This was a talk for a workshop at the Convergence sustainable development week in Dublin, 30.4.00. The discussion was pretty good, and the session was great fun. If you prefer a longhand version, there's one below.
This is an edited version of the same talk, published in Community Media Network's magazine Tracking. If you prefer the bullet-point version, it's just above this.
At this fair, as often when activists get together, we're comfortable talking about problems and issues that exist in the present and comfortable talking about visions for the future. Something we're rather less comfortable with is how we get from one to the other.
Here I want to try and bring this question of "getting there" within a field we can think about, by drawing a parallel between good activism and good cooking. I'm drawing on my own experience and research in movements and in building links between movements, but the metaphor should speak for itself.
Social movements are a skilled human activity. That means that activism is not something we're born knowing how to do. We're always learning, and there's no shame in that. Often we don't talk about it much, as if we believe the answers are obvious, or we already have the perfect strategy.
But in practice we can win or lose. Not everyone likes those words, but if we're serious about the issues, and about the future we want, it's clear that some results help tackle the issues and bring that future closer, and some … don't. And when we recognise that, we start to get interested in thinking about our own activism and developing our ability to make a difference.
So how can we think about activism? Here's a parallel with cooking, because it's something that probably most of us here have some kind of positive connection with, and not something we're likely to treat as too sacred or too far beneath contempt to talk about intelligently.
Cooking and activism are both fundamental skilled activities. They're fundamental in the sense that we need them to happen. If we're not doing them, it's because someone else is doing them for us or on our behalf. In this sense, to be a good cook is just to be making a reasonable contribution to something that's basic to our own life.
It's not that I'm a great cook, by the way! But I have started to get seriously interested in the subject, partly as a vegetarian and partly as a feminist. And I think I can identify in myself what the tendencies towards good and bad cooking are like.
One feature of bad cooking, in my experience, is being dependent on having very specific ingredients. If that one thing isn't in the cupboard, you're sunk. This seems to be linked to only being able to cook for one particular taste - and if the people who are eating the food don't like it, tough. Putting these together, bad cooking is recipe-bound and fundamentally uncreative: it's about repeating routines over and over, irrespective of how well they connect with the situation (baked beans on toast, anyone?)
The results, partly because of this inflexibility, are often completely inedible when things don't go just right. More generally, bad cooking rarely involves any thought about the long-term diet that's involved. In fact, it often involves very little reflexive thought at all - there may be a lot of upset when ingredient X can't be found, but there's relatively little questioning of "what am I trying to do when I cook?"
By contrast, the good cooks I know work with what's to hand, and often start precisely with that question: what's in the fridge, what can we do with it? They then go on to think about who's going to be eating it, and what might go down well. So there's a basic creative orientation which is creative because it's thinking about the situation, not trying to ignore it when it doesn't fit.
Rarely are the results complete disasters, though as we all know creative cookery can sometimes lead to unusual surprises! (Wise cooks experiment when they're cooking for themselves, my partner says.) And good cooking in this sense also involves some kind of an overall picture, a concern with what our dietary needs in the long-term might be.
If we translate this to movement activism, we can ask a series of questions, and point out something of what good activism might be like. Firstly, how many different situations can we work in? Are we completely stuck if there aren't any tomatoes? Secondly, who can we work with? Are we going to panic if a vegetarian comes to dinner? Thirdly, are we good at finding new solutions? Are we creative movement cooks?
Going on from the day-to-day orientation to the big picture, do we tend to win? Is what we cook generally good to eat, or tendentially inedible? And what are the long-term outcomes? If we look at movements, not just campaigns - diets, not just meals - what is the "big picture" of our practice?
To work well in different situations (not depending on specific ingredients), we need to be able to think on a global scale, in terms of the whole of society. Part and parcel of that is working and talking with different kinds of activists and movements (the people we're eating with). If we encapsulate ourselves within a familiar world, we're going to be left high and dry when we need to engage with something or someone that works differently.
One implication of this: to be creative, we need to actively enjoy politics and struggle. Many of us don't, so we don't really want to think about what we're doing: we're happier just looking at what's wrong and what's right. But practically, we need to think more about how we get from one to the other.
Winning and losing - producing good food or something that has to be thrown away - are not entirely within our control. What we can do is reflect on our experiences and be aware of our weak points, so we can get better at what we do (even if we never have the time to learn the finer points of Chinese vegetarian cookery!) Part and parcel of this is thinking in the long term, not just the short: the diet, not just the meal or the dish. Often when we don't want to think about what we're doing it's because we've happily buried our head in a particular corner of a particular movement, and don't really want to put it in context because we're afraid of - what?
