Belonging the Basis of Community – small is necessary

I truly, believe that the problems we face in this world won’t be solved by doing, until we have contemplated the context, depth and reality of these problems and not just accepted the perceptions that appear so evident.   Just maybe, our perceptions might be muddled by the words which people use, but don’t fully understand, and the facts that have been negotiated to demonstrate success.

I have spent the past number of years working with people, immersed with them in the issues with which they have to deal in their communities and its development.  Part of what appears evident is a general apparent lapse of memory perhaps the result of generational shifts, communications breakdown and maybe only one symptom of a broader malaise that happens when generational shifts coincide with technological evolution and fundamental economic or social change.  Interestingly, it is during these particular times that it seems we trot out the concept of Community Development in one form or another, the current terminology at that time was CommunityBuilding and now we have graduated to a more economic descriptive term “The Social Economy”.

An edited version of a presentation I made at a conference in Knowlton, Quebec 

 

In May of 2000 I was invited to speak to a Chamber of Commerce gathering in Knowlton, Quebec in Canada.  This community was considered fairly prosperous and had built a thriving tourism sector around its agricultural and rural roots.  The essence of my presentation was provided by a conference that I had been invited to attend just a few days before related to Community Economic Development and sponsored by the Canadian Government.  It was attended by representatives from community based organizations and initiatives, government agencies and educational institutions from across Canada.

It is amazing how the words of values, of culture, of community and of democracy seem to permeate almost every spectrum of our society whether it is private or public, politically left or right – it even surrounds the way we reference the internet.  At this conference these words were repeated over and over but the practice was not utilised in the organisation of the conference or its delivery.  There were many that felt the same.

Despite the themes of capacity building, education, knowledge, participation and partnership there was little time allotted for dialogue and debate, which are the very basis of building capacity and knowledge.  The conference, its content or its organizers is not being dismissed as it did provide learning and examples with which to frame my comments, albeit there were other such activities that could have been used from my varied experiences of hearing these words yet, not witnessing the practice.  Any opportunity to bring people together is important, but my concern was, that many went away more confused and agitated than when they arrived

One learned speaker suggested “that in today’s world perceptions are real and facts are negotiable”.   As the two days wore on there was much talk of community, of capacity building, of knowledge economies and of “E” – E-Commerce, E-Education, and even E-Government providing the perception that “E” was somehow going to be the solution to all our ills – social and economical.  I wondered about other words as well.  What in a world, where supposedly perception reigns, is rural, what is local, what is economy, what is social and what, pray tell, is spiritual.

I even wondered to myself and out loud – to anyone who would listen what is real and what makes sense in a world where a company such as Microsoft can lose 45% of its capital assets in only a month or so and still be in business.  Similarly how one person could possible drop 45+ billion dollars in the very same period and still be the richest man in the world. (these were the topical news issues at the time).  This is the same world, where even in the richest countries such as Canada there is growing homelessness, ever expanding food banks and more disadvantaged people despite the “fact” that we have record economic growth statistics.  Is any of this sensible and does it really have any meaning at all in the context of life and living.  Yes, I wondered — is any of this fact or is it all just perception!!

Part of our dilemma, of course, is the need to do, to deliver and to measure and to demonstrate our “success”.  So we can’t really afford time for discussion, dialogue and debate.  Perhaps, more importantly, is this feeling that there is not even need for such dialogue as we “know” and just need to get on and “do it” – to do what I am never sure.  I am not sure, because what is it we really know, and as the speaker said what is it we just perceive.

I truly, believe that the problems we face in this world won’t be solved by doing, until we have contemplated the context, depth and reality of these problems and not just accepted the perceptions that appear so evident.   Just maybe, our perceptions might be muddled by the words which people use, but don’t fully understand, and the facts that have been negotiated to demonstrate success.

I have spent the past number of years working with people, immersed with them in the issues with which they have to deal in their communities and its development.  Part of what appears evident is a general apparent lapse of memory perhaps the result of generational shifts, communications breakdown and maybe only one symptom of a broader malaise that happens when generational shifts coincide with technological evolution and fundamental economic or social change.  Interestingly, it is during these particular times that it seems we trot out the concept of Community Development in one form or another, the current terminology at that time was CommunityBuilding and now we have graduated to a more economic descriptive term “The Social Economy”.

Let me begin by explaining what I believe we have perhaps forgotten or maybe just muddled:

We seem to have forgotten many aspects of our history, instead framing everything that we do in the present, thinking that this is how it has always been, when in fact many current aspects of modern living don’t reach back many years.

We have clouded our cultures, which embodies our very roots, our values and the inherent philosophical basis for our way of life, with a popular culture foisted on us by mass marketing and media.

We have diminished the basis for our society rooted in family and developed in community, one could argue, that we have difficulty even remembering or understanding what is “community”.

Perhaps these lapses are only indicators of the fact that, the ways and means that we used to organise and manage will not fit in a world where many aspects of our society have changed.  The dilemma is that we tend to want to dismiss the very values of our society, yet retain the very structures and practices that we developed to organise and manage ourselves in the past.

