Re: [alternateculture] Let's Get Coherent! (was theory & praxis)

Having thunk this one for a long time and seen what has happened to some
of our "charismatic leaders," i will heatedly debate any need or desire
for one such leader. It lacks empowerment and has the danger of loosing
the momentum of the movement if such leader is in any way injured. 

Having flirted with the issue as a leader myself, i think the popular role
of actors and politicians are more leaders than we need already as most
people think they will take care of everything and need to do no leading
themselves. 

The example of my daughter's daycare class stands out, with teachers
encouraging the kids to take turns leading the others to walk down steps,
brush teeth, etc. 

By empowering the masses with knowledge and working on projects together,
and putting our incentives and money and personal actions where our
mouths are, we are more likely to arrive at our goals. 

One cannot speak for so many anyway when there are so many goals. 

Which is not to say that role models aren't ok and good, progressive songs
shouldn't be on the radio and speakers shouldn't speak.

Rob Clay

On Sun, 10 Dec 2000, Marguerite M Hampton wrote:

> (Note:  I am both replying to a new message from Richard Hutchinson and
> forwarding the message to FixGov and AlternateCulture Lists. For full
> text of Hutchinson msg, pls see below.  I have also cc this to some known
> leaders in the Seattle movement for consideration, comment, and further
> dissemination as appropriate. )    
> 
> Richard N Hutchinson <rhutchin@U.Arizona.EDU writes: 
> 
> <If you prefer to use a broader, everyday sense of the term, then I would
> argue that effective leadership can take many forms. > 
> 
> Yes, I am using a broader, everyday sense of the term 'charismatic
> leader' to describe the type of person who can catch and spark the
> imagination and passion of people from disparate walks of life.  Just as
> so many vote in an election based on 'emotion,' followers in a protest
> movement will do the same.  The Beatles set out to 'change the world with
> their music' and millions followed them.  If you recall in my initial
> post I wrote:  'A more pragmatic approach may be . . .  
> 
> You continue:  <There are the more visible spokesperson sort of roles
> (which might be called charismatic), and the behind-the-scenes
> organizational builder sort of roles, and others, and they rarely all
> come together in one person.>
> 
> They don't have to come together in one person -- but the focus has to be
> on one person.  Once the leader emerges from the pack,  the rest of the
> organization falls in behind and the 'pecking order' is 'intuitively'
> established.  But without a leader the organization will remain
> incoherent as it tries to speak through many voices giving mixed
> messages.  Incoherence has continually been the call of the conventional
> media with regard to the Seattle movement.  While this may be a somewhat
> biased observation it does seem to have some validity as differing
> factions protest their individual issues leaving an observer with no
> clear view of what the whole thing is about.  Yet there are underlying
> themes that could be woven into a 'whole' view' and presented through a
> 'charismatic (and respected) spokesperson.'    
> 
> Values researcher Paul Ray reveals that as many as forty-four million
> people, whom he labels as 'Culture Creatives,' and whom are 'intuitively
> led' and unaware of their numbers, are now 'a major and growing cultural
> response to the accelerating failures of modernism' (which includes
> capitalism) here in the U.S. alone. Using data from a 1990-1991 
> World Values Survey, drawn from forty-three nations representing 70
> percent of the world's population, Ronald Inglehart identified clear
> evidence of a shift toward the values of an integral culture in a number
> of societies, including Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, Finland,
> Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Britain, Canada, and the United States.  
> (Korten-1999.)  
> 
> Korten notes that the 'real test of a values shift is the behavior that
> accompanies it.'  The Trend Institute reports that large numbers of
> people are volutarily choosing to limit their consumption and reduce
> their income in favor of simpler lifestyles as they become less
> interested in striving for economic gain and show an increased interest
> in environmental conservation and other things such as more meaningful
> work and time for family. (Korten - 1999) This shift is also evidenced by
> the growing numbers of people who are joining Internet Lists such as the
> Center for a New American Dream (CNAD) where people share their feelings
> and experiences in 'making the shift' while encouraging others to do so. 
>  
> 
> With the large numbers of people involved in this movement away from