This was a series of linked workshops on social movement practice held during the Convergence 2001 sustainable development week in Dublin, looking at issues of connecting means and ends, communication and skills transfer within movements, spirituality and sustainable activism. It was a relative success in terms of the activists who were involved and numbers of participants (20 - 30 for most sessions), but a disappointment insofar as relatively few participants seemed interested in making the links: most attended only the workshop that spoke to their own existing areas of interest, and although a good number of activists attended, there was also a relatively high level of passive participants with no obvious links to movements. Movements have their own speeds of development, though, and activists have their own sense of their own needs, and it's never easy to know what if anything the effect of any individual initiative like this might have been!
The alternative movement(s) in Ireland and around the world is increasingly clear both about the problems facing us all and about visions of a possible future that would be worth living. What seems hardest to think about is how to get from one to the other, which is something few of us have much experience of.
The Tools For Change series is a connected thread of workshops around the themes of developing the skills and building the capacity to overcome the problems and develop the vision. Each workshop consists of a 30 - 45 minute presentation and discussion by someone involved in the specific field of change, followed after a short break by a facilitated group session where the participants reflect on their own practice. All welcome; suggested donation £2.
The overall series is organised and facilitated by Laurence Cox, who has been involved in radical social movements for nearly 20 years, including movement development and networking projects from the "Ireland from Below" workshop via An Caorthann magazine to the Centre for Research on Environment and Community. He maintains the "Tools for change" website.
Tools for Change is part of the wider Convergence festival promoting sustainable development. Full programme available at this site.
Aileen O'Carroll (Workers' Solidarity Movement) once joined a rifle club in preparation for the revolution, but since realised the futility of this strategy and is now saving up for an attack helicopter. She has been an active campaigner in many important and successful movements over the years, from divorce action and opposition to water charges to Zapatista solidarity and the anti-globalisation movement. Her philosophy consists in having fun while you're trying to change the world, so you're still around to keep on doing it in ten years' time.
A major difficulty in the alternative movement is a general enthusiasm for each other's projects, but an inability to make real connections. Aileen's workshop will focus on how people can build links between different groups and movements, how campaigns can come to broaden their scope from a single issue towards common goals, and how individuals can change their own understanding of what they want in the process.
A full version of Aileen's talk is available at this site.
Ratnabandhu (Dublin Meditation Centre) has been a practicing Buddhist for the last 15 years. This means he's spent the last 15 years attempting to change himself in the light of Buddhist methodology. He has been teaching meditation and yoga as explicit tools for change since he was ordained in 1988. Prior to his Buddhist practice he was a medical doctor and a black belt in judo. Currently he devotes himself to teaching, running the Dublin Meditation Centre, seeing his friends and developing his own meditation and yoga practice. He has a special interest in mind-body medicine, conflict resolution, effective communication and community living.
Ratnabandhu's workshop will introduce you to what meditation is and to how to do it. At the end of the two hour workshop you will have the rudiments of a meditation practice that you can go off and explore. You will also have an introduction to some of the fundamental ideas that Buddhists apply to change themselves - ideas that have survived because they have proved themselves.
Caitríona Mullan (Third System Approaches) is a social economy specialist who works with community groups across the country to develop their assertiveness and effectiveness in working to meet their members' needs. She also has a nice sideline in bullying bureaucrats (private sessions available by arrangement). Her radical practice is grounded in a deep experience of how the system normally works and what it can be made to do.
While many Irish activists have high ideals, in practice they are often all too willing to restrict themselves to what they think the public, the media or the state will accept. Caitríona's workshop will focus on how the principles of social economy can help move beyond this kind of timidity. It will discuss how to push the boundaries of what is "normal" and "possible" to place real needs first and bring about actual change.
Richard Moore (Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance) abandoned a well-paying career in Silicon Valley to devote himself to the struggle against globalisation. Living and writing in Wexford since 1994, he has published numerous articles in magazines and journals worldwide. He is currently working with several activist groups which are seeking, in various ways, to help bring 'the movement' into some kind of effective coherence.
People around the world, in increasing numbers, are realising that globalisation's hyper-capitalism can only lead only to further environmental collapse, widespread economic suffering, and a general loss of democratic sovereignty. If humanity and civilization are to survive, a complete transformation of global society is required - both economically and politically. Unfortunately, such an agenda of transformation is beyond the power of our politicians to even contemplate. They are just as much trapped by 'the system' as the rest of us are.
History clearly shows that only a mass grass-roots movement is capable of bringing about the kind of transformation that is currently required. We have seen the beginnings of such a movement - in Seattle, Prague, Chiapas, Porto Alegre, and elsewhere. In order to move on to the next stage of effectiveness, the movement must find an appropriate means of organizing and of developing a coherent agenda for change. In this workshop, we will explore the ideas behind a new 'harmonization inititative' which may provide the key to bringing the movement together.