At this forum there were many interesting and exciting success stories of local projects and activities presented.  These were undoubtedly real testimonials to local ingenuity and ability.  But, most were “completed” with great urgency, small amounts of resources, and little consideration for sustainability.  More importantly, I am not sure there was much contemplation of the longer term impact on those involved, who put heart and soul into these ideas and activities.  Their concepts had much merit but perhaps needed longer gestation and development time and perhaps more thought and reflection in their implementation.  Most, if not all, local presenters complained of limited resources, tight time frames and an inability to sustain that which they had begun.  Again they were encouraged and supported by those in a hurry or being driven to provide successful models.  Maybe there needs to be more consideration of the possible frustrations, even despair that may be caused to such people and their colleagues in attempting achievement under duress.  Maybe we need more dialogue (and debate) on the possible negative impacts on the esteem of people at such lack of real value for their ideas and efforts?

Yet, this is all part of the current approach we are seeing in a shift to decentralization and to devolution (responsibility perhaps but not necessarily resources or power).  And, this approach is being articulated by governments, by business and by institutions of all sorts.  For, isn’t what we call globalisation only centralization in a different form?  Corporations centralize into transnationals, and governments centralize into regions and institutions and business just merge.  All this is being built on a foundation and approach to organization and management based, not on common values, but on outmoded structures designed for a different era.

My own experience with government in Scotland, when I worked there, (they regionalized local government in the seventies and supposedly de-regionalised them in 1996) was that in two attempts at decentralization government decision making was further centralized.  My observation was that as you move governments further away from the people they govern, the more expensive it gets, the less effective it is and the more destructive it becomes to any form of sustainable governance or the enhancement of local self reliance and empowerment.  Subsequently, as my work with communities demonstrated, building any sense of real community was quite a challenge when after twenty-five years had passed a new generation didn’t know or understand the very basics of local governance.

Schumacher wrote “Small is Beautiful”, and George McRobie a colleague of his, wrote “Small is Possible” I suggest that “Small is Necessary”.  Big is only ever a concentration or agglomeration of the small and of power.  It is never sustainable and only breeds dysfunction.  Our history books tell us that – or do we even remember the Roman, the British or the myriad of other empires.

This all leads me to the conundrums that we face:

The conundrum of real community in the context of a world built on perception not necessarily on reality or even the reality which we are currently experiencing.  That is community, as I idealistically believe, based on caring and sharing, and in which the economy is only one of our real measures of our ability to share and perhaps even moreso, our ability to care.  Community, not as some suggest, a homogeneous geographical construct, but Community as a mosaic of people, interests and activities.

The conundrum of government with real foundations in governance, developing policies, that right the balance of inequities, disparity and change (technological included).  Governments building policy based on support and encouragement, rather than predicated on centralization, marginalisation and relocation.

The conundrum of a business and private sector founded on capital and its “value” (including human capital) rather than capital and people as commodities to be auctioned to the highest bidder no matter their values or beliefs.  (The Europeans, in earlier studies, had discovered that the most advanced areas were those that had invested (and I do stress invested) most heavily in their social capital.

I am not naïve enough to believe that these ideals will become the common values and philosophy of our society but I do believe that they were the ideals very much evident in the historical basis of western society and its democratic foundations.  We have somehow forgotten them in our quest to reshape our “new” society with its knowledge-based economy, its technological foundations and its shifting social requirements.  It is at least somewhat encouraging though, that when at such conferences as this, at least the terminology is used, the ideals are being articulated and questions are being raised by a wider and wider audience.

I sometimes put to paper my philosophical musings and started a series of essays some time ago entitled “Renewing Democracy”, Governance – its foundations.  These essays were the beginning of an exploration and comparison of governance and government with music and dance.  Music, like good governance, has its foundation in harmony while dance, like good government, requires engagement and participation.

From my vantage point in communities over the past few years there is more and more restlessness at the grassroots and more and more desire for involvement.  So the following excerpts from these essays may help put these words into a more philosophical context:

“Governments appear unable to hear anything but, the high pitched and artificial noise of so called “representative” lobbies while, neglecting the increasingly agitated, yet softer tones, of the majority ………..

A different tune is emerging, which like the music of life, began in the quiet, the refuge of the growing numbers who feel marginalized and disadvantaged.………

Almost everywhere one sees this tune emerging from the formerly low keyed majorities of people, who had up until now, given over their lyrics to government, in order for them to create the music.  It appears, that as this new tune is becoming known, the chorus grows louder, as these same people realize how disconnected from themselves their governments have become ……..”

Maybe if enough of us join the chorus and sing loud and softly enough, those in power will bring back the tune of balance.  If not, I fear that the noise of the disenfranchised and marginalized, encouraged by those very “representative” lobbies and others seeking control and power, will destroy the very fabric and framework of the instruments and implements that are the foundations of our governance and institutional bodies.  We have to remember that these frameworks and fabrics were created to build the harmony that ultimately is at the very basis of the ideal of democratic equality and governance.

We have witnessed many examples over the past years, of the power of destruction that becomes apparent when governments of any kind disconnect themselves completely from the people that they are supposed to govern and the reaction, oftentimes violent, of people to this disconnectivity.

To conclude, when I was in Scotland there were villages, as they call then now, that had received their Royal Charter as Boroughs (towns) at the turn of the last millennium.  They in their history had evolved and changed numerous times and still were sustaining themselves.  We, in the new world, are only building our history and have a responsibility to build a history that sustains and supports future generations and one of which they can be proud.  A history and a society that provides a sense of belonging, which I fundamentally believe, is the real basis of community and the first small steps necessary for a sustainable future.

Edited 2000 Presentation

William W. Pardy

December 5th, 2005

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.