weak link, then I will take a chain of weak links any day.

[Gerry]

Thanks very much Eugene.

Protest taken in stride, and I know that you would also be able to do more with any resources that came your way.

Let me be clear, we need resources to initiate and carry out projects. The projects can originate in any community and serve any purpose that a group is willing to gather for. Looked at another way, we are resources ready to be put into service, and we already know a lot about gathering a group to a cause.

Among the network I know through Michael and Community Wireless is a group of people who are building a mesh network in Champaign/Urbana IL. They gathered a group with some equipment and brought Internet and phone communications in the wake of Katrina. With a little more pre-position resources this network of minute men and women can respond to any disaster even more quickly and powerfully. As Phil said, "We are essentially desperate to make a difference." We already are, and we are ready to to more. Much much more.

[phil]

I have a serious question: Godot. Let's say Godot stands for the proposition that we must wait for a) permission and b) money from the "persons of substance in every sense of that word," people with accumulated money, power, influence, etc. And let's say that such influential people are more often appalled than excited to see an upsurge of unruly democracy from "below." Why not create, then, an infrastructure that connects the little pieces to make something bigger? What is missing in our raising our own little money pots by passing a hat? Omidyar.net, Chipin.org, paypal, tides e-grants, Emerging Futures Foundation, Planetworks, - can this kind of grassroots stuff achieve critical mass without needing to get some "big person" or "big foundation" to contribute $100,000?

My concern really is in the unconscious assumption that we have to wait for what may never come. Who in their right mind would fund a truly open society when they ride astride a hierarchy? And if they did, what positional power would they then expect to wield? Resistance from above might be a greater sign of progress than acceptance, if you think about it.

There are exceptions, Fex.org, Tides, Threshold, Momentum, maybe sources of seed funding for people who have not given up on the original promise of democracy. But I have not seen an active online presence from any of them, though maybe a growing awareness that "something is happening here and you don't know what it is, do you, Mister Jones?"

On the subject of the ludicrous - how much would Omidyar give from multi-billions for an infrastructure for democracy? Zero. What he would do is to invest millions if he coud own that infrastructure and make a buck off it. That, my friends, is the state of the art today. Welcome to democracy 2.O, a social venture owned and operated by reasonably benevolent billionairres as their "gift" to the little people.

[Gerry]

Yes, and you know the problems well. You can't get the funds to get started and create the basic infrastucture unless you have some "angel" donor willing to foot the bill. And as you say this is often counter to what they want. A project of the right scale could really jumpstart it. The basic skills are there and we could back fill on the infrastructure and administration.

[Debbie]

I agree, Phil. Up to us to fill in the pieces. But how? How do we empower the disaffected? The proprietess of this site, http://modofaccentral.com truly feels as if no one cares and even if we say so, we're just going to let her down, anyway. And, yet, if Kerry were to listen to me carefully, she'd know I greatly admire her for her indominable spirit. I genuinely feel distressed because I don't have a way to hand over one hundred thousand American Dollars so that she can refurbish her building to create a drop in center. And there's so many people, and, I dunno, passing the hat seems like such an empty gesture. Do wealthy people really simply want to own democracy? Is that true for the likes of George Soros, too? What happens to us if and when we become wealthy? Perhaps we should all hope to remain where we're at? Does money always corrupt? Maybe then I should wish for a world without money. We all sink or swim, based upon our merits. But what if we're not a particularly popular person? I don't much cotton to reputation systems, either. Why do we need anything? So much artifice. A necessary evil.

[Phil]

The hidden hand implies that those with money who get more money are honored by fate, destiny, providence, etc. Those who feel that way should read Frost's "Provide Provide." Or they should read Greek tradegy. Meanwhile, we have to fend for ourselves, not wait for permission or big gobs of funding.

[Debbie]

Fend for oneself gets awfully tiring after a while. Disheartening. Discouraging. At the very least, one needs community to bolster oneself. As an example, took me probably a year longer to get our older daughter placed in a better school because I had no one really helping me. It was very overwhelming.