This was one of three "talklets" done by members of the Buddhafield Ireland team in 2002. Buddhafield Ireland is an "outreach" programme designed to make meditation available to people in the alternative scene who wouldn't come to a city centre meditation centre. Following the UK Buddhafield model, the central idea is of introducing people to meditation in the context of outdoors retreats, usually under canvas. In 2000 and 2001 we hosted several dozen of people each time for a week and a half at Slí na Bandé in Wicklow and Teach Shinanne in Leitrim respectively. I've put the talk up here because it presents quite a different "take" on the business of activism and organising!
"Taking care of ourselves, wanderers, we also take care of others; taking care of others, we take care of ourselves.
And how, wanderers, do we take care of others by taking care of ourselves? With effort, with cultivation, with constant practice; thus, wanderers, taking care of ourselves we also take care of others.
And how, wanderers, do we take care of ourselves by taking care of others? With tolerance, with non-violence, with friendship, with patience; thus, wanderers, taking care of others we also take care of ourselves."
- Samyutta Nikaya 5:III: 19
Being part of Buddhafield is all about working with people. In fact a Buddha-field, the realm a Buddha is responsible for, consists precisely of living beings. Nothing else.
On the Buddhafield team we find ourselves working with people in three dimensions. We work with people through making meditation available to them. We work with people through working in a team. And we work with ourselves. So I'll talk about each of these, very briefly.
The practice of meditation, the knowledge of the Dharma, the happiness of an ethical life - all of these are remarkable gifts. As a friend of mine put it, "It feels like my life has been given back to me". These gifts are so remarkable, they can transform our lives so much, that when we first come across them we often want to rush out and tell the rest of the world. This is a very very common experience. But of course it usually doesn't work. What we tell other people doesn't usually convince them, and after all why should it? What we know is what has worked for us, what has been significant for us, what we have started to orient ourselves towards. What we don't yet know is what other people need, what will make sense to them, what will work in their lives.
And so if we want to share these remarkable gifts, we need to learn what the Buddhist tradition calls "skilful means". Basically this means nothing other than taking a real interest in other people, recognising that other people's experience is different - sometimes radically different - from our own, and starting to find out what their actual needs are. Otherwise we aren't trying to do something for them at all - we're trying to meet some need of our own.
So in the simple act of making meditation available to other people, we have to start coming out of the shell of ourselves, letting go of the assumption that we are the centre of the universe, and orienting ourselves more towards other people as real, living, developing beings with their own needs and problems and understanding of how things work.
Making Buddhafield happen is a large cooperative effort. We've usually had more than half a dozen people on the core team, as well as lots of helpers; we've worked together with a British team and with the people who've hosted our events; and of course we wind up asking everyone who goes on a retreat to do something in the way of chores.
That's quite a lot of people to work with, and all of them, in one way or another, are volunteers. Nobody has to cooperate. So it's not really possible to go "look, this is just the way it has to be, and there's an end of it." We are all working, in different ways, within the love mode. But there is a lot of space for differences of opinion in any kind of love!
On the team, I've been dedicating myself particularly to making sure that communication and cooperation run as smoothly as possible. And what I've experienced is that working in a team is a real challenge. It's a challenge because you have to let go, as far as you can, of things like the desire to hear the sound of your own voice, the desire to enthuse about your own pet idea, the desire to tell everybody how to do things - and try to listen to other people's voices, support their ideas, and find out what they think about how to do things.
As the others on the team know, I'm not always very good at this! In fact none of us are. But that process of having to find ways of communicating and cooperating is a really useful one. It means that we're not just stomping on our ego for some abstract reason that we don't fully agree with. We can see the results of our actions, and the context we're operating in, in other people's eyes. And we learn, slowly, to orient ourselves to that - and in the process "come out" of ourselves.
So working with other people, in different ways, always comes down to working with ourselves. And we do that most effectively in working with other people. Why is this? Well, basically we are social animals. Particularly our emotions, which is what drive us most of the time, are social emotions - responses to other people, to what they do to us and to what we want from them.
And other people provide such a wonderful context to explore this. It really is very objective - there we are, trying to help the team come to an agreement, and either we all cooperate and get somewhere, or we all try to express our egos as loudly as possible and get nowhere. Or there we are, trying to make this wonderful fact of meditation available to people - and either what we say makes sense to them and meets their needs, or we're just talking to ourselves in the company of someone else.
