Re: Fw: Re: rn,wsn> Laurence Cox re: theory & praxis

In a message dated 00-12-10 03:14:51 EST, ecopilgrim@juno.com writes:

> Courage and solidarity may be enough to see us through this crisis.  But
>  as in every battle, we, the people of the world need a common cause to
>  fight for and a leader to hold us to courage.  Several names come to mind
>  including:  Ralph Nader, Fr. Thomas Berry, and David C. Korten, as ones
>  who may have sufficient grasp of all of the issues and be acceptable as a
>  leader by all members of the Global Village.  We need a 'Ghandi' - a
>  'Martin Luther King' - to issue a battle cry that can be heard around the
>  world.    

Dear Marguerite,

I don't think all the members of the Global Village would agree that we, 
whoever we are, need pacifists like a Ghandi or a Martin Luther King to issue 
a battle cry and accept reformists like Ralph Nader or David Korten as their 
leader (by the way, who is Fr. Thomas Berry?).

In what you call the Seattle and, for want of a better term, I call the 
"anti-globalization" movement, there are participants from many political 
views and countries. There are anarchists, socialists, communists, 
ecologists, ngoists, unionists what have you. There are Koreans, Finish, 
Turks, Greeks, Brazilians, Swidish, Germans, what have you. 

Go and attempt to tell my anarchist friends that they need a leader and see 
what kind of reaction you will get. Mention the names of the "party" or the 
"state" if you dare. Go and attempt to tell my socialist friends that they 
should accept David Korten as their leader and see what kind of lectures on 
"reactionary utopias" you will get. Further, some (I would say a significant 
portion of) participants of the movement are national liberationists. Do you 
think they would accept an American as their leader? Of course there are 
right-wing anti-globalizationists as well, but I conveniently and 
unjustifiably assume them away. Do I need to mention those  who have no idea 
but lots of pain?

At this point, we are looking at a problem for which we don't know whether a 
solution exists and, if exists, whether it is unique. What we need in my 
opinion is patience, not leaders. To determine whether a problem has a unique 
solution, we need to define the problem first. And, unfortunatelly, I don't 
see that definition yet.

To sum up, at this point what we need is patience I would say. And persistent 
work based on mutual respect. That is, we need to keep pouring the gasoline 
into the fire. Some coordination wouldn't hurt either. 

Until the problem is defined!

Respectfully,
Sabri