Bcc: various colleagues Companion essay: "The movement & its culture - an optimistic view" online at: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/postings/?id='2205' Forwarding invited to appropriate forums. _________________________________________________________ DOES THE MOVEMENT NEED AN IDEOLOGY? Friends, For me, writing is a process of discovery. After putting down the facts and circumstances, as I understand them, I then try to see where they lead, and how they interact with one another. Quite often, the conclusions reached are quite different than those that motivated me to write in the first place. Such was my experience in trying to write an essay on this ideology question. What motivated me to address this question were a number of folks who have been stridently claiming that the movement ~must~ adopt some ideology, if it is to achieve unity and effectiveness. This concerned me, because ideologies (and religions) tend to divide people into camps and factions. If the movement were to start espousing some ideology, that would tend to alienate those who were already committed to other religions and ideologies. It seemed to me that the strength of the movement comes from its ability to welcome diverse constituencies, and its success in providing a space where they can collaborate in a pragmatic way. Richard Richardson is one of the pro-ideology folks. He summarized his position this way in a posting he sent out earlier this month: > The anti-globalization movement cannot become a genuine revolutionary movement until it has a positive goal and ideology for humanity and other living beings, not only a negative one. Without such a widely accepted ideology that will guide a genuine...movement to replace capitalism with a pro-living beings socio-economic system, the present movement is bound to flounder and disintegrate into the multi-ideological factions that presently compose it, or else limp along as an impotent 'straw-person' opposition to corporate globalization. Subsequent to that, Richardson has been sponsoring a thread on the list <•••@••.•••> in which he has been assembling a list of all known ideologies which can be characterized as 'anti-corporate globalization'. He is seeking to synthesize a new ideology, in discussion with others, that would have a universal appeal to all those who want a livable and sustainable world. I wrote about five pages, bringing in considerations of the movement culture, and the nature of capitalism, etc., and then began trying to put together an argument about why we don't need an ideology, and how the movement can agree on vision and strategy by other means. But the argument wasn't getting off the ground. I started browsing back through old cj postings in order to refresh my thinking, and I came to the posting, "Empowering the movement: unity through harmonization". In the cartoon of my life, a big exclamation mark then showed up in a bubble over my desk. The next frame has the bubble: "Harmonization as ideology?". After that comes the frame where I set aside the original essay and begin again. I pursued that in the form of a letter to Richardson (below). As always, your ideas and questions are invited. all the best, rkm BTW> I'd like to thank Linnea Carroll Meyer, who has put a page on her site which features the cyberjournal site. In fact, her page would perhaps be a better home page than the one we currently have! You might want to check it out at <http://www.fantasticforum.com/cyberjournal/rkm_index.html>. Linnea has invited feedback, at <•••@••.•••>. BTW-2> The first attempt at the essay was not wasted; it led me to some new ideas which will make sense in our 'movement strategy' thread. ____________________________________________________________________________ Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 07:41 To: Richard Richardson <•••@••.•••> From: "Richard K. Moore" <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: more anti-corporate-globalization ideologies 5/24/2001, Richard Richardson [added rkm's submission to his list]: > 23. No single hegemonic ideology Dear Richard, In developing my essay on 'ideology', I was led to conclusions I did not expect. I have decided to change my submission, above. I now think the movement ~does~ need an ideology, and I've got a heavyweight contender to put forward for that role - a contender that I believe you might respond to favorably. I was resisting the notion of ideology, because I could not imagine there being any ideology that would be suitable to such a diverse movement. Any pre-existing ideology would leave some people out, either because of their religion, current ideology, personal prejudices, or whatever. Besides, what are the chances that any pre-existing ideology would exactly match the requirements of our current circumstances, circumstances which are unique historically in many different ways? I realize that you are thinking in terms of synthesizing a new ideology, taking into account that diversity and our special circumstances, but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Such a synthesis, I think, would be better called a 'platform', or 'manifesto', or 'program', rather than an 'ideology'. An 'ideology' needs to have a core simplicity, a central backbone inherent to itself that can be expressed in a word or phrase, like 'socialism', 'capitalism', 'anarchism', 'republicanism', or whatever. If it's a hodge-podge of ideas, then its something other than an ideology. But then the penny dropped. I remembered some ideas that had drifted out of my mind, due to my recent pre-occupation with Daniel Quinn's ideas (Story of B), and with what I had been learning about the movement and its culture. The earlier ideas drifted back in, and they are about something I call 'harmonization'. I'd like to put forward 'harmonization' as a candidate ideology - an overarching ideology for the new age. Here's how I would define it: Harmonization (Brit.: Harmonisation). n., 1. A process of problem solving which seeks to find a best overall solution, taking into account the interests and values of all concerned parties. (Related: consensus, pragmatism; contrasting: factionalism, party politics.) 2. An ideology professing that society needs to be in harmony with nature, man in harmony with society, and different societies in harmony with one another. (Related: sustainability, collaboration; contrasting: exploitation, competition.) 3. An attitude toward the beliefs of others, which goes beyond tolerance, including as well respect and understanding. (Related: 'brotherhood of man'; contrasting: bigotry.) Now let's consider your ideology survey, from the perspective of harmonization. Those ideologies represent summaries of the beliefs and values of various groups. The problem of coming up with principles and values that would be acceptable to all of those groups is precisely what harmonization (the process) is all about. Presumably, we could make a list, for each ideology, of its primary values and principles. We could then seek to make another list, which does not conflict with any of the ideologies, and which incorporates as many values and principles as possible. The result, I continue to suggest, would not itself be an ideology, but would be a 'manifesto' or 'platform' that all the groups could support while still retaining their separate ideologies. Note also that it is possible for someone to hold more than one ideology / religion at the same time, if they are in different domains. For example, one can be a Muslim and capitalist, a Christian and an anarchist, a pagan and a socialist, and many other combinations. I suggest that everyone can subscribe to harmonization (the ideology) without sacrificing any of their existing values or beliefs, other than those of hatred, bigotry, and intolerance. Furthermore, harmonization (the process) has already been guiding the movement's activities, even though it has not been recognized as such. Movement decision making has been by consensus (harmonizing the agendas of a single gathering) and decentralized networking (harmonizing the outcomes of individual gatherings). Harmonization (the ideology) has been at the heart of movement demands for sustainability, democracy, and an end to corporate rule. Harmonization (the attitude) has enabled diverse groups (such as union activists and environmentalists) to collaborate effectively. I hope these ideas are useful to your current endeavor. best regards, rkm http://cyberjournal.org ____________________________________________________________________________