We have to get good at this, of course, and the way we do that is through our own practice: Through mindfulness of our own reactions and of what is happening with other people. Through metta for others, and a friendly sense of ourselves as part of the situation. Through ethical practice geared to compassion, generosity, contentment and truth. And through constantly trying to get beyond our current, limited selves - through Going for Refuge. This is what helps us eventually become good at working with people, instead of irritable, bitchy, manipulative and all those ways of relating to each other that we can already do so well!
So the Buddha is right. Absolutely the best field for transforming ourselves is working with other people. And absolutely the best way of transforming our relationships with other people is to work on ourselves. And Buddhafield is a great context for doing both!
This was a roleplay designed to fit into a broader workshop on gender and activism planned for the second Grassroots Gathering together with Caitríona Mullan and Venus Kamura. In the event, it didn't happen because a comrade objected to the idea of roleplay on the grounds that the internal gender dynamics of movements are irrelevant: the real problems have to do with the proportions of women taking part in activism, and this is an effect of social structures which have to be changed.
Which is all fair enough, except that it's something of an "after the revolution" answer, that doesn't tell us what to do beyond the fairly obvious: campaign on gender issues, try to mobilise women as well as men. But the extent to which movements do this in turn has more than a little to do with how gender relations operate inside movements, which is what we were trying to look at. Oh well...
In any case, here's the roleplay in the hope it might be useful to someone. I'd be interested to hear back from anyone who's tried it out!
This roleplay will work for up to a dozen men and a dozen women, and should take about half an hour to run. (NB: the characters will need to be written out in advance on index cards or something similar.) It's probably helpful not to launch straight into it, but rather take a bit of time first for people to start to engage with each other in the group context (in our session the plan was to start by getting the group to tell stories about times they'd noticed gender issues coming up in activist contexts).
The basic idea is that participants are acting as members of a group planning an action of some kind (ideally something which people have some familiarity with, but not so much that the discussion is purely technical!) Get the women to randomly pick male characters and vice versa, give people a few minutes to think themselves into their roles (eg ask them to imagine what the character's accent might be like, how they're dressed, or something similar) and then set the scene: what the group is, where they've met and what they're trying to organise/
Obviously the characters are all to a greater or lesser extent caricatures, but hopefully caricatures which represent something of real gender dynamics. The point is not so much to get people to "learn something about the opposite sex" in a Men are from Mars, women are from Venus style as it is to give them a chance to step outside their own specific gendered approach to activism for a time. The roleplay should then set the group up for a more general discussion on participants' understandings of gender issues in activism and possible strategies for working with them.
Disclaimer: These characters aren't intended as a representation of reality (even though people sometimes do act as caricatures). A roleplay is a tool, not a visualisation of statistical realities: to work, it needs strongly gendered characters so that participants have a high chance of winding up playing someone whose approach is very different to their own.
Siobhán (student, age 23)
You've come from a small town where you had to be careful what you said to whom. You're quite attracted by what's going on, but you feel a bit of a fraud among all these impressive activists here. Try not to make a fool of yourself...
Catchphrase: "I'm just me..."
Karen (civil servant, age 35)
You're very competent at your job and used to speaking out when things aren't right. But you find the setup here quite intimidating; it isn't clear who's really making the decisions, but anything you say seems to be "wrong". Try to work out what's going on!
Catchphrase: "Em..."
Therese (secretary, age 47)
You're a very down-to-earth person. All these big ideas are all very well, but someone has to actually put them into practice. Often it's you! Keep very close track of the practical realities, and bring people back with a bump if necessary...
Catchphrase: "The practical facts are..."
Kathleen (fulltime activist, age 42)
You've been arguing for women's rights since the days divorce and contraception were illegal. You thought the meeting sounded interesting, but it's just another setup dominated by men. You can't be bothered even arguing - if they haven't learned yet, that's their problem!
Catchphrase: "I'm not really that interested..."
Mary (housewife, 27)
In your earlier life you used to be very active, and you're still interested in what's going on. But now you've got a toddler, and they're quite a handful. You still go to events, but you miss a lot of what's going on through having to deal with the kid.
Catchphrase: "Come here!"
Martina (journalist, age 35)
You are bloody good at what you do, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise! You know a lot, and you don't believe in hiding your light under a bushel. Make sure you contribute to the full!
Catchphrase: "What I think we should do is..."
Liz (nurse, age 32)
Your life has brought you into contact with a lot of other people's suffering. Even when you're not at work, you tend to put other people's needs before your own. Try and check out who needs supporting in the group and look after them as appropriate.
Catchphrase: "Seamus (or whoever) wanted to say something..."