I imagine that in the philanthropic sphere it's rather similar. No community means no moving forward. And if you don't find community, ie, remain isolated from people with resources, experience and knowledge, then you are sunk. Doesn't matter how beneficial your idea might be. How many broken dreams? How many people, exponential, didn't realize theirs because one other person couldn't see theirs come to fruition? So many lost connections.

The internet broadens our horizons, but, by the same token, creates a sense of false security, when, in fact, in many instances, it adds to the increased isolation and the alienation we have from one another. It's a terrible paradox. Increases the possibilities. Increases the disappointments.

Some day there will be better roads. Not just talking about technology. I am talking about people willing to reach out and talk to other people. Otherwise it ends up being an electronic wilderness. Might as well be a pioneer out on the prairie for all the good the high speeds do ya.

Ever read Prairyerth by William Least Heat Moon? He chronicles one county in Kansas. Just one county. Hundreds and hundreds of pages. Quadrant after quadrant. It's utterly fascinating. So much humanity, even in a relatively sparsely populated area. One story continues to haunt me. Pioneer woman. Seemingly self-reliant. Cleaned the farmhouse. Clothed and fed her kids. Looked after her husband. One day she cleaned her house from end to end. Spotless. Then she went upstairs and put a gun to her mouth. A prime example of a life of quiet desperation.

There are too many cracks and not enough pathways. You created the Gifthub, Phil, and that is very commendable. But we need more hubs. And, the greater the personal challenges, the more hubs we need. Organizations that are supposed to lend help, either can't or won't. And resources go to the wealthier clientele who really don't need this as much, but get it, anyway. One of the things that I still intend to do, in my copious free time, is establish an Advocacy Hub based upon your model. And not just another page with links and links and more links. But real connections to people who have the exact experience you need. Right now it's really happenstance if you encounter someone.

[phil]

Good and deep thoughts, Debbie, reminders, really. Thank you. The instinct to overcome isolation and build community, almost like a nestbuilding instinct, is one that Peter's own writing echo. Philanthropy at its best seems a "for instance" of that, but not a replacement for the larger effort by a broader swathe of the populace. Your story from Least Heat Moon reminds me of some of Robert Frost's poems about isolated country people and their quiet misery and desperation, like "the Hill Wife," or "Death of the Hired Man."

[Debbie]

Ah, yes, Phil. I had forgotten those.

Where is everybody? I don't mean to be flippant. But I "see" Jon every once in a while. And Chris every now and again. And, of course, I "see" you often for a while and then I wander off. The internet stretches our connections. There's an immediacy. And, yet, separate lives, and, truthfully, we know very little about each other as private individuals. And, to some degree, we prefer it that way.

I prefer my public persona, and, frankly, so does everyone else. There's a vast difference between me being a bit edgy in public and my private self. I recently wrote a piece in my O/Net personal news that's kind of an interior monologue, where I ask some unknown person if they would please hand me my mask because I was feeling so exposed. Suffice to say, how much can we stand of one another, even as we build community. I know that most people would be casting furtive glances towards the door, and I am not being self-deprecating as I am wont to be. I am being realistic. And the same holds true for me. With community comes a certain familiarity. Even to the point of intimacy, depending on the individuals involved. Makes me twitchy just to think of it. I want to open, yet, at the same time, I am cognizant of the fact that "walls make good neighbors."

This all reminds me of Sartre's No Exit, where the man is thrown in with these two women. At first you think, what a great deal for the man. But the woman he prefers is a lesbian, and the woman who prefers him is someone he abhors. And, actually, they abhor him for his moral cowardice. Hell is other people, and what pulls us together also pushes us apart. In short, the world I want and the community I want is a place where I can go off and be in a Greta Garbo frame of mind, at least for a while. Sometimes the thought of community horrifies me, just as much as I find aspects of it appealing.

Striking a delicate balance is critical for me. I need connections. No doubt about it. I need to be let into people's lives. No doubt about that, either. But I suppose I am not alone in desiring to be separate, too, in some ways. Tricky. Very tricky. Because I want togetherness when I want it and on my terms. And so does everyone else.

