[Springboard] 21st Century Contradicitons
Jack Gilles
icabombay at igc.org
Wed Nov 7 12:15:25 EST 2007
John,
I thought when we first made the trilogy from All the Earth Belongs
to All we kept that phrase, that is, All the Goods of the Earth
Belong to All etc. At least that is the way I remember the song
John Tresise used to lead us in singing. Am I mistaken?
As for the Social Process, some time ago I began to work on what I
called the Life Process Triangle, which had the Natural Process on
the left, the Social Process on the right and The Human Process at
the top. This by the way fits into what Wilber lays out in his work.
Jack
On Nov 7, 2007, at 9:48 PM, John Cock wrote:
> There are two sets of vision statements mingling in my head now:
> the "All the earth belongs to all the people: all the goods (eco),
> all the decisions (pol), and all the gifts (cult)" -- which can
> mean all the goods of earth belong to the humans, all the decisions
> of earth belong to the humans, and all the gifts of earth belong to
> the humans. All this is true, but not in the meaning of exclusive
> or primary human ownership. Therefore, we have to be sensitive to
> the "belongs to humans exclusively" misunderstanding. Indicatively,
> at our best, our vision meant/means that all humans are meant to
> share fully in the universal blessings of goods, decisions, and gifts.
>
> Why not just say "all the earth belongs to all the earth" or "all
> the earth belongs to the universe" or, my favorite, "all the earth
> belongs to all"? We have to be at least as persnickety today about
> inclusive earth-community language as we are about gender language,
> wouldn't you say -- like changing the hymnals and Bible
> translations to be earth community correct as well as gender
> correct -- which is to say we humans have been and are abusing the
> total earth community every day in our language: an indication of
> our operating images, organization, and actions.
>
> The other set of vision statements mingling is Jack's trilogy
> yesterday of "NEW EARTH/NEW SOCIETY/NEW HUMAN." Though these are
> very general, they are super good and easy to remember relative to
> all the above. In fact, their simplicity frees me up in thinking
> about "earth processes/social processes/human processes"
> contradictions (you see, I also have a little problem with the
> "social process" name being as all-inclusive as we sometimes infer).
>
> All of which is to say, unlike Roxana and Randy who are always at
> the head of the class, I do not have my 3-9 contradictions yet.
> "21st Century Contradicitons" really is a daunting assignment. As
> you can see, I'm just spinning my wheels, probably avoiding the
> assignment.
>
> But I promise . . .
>
> John
>
> One more vision (plus contradiction/strategic) statement: "The task
> before us now, if we would not perish, is to shake off our ancient
> prejudices and to build the earth."
>
> From: springboard-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:springboard-
> bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of R Williams
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 9:57 AM
> To: Springboard Dialogue
> Subject: Re: [Springboard] 21st Century Contradicitons
>
> Jack,
>
> I agree, "legitimate" vision is always indicative. It is never and
> imposition on history of "what I'd like to see," a perversion that
> often creeps into organizational planning. Instead it is, to quote
> Buber, "what is emerging from (the visioner), to the course of
> being in the world."
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Randy
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jack Gilles <icabombay at igc.org>
> To: Springboard Dialogue <springboard at wedgeblade.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 7, 2007 8:44:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [Springboard] 21st Century Contradicitons
>
> Randy,
>
> You are right, at least I think so. When I did my contradictional
> analysis I started with the Vision statement we made in 72 (?) of
> all the Goods.... all the Decisions.... and all the Gifts of
> Humanness...... It is important to remember that we saw these as
> indicative statements. That is, they are not what should or could
> be, but what is. My thought is that this reality is now becoming
> aware to a vast number of people, although they wouldn't probably
> articulate it like we did. People are becoming deeply aware that
> we are all in this together and therefore we have to figure out how
> to make the vision we stated a reality in some way. When an
> awareness becomes apparent that is being blocked by the present
> structures, mindsets, etc., then the emergence of the
> contradictions becomes possible to identify. As I said, I listed
> 9, three each for each of the three vision components. I'll share
> those later this week. Thanks for jumping in there. I like what
> you have stated. Let's hear from some more.
>
> Jack
>
>
> On Nov 7, 2007, at 7:45 PM, R Williams wrote:
>
>> Jack,
>>
>> I believe there need to be two backdrops as context for a
>> conversation about 21st century contradictions. The first is the
>> vision which we embraced with "All the earth belongs to all the
>> people;" all the goods (eco), all the decisions (pol) and all the
>> gifts (cult). It seems to me any analysis of contradictions has
>> to be over against that vision. I believe that vision has
>> basically not changed except that it needs to be expanded to
>> include all creation.
