[Springboard] Deep culture behind our debate on health care reform
M. George Walters
m.george.walters at verizon.net
Thu Sep 3 09:37:15 CDT 2009
Great stuff. Are the Springboard Dialogues organized by categories or just random? It seems to me where possible these insights could greatly facilitate the background thinking for the workshop tracks in the Symposium. Some like the one below relate to all the tracks in that they go deep. Others may focus more on content.
With kindest regards.
M. George Walters
Resurgence Publishing Corporation
4240 Sandy Shores Dr
Lutz, FL 33558
Tel: +1 (813) 948-7267
Fax: +1 (813) 333-1787
Mob: +1 (813) 505-9041
From: springboard-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:springboard-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of James Wiegel
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 6:53 AM
To: Order Ecumenical Community; Colleague Dialogue; springboard at wedgeblade.net
Subject: [Springboard] Deep culture behind our debate on health care reform
I can see, from this conversation, how much more is going on in the health care reform debate, and how much more is being added in, so it becomes an "argument about everything" . . . and this is among us, a quite small demographic of people, I think, with a shared history and a "transestablishment" (facilitative) perspective of brining people together for consensus, common vision, etc.
In the project I have been helping with re: combining ICA's ToP and other methods for use in the Israeli - Palestinian conflict, one of the project partners talks about 3 levels of a conflict: conflict over resources, conflict over goals, conflict over identities. Their insight is that once a conflict becomes about identity, there is something non negotiable that enters in to the conversation. Another of the project partners talks about elements of the "deep culture" that fuel conflict -- a "cognitive pathology" and an "emotional pathology" (see below)
· Deep Cultures often have elements which are counterproductive for peace. Two syndromes in particular can generally be identified. There is a cognitive pathology in Deep Culture which affects how a society thinks and analyses a conflict. There is also an Emotional pathology which strongly affect attitudes.
· The Cognitive syndrome, DMA for short, is centered on Dichotomy (reducing the conflict to 2 conflict parties only)i, Manichaeism (where one side is “Good” and one side is “Evil”) and Armageddon (that there will be a final and inevitable battle in which Good decisively destroys Evil).
· The Emotional syndrome, CGT for short, is centered on Chosenness (the belief that a group of people have been chosen by transcendental forces or history for a political mission), Glory (the myths of past and future glory, underscoring their Chosenness), and Trauma (the experience of past injuries and defeats, underscoring the need to pursue their Mission).
i <> We reinforce this syndrome when we call the “Israeli – Palestinian” identities into the room
Coincidence is the spiritual equivalent of a pun. G. K. Chesterton
401 North Beverly Way, Tolleson, Arizona 85353-2401
+1 623-936-8671 +1 623-363-3277
jfwiegel at yahoo.com www.partnersinparticipation.com
--- On Wed, 9/2/09, jonzondo at juno.com <jonzondo at juno.com> wrote:
From: jonzondo at juno.com <jonzondo at juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] More about the definitions of Liberal and Conservati ve
To: oe at wedgeblade.net
Date: Wednesday, September 2, 2009, 11:15 PM
1)Most conservatives I know support Diebold voting machines. Some make money off of them. And in Washington State, there was conservative resistance to a paper trail.
2) The elections of 2000 and 2004 and the lack of interest in counting every vote.
3) Discussions with my conservative relatives.
4) "Illegal" Phone calls made in several states to my friends of different ethnicities giving false information about the 2008 election, all in an effort to reduce the number of people voting for Obama.
I hope that all people are ready for fair clean elections. That will be a blessing.
You've got to be kidding! Where could you possibly have come up with the idea that conservatives oppose fair clean elections and open government?
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
You've got to be kidding! Where could you possibly have come up with the idea that conservatives oppose fair clean elections and open government? Part of the huge problem with Obama is that he promised transparency and hasn't practiced it. And can you possibly know about Acorn and think the Democrats are all about clean electins? Conservatives support everything on your list. They just don't support distortion and manipulation of all those issues.
From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Dave Thomas
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 8:49 PM
To: 'Order Ecumenical Community'
Subject: [Oe List ...] More about the definitions of Liberal and Conservative
Learn more about Liberals and the types of Conservatives (Traditional Conservatives, Libertarians, Christian Conservatives and Neo-Conservatives) who oppose them at <http://www.pugetsoundliberals.org/bootcamp/05AboutLiberals.htm> http://www.pugetsoundliberals.org/bootcamp/05AboutLiberals.htm
Also note our Liberal Priorities, which Conservatives consistently oppose:
· Fair Clean Elections and Open Government
· Fair Taxes and Competent Spending
· Investment for Productivity
· Quality Health, Education, Jobs, Income
· Environmental Protection and Energy Independence
· Security and Equal Rights
· Justice and Peace Everywhere
· International Cooperation and Leadership
<http://www.pugetsoundliberals.org/bootcamp/20ConservativesOpposeOurPriorities.htm> Conservatives oppose all of these Dave Thomas
From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of ed feldmanis
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 7:59 PM
To: oe at wedgeblade.net
Subject: [Oe List ...] What do we mean by a right? To Jim, Dave,et.al. re: Conservativism
The most eloquent modern day description that I have seen is in the book Conscience of a Conservative by Barry Goldwater.
I have to agree with Dave as far as his description goes. Here is where I found the problem, at least for me: Conservatives may give lip service to these values, but they intolerantly restrict the freedoms and opportunities they would offer people different from themselves, often valuing the freedom of businesses more than the freedom of individuals.
I find that statement in general to be devastatingly true and possibly un-American. However, I don't agree that every conservative is merely giving lip service. My own impression is that Barry Goldwater was very sincere and specific in his book. At the point of writing the book, in my opinion, there was some sense in that folks still wanted to make America work for everybody and they thought they had more common ground than there is today.
For a while it, the Goldwater book, was the standard of what a conservative was. Conservativism was tied to merit, learning, service, pay as you go spending, and the wide spread use of incentives before deciding to create an agency; and, by the way, there was some sense of what is called state-craft. If pushed beyond Goldwater to Teddy Roosevelt it was also tied to conservation. I think in my time this is as close to having a dynamic - conservativism- defined in some stability. (Notice some of the liberalism inherent in the above description.)
Where I really disagree is where many people simply call the new crowd conservatives; for example, the crowd now in power and mostly Southerners and their business conspirators. The label, I think, in this case, is a cop out for the sake of convenience. In my mind, I can not get the label of conservative to stick on extremists or people who have neo-fascist ideas. These are the same people who called Goldwater a liberal. And they are the so-called conservatives of our day. I don't buy it, but the press and then everyone else seems to.
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
OE mailing list
OE at wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Springboard