I suppose this is getting a bit off topic, yet I cannot help but feel that all these things ultimately need to be addressed. Let's pare it down. The world we want. Such a grandiose vision. What about how I want my community to be? Important to extract the specific from the general and probably harder to articulate. What does community mean these days with the internet and with families all spread out, etc.? And with everyone spread out hither and yon, what exactly can we rightfully expect from one another in terms of both companionship and cooperation? I am not just throwing these questions out. I need to answer them for myself.

[Phil]

Great reminder. "Hell is other people," indeed. Community can become village life with no privacy and everyone one looking out the window through parted curtains, checking up on the neighbors. Urban(e) life can be such a relief, since you are seen but anonymous. The Moral Center of Community resonates with me as "The Mind of St Oggs," as George Eliot called it in The Mill on the Floss, the middling mind of a village sunk in tradition. "The Moral Center of White Old Money Dallas" - do you really want to know what and where that is? Fitting into that village would require a mask, perhaps, for many.

"Rootless cosmopolitans," "Wandering Jews," "Travelling Salesmen," have often been constrasted with the "authenticity" of particularistic village life. We long at times for both the village and the cosmopolitan anonymous city.

"We" is a fragile aspirational community, "I" is a brand, a masked figure, a cypher, the unreliable author function of a fiction passing for normal under often aberrant circumstances.

The tools Peter is using, the language itself, has to be constantly challenged for each of the key words is a smuggler's box with many a hidden compartment: "We,
"I," "community," "moral," "center," all are gestures towards certainties that are long gone.

Yet, "How should I live?" And "What is justice?" "Who is a friend and who is a foe?" are among the founding questions of every life and every society. We can't answer definitively, but we can't cease asking and answering in our actions. We all must live one way or another, and we are all in community with others, even Crusoe who is not just Anyman, but an Eighteenth Century English Calvinist small businessman. Even alone, we are like coins that pass current only in a certain kingdom.

[Debbie]

Phil,

This last comment of yours was so elegant. I have needed time to digest it.

The middling mind. Oh, the horror. Nice place to visit with well meaning people, but I wouldn't want to live there. By the same token, it's people with potential to rise above that who I do want to reach out to and guide.

Why must this "I" wear a public mask? Because no one would feel comfortable with the private me. The dark recesses. So I smile and nod politely and get along. Well, maybe not to the extent to need to in Corporate America, but, certainly my online persona is overall an agreeable one.

I don't want to just be anonymous, either, although there are certainly times when I benefit from being unnoticed. I am always the outsider. it weighs on me, just like it did when I was a kid. I am constantly twitchy and looking for disapproval and other judgments against me. It's become a way of life, the hypervigalence. Being a nonconformist liberates and oppresses. I have my own moral center, of course. My own sense it is to be an ethical and authentic human being. Does it matter that my morality does not necessarily jive with that of the populace, or is it enough that I can look in my own mirror and be OK with who and, more importantly, what, I see looking back at me? By and large, I'd have to say that I am satisfied, but these doubts still niggle at the back of my brain. Is it possible to connect without losing too much of your own self to the Collective, to the hive? Is that what really drove people to become anchorites and hermits? They didn't want to pay the price extracted from one in order to be a member of a community? I suspect that I will be part of this push-pull for the remainder of my days. This Wandering Jew desperately wants a place to lay her head and rest for a while.

[phil]

"My people...." Who are my people? When we rise to say "we" in cermoney, and someone speaks for us, not just to us, and we say, "Amen," who is included? Who is welcome? Who is honored or beatified? Who is excluded or cast out? Who is shunned? Who is left for dead? Who must be sacrified? Who is the enemy? These no doubt related questions.

At the Constitutional level we want a framework large enough and flexibile enough to include and guarantee the rights of many convenanted congregations, and many secular tribes. At the community level, we want to be surrounded by "those like us."

To be both a good Christian, a good Jew, a good secular educated idealist, and a good citizenn is difficult since the tribal is always wanting to over-reach and impose is bloodwarmth, its village understandings, its absolutes on all the other tribes from the top down through some kind of constitutional curtailment or amendment.