> moderism rapidly approaching critical mass and ready to move forward, it
> is imperative that a charismatic leader (spokesperson) emerge in short
> order to bring a coherent voice to, while also uniting, the different
> factions in protest if we are to successfully bring an end to
> neoglobalization.  The opposition would prefer to 'divide and conquer' as
> they have done in the U.S. election this year.  We cannot and must not
> let this happen.
> 
> What is imperative is that we quickly identify the person best qualified
> to fill the role of 'spokesperson' or 'charismatic leader' and get to
> work intuitively organizing in a variety of ways so that those who are
> searching for change may find an organization or 'field unit' to which
> they feel comfortable joining, and which can ultimately link to the
> 'spokesperson.'  Ideally the Internet plays an important role here and
> serves as an organizing tool which permits communication to flow in all
> directions, creating what Korten refers to as a 'planetary
> consciousness.'  
> 
> He writes:  'Much as capitalism uses the power of secrecy, centralized
> authority, and massive financing to champion the cause of money, a
> globalizing civil society is using the powers of openess, voluntary
> commitment, and the ability to self-organize everywhere at once to
> champion the cause of life. . . .The many physical and cyberspace forums
> in which we gather serve as 'learning centers' (my quote) to help us hone
> our capacities for mindful choice and participation in highly democratic
> processes as we reflect, think, share, and deepen our sense of the
> creative possibilities that lie ahead.  We learn as we participate,
> growing in confidence in our ability to function as part of a conscious
> self-organizing, life-serving planetary whole.'  
> 
> Korten continues:  'We must now learn to live as one with the planet,
> taking only what we need, and discovering our place of service to life's
> continuing quest.'   (This statement by Korten carries out my philosophy
> of 'bioregion as the first unit of organization and that everything must
> emanate from this point with the Earth (land, topsoil) being of first
> consideration as it is to this that we 'owe' life. )    
> 
> (Note:  In replying to R. Hutchin's post as above, I have also gone a
> little further and addressed, from Korten's perspective (which is also
> mine), some recent issues discussed on the FixGov Forum as there are some
> interrelated issues here.)  
> 
> marguerite 
> 
> Here is the original message from 
> 
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Richard N Hutchinson <rhutchin@U.Arizona.EDU>
> To: Marguerite M Hampton <ecopilgrim@juno.com>
> Cc: FixGov@egroups.com, Alternateculture@egroups.com,
>        wsn@csf.colorado.edu, renaissance-network@cyberjournal.org
> 
> > I suspect that 'charismatic leadership' is to the 'passionate follower'
> 
> > what 'beauty' is to the 'eye of the beholder.'
> 
> No, this is precisely my point.  There is a theory of charismatic
> leadership, developed by Max Weber and others, that is both different
> from, and to the extent that it overlaps with the everyday use of the
> term, more specific than that usage.
> 
> Charismatic leadership, according to this more rigorous definition, is
> associated with *an informal organizational structure, centered on the
> charismatic leader*.  So leaders of routinized, bureaucratized
> organizations cannot be charismatic by definition.
> 
> If you prefer to use a broader, everyday sense of the term, then I would
> argue that effective leadership can take many forms.  There are the more
> visible spokesperson sort of roles (which might be called charismatic),
> and the behind-the-scenes organizational builder sort of roles, and
> others, and they rarely all come together in one person.  A team of
> leaders with various complementary attributes, in my experience, is
> best.  It doesn't always, even usually, exist.  This "team" can be called
> a critical mass, but that gets into another rigorous theory of social
> movements (see Marwell and Oliver for starters).
> 
> [What I am saying about effective leadership in movements, by the way,
> applies regardless of ideology -- effective leadership is just as
> necessary, for instance, among anarchists as among anyone else.  I throw
> this in as a response to the last post.]
> 
> RH
> _________________________________________
> 
> Marguerite Hampton
> Executive Director - Turtle Island Institute
> EcoPilgrim@juno.com
> http://tii-kokopellispirit.org
> http://egroups.com/group/fixgov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
> eLerts
> It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/_/_/976495215/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> alternateculture-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> 
> 
> 
>