>>
>> Second, contradictions must be considered in light of the
>> imbalance in the social process, which is still today what it was
>> 30 years ago--the dominance of the economic, the subservience of
>> the political (to the economic, example, Greenspan's statement
>> that Iraq is and was always about oil), and the collapse of the
>> cultural. Not only has the cultural collapsed, but it has been co-
>> opted by the economic. By this I mean that the economic rather
>> than the cultural has become the meaning-giving pole of the social
>> process, and the political has helped by imposing reduced values.
>>
>> Now to Niebuhr. His three contradictions were a reflection of the
>> social process whether he knew it or not--"racialism" (cultural),
>> "nationalism" (political), and economic imperialism. Reflecting
>> on this, I believe we should identify and focus on only three
>> inclusive "master" or major contradictions, one on each pole of
>> the social process. As others respond to your query and offer
>> their reading of the contradictions for our time, I expect that
>> each stated contradiction can probably fit under one or another of
>> the SP poles, if indeed the Social Process is as inclusive as we
>> think it is.
>>
>> This will be interesting because there is so much overlap and
>> inter-connectivity. A couple of examples. Racism has been
>> revealed to be a contributing and related cause of poverty,
>> especially since Hurricane Katrina. Catholic Charities USA has
>> written a position paper entitled "Racism and Poverty: Overlapping
>> Threats to the Common Good." Also, I think racism has to be
>> expanded to include a kind of "species-ism" meaning discrimination
>> against the non-human. A second example--is religious
>> fundamentalism a cultural or political contradiction? I think I
>> would put it under political. Islamic extremists in the Middle
>> East and far right evangelical Christians in the US have become
>> political movements. Rather than trying to "transform" the
>> political, they are trying co-opt and "become" the political.
>>
>> The primary contradiction under the economic continues to be what
>> it was 30 years ago--the growing gap between those who have much
>> and those who have little, and we must expand this to go beyond
>> just humans. However, now the emphasis is more on natural
>> resources, particularly water, land and air. This can be seen not
>> only globally but also in every locale. In the developed world it
>> is often spoken of as the disappearing middle class.
>>
>> So with fear and trembling, at this moment here are my three.
>> Under the economic, Disparate Resource Distribution which has led
>> to economic impoverishment; under the political, Elitist Political
>> Exclusiveness which has led to political powerlessness; and under
>> the cultural, Discredited Cultural Heritage, which has led to
>> cultural disenfranchisement.
>>
>> I hope a lot of people jump in on this so you have plenty of grist
>> at Junaluska. Thanks to Roxana for being one of the first.
>>
>> G&P,
>> Randy
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Jack Gilles <icabombay at igc.org>
>> To: Springboard Dialogue <springboard at wedgeblade.net>
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2007 2:23:59 PM
>> Subject: [Springboard] 21st Century Contradicitons
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I have followed the dialogue on the OE list serve regarding the
>> updating of the HRN call for social pioneers in the three areas he
>> felt at that time where critical for the sensitive and responsive
>> ones to respond to. Since we are referring to the Guild as that
>> part of society that is sensitive and responsive to bringing forth a
>> new earth/new society/new humanness I think it is important that we
>> discern what the critical areas of contradiction are for our time. I
>> have been working on this for a couple of weeks and have developed
>> what for me are the contradictions that the Guilds (and the Order)
>> need to be addressing. I won't share them just yet, but would invite
>> everyone to think what would be your list. Next week sometime I'll
>> share my list and rationale.
>>
>> There are many, many areas of concern and issues facing the world
>> today. So to try and discern the critical ones I applied the
>> following test. I asked "What societal contradictions, if not
>> addressed in the next 10-15 years will put the global society into a
>> tipping point of danger?" That is, although there are many issues
>> facing India today, I discovered a set that seemed to apply here as
>> well as in the developed world. Common contradictions that are
>> affecting us all and will "sink the ship" if we don't mobilize the
>> sensitive and responsive to creatively respond. I found brooding on
>> the imbalances of the Social Process as well as the Pressure Points
>> we discerned 30+ years ago to be helpful in my discernment for today.
>>
>> Maybe by the time of the Junaluska event we will begin to see a
>> consensus of what these are and then we could perhaps do some writing
>> on them at the gathering as well as use them as a screen for what we
>> might be doing with the Guilds.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing what you feel the Order needs to address.
>>
>> G&P,
>>
>> Jack
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Springboard mailing list
>> Springboard at wedgeblade.net
>> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/springboard_wedgeblade.net
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> Springboard mailing list
>> Springboard at wedgeblade.net
>> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/springboard_wedgeblade.net
>
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Springboard mailing list
> Springboard at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/springboard_wedgeblade.net
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Springboard mailing list
> Springboard at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/springboard_wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/springboard_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20071107/4ae2cf75/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Springboard
mailing list