Jo (aromatherapist, age 35)
You've always been a very intuitive person. The rational stuff isn't the only thing that counts in life! Make sure the meeting doesn't lose touch with the energies that matter: pick one theme (eg feng shui, auras, phases of the moon) and remind people of its importance!
Catchphrase: "Let's focus on (whatever it is)..."
Marion (student, age 19)
You're not really sure what's going on in this meeting. But your boyfriend really wanted to go, and he persuaded you too. Stick close to him (change seats if you need to - choose the "man" character you prefer!) and don't do anything else.
Catchphrase: "I'm only here with him..."
Lucia (beautician, age 24)
When you were growing up you were told you'd never get a man if you were too intelligent: it'd only frighten them off. You've learned the lesson well: your voice is half an octave higher than natural, you've a great line in giggles, and you always defer to men.
Catchphrase: "Oh, I don't know! (giggle)"
Anne (mature student, age 37)
You're slowly making a new life for yourself after a disastrous marriage. You thought this meeting might be part of that, but you really aren't understanding everything that's going on, and no-one bothers to explain. You're starting to feel very stupid...
Catchphrase: "I didn't really understand..."
Claire (care worker, age 36)
You're very aware of communication processes and how things are going within groups. You tend to notice people's needs and try to build them into the whole group process. Keep an eye on the flow of discussion and do what you can to mediate!
Catchphrase: "How does the rest of the group feel?"
Michael (architect, age 35)
You're smart and good at what you do: successful at work, well-respected by other campaigners. You don't always feel this, though, and you depend a lot on getting good feedback, particularly from women. Pick any woman character (ie one played by a man) and try to impress her (by any means necessary!)
Catchphrase: "I really like what Mary (or whoever) said..."
John (teacher, age 28)
You're interested in a lot of things and do your own thinking about them. This means you tend to have very strong points of view, and you don't take kindly to contradiction! Pick any male character (ie one played by a woman) and argue with whatever he says!
Catchphrase: "I think that's completely wrong..."
Brendan (ex-student, age 27)
You do a lot of reading and try to make sense of it all. You also tend to get very passionate about things other people see as pretty abstract. Pick any topic (eg the purpose of the gathering, the importance of consensus, community...) and go on about it for as long as you can get away with!
Catchphrase: "This is really very important..."
Seán (electrician, age 45)
You haven't had a happy life, but other people have it worse than you. So you're really committed to changing things, and do a lot of the donkey-work. In meetings like this you feel responsible for keeping things on track, and worry a lot about whether you're dominating things.
Catchphrase: "Em..."
Frank (counsellor, age 42)
You're a professional mediator - working with other people's needs and trying to get good outcomes. You're convinced that this always means compromise, and you're made nervous by any outburst of strong emotion. Try to quieten things down whenever possible.
Catchphrase: "Maybe we should take 5 minutes time out..."
Ronan (unemployed artist, age 25)
You're very passionate about the cause you care about and really want to take direct action. The only point you see in this event is if people do an action, preferably as dramatic as possible. Try not to listen to other people!
Catchphrase: "We have to do something!
Martin (fulltime activist, age 37)
You've been a committed activist for as long as you can remember. You work as an organiser, training younger people; but most of them aren't really serious. Try to pick out the ones who are and correct them if they make mistakes!
Catchphrase: "The answer to that question is..."
Donal (postgraduate, age 28)
You're very smart - the first person in your family to go on to do postgrad, and what you're doing is really really important. Pick a subject (eg marine biology, agricultural economics, political science) and try and show everyone else how important it is!
Catchphrase: "In my discipline, what we've found out is..."
Kieran (journalist, age 45)
You've been around a long time, and seen a lot of stupidity and a lot of show-offs. You've developed a really sharp eye for other people's motivations. Pick on other people, one at a time, and come up with the funniest put-down lines you can!
Catchphrase: "Sure you'll be working for Daddy soon..."
Anthony (freelance writer, age 29
You're very strongly motivated by your values and beliefs, and they really help you keep going. So you don't let a chance go by of convincing people of them! Pick one thing (eg non-hierarchical organisation, non-violence, consensus) and let everyone know how much it matters!
Catchphrase: "Without (whatever), these problems will always happen..."
Tommy (self-employed, age 42)
You've always been a very practical person. You're an activist in order to make things happen, and you easily get impatient when other people waste time! Try to get results out of this meeting, whatever the cost.
Catchphrase: "We have to take a decision..."
Simon (technical writer, age 32)
You have very very high standards - you campaign because the world doesn't live up to them. You're not satisfied with yourself either, no matter how hard you work - and other people often seem very untogether in what they do...
Catchphrase: "The best way to do this would be..."