Parts of Western Papua in precolonial times were subject to the Sultanate of Tidore. Dutch began to establish outposts in 1828, claiming western New Guinea for the Dutch East Indies. When Indonesia was released into Independence (1949), the Netherlands held on to Netherlands New Guinea. In the early 1960es Indonesia launched its Konfrontasi policy; in 1963 the Dutch withdrew and Netherlands New Guinea, renamed Irian Jaya, was annexed by Indonesia. In 2003 the province was split in two, Irian Jaya and West Irian Jaya. In 2007 the provinces were renamed, Papua and West Papua respectively.
Timeline : Irian Jaya
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
History of Irian Jaya, ToC
Saturday, 5 June 2010
Tumba Lata: Indigenous Spirituality Anyone?
Tumba Lata: Indigenous Spirituality Anyone?
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Indigenous Spirituality Anyone?
In Papua today, to talk about indigenous spirituality is to talk about something that is true in the past.
Sometime last year, I went with a group of women to join an exposure and educational trip in Bukidnon among the Talaandig and Matigsalug tribes. The occasion was a cultural exchange between West Papua and Mindanao facilitated by Mindanao People’s Caucus and Concord, a Dutch development agency engaged in indigenous people’s development. With us were one journalist from the Suara Perempuan Papua (Voice of Papuan Women), an alternative weekly, and five members of the Majelis Rakyat Papua (MRP) or Papuan People’s Assembly, four of whom women.
MRP is a state body established in 2005 to represent the interests of the indigenous peoples in West Papua. Established in compliance with a provision in the Special Autonomy granted the West Papuans in 2001, it is tasked to protect the cultural sovereignty of the Papuans. Part of MRP’s authority is ensuring that custom and culture are respected, women’s rights protected and harmonious religious life upheld.
Mindanao indigenous women, like the West Papuan women in the delegation, are also currently engaged in a struggle for peace. An important aspect of this struggle is the reclaiming of their ancestral lands which are now largely in the hands of outsiders, mainly migrant and corporate business interests. Conflict in both West Papua and Mindanao, participants to the cultural exchange believe, have their roots in the historical injustice that had turned indigenous peoples into marginal farmers and virtual scavengers in their own lands.
West Papuan women’s interest in Mindanao’s indigenous women partly comes from the latter’s rather famed role in conflict resolution and peace-building. The visit to Mindanao, it was hoped, would make an important learning experience especially in the practice of indigenous spirituality and customary law and in how these serve their peace-making roles. But in Papua today, according to Frida Tabita Kelasin of the MRP’s Women Working Group and head of the Papuan delegation that visited Mindanao, to talk about indigenous spirituality is to talk about something that is true in the past as most of West Papua are now practicing one or the other of the five world religions, namely, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Judaism.
What West Papuans have today, Frida Tabita Kelasin said, is contextual spirituality, a syncretic blend of indigenous belief and world religions. This syncretic faith rose from people’s deep involvement in indigenous people’s struggle to claim their heritage, an important aspect of which is the reclaiming of their ancestral lands and their relationship with Mother Nature. There are 253 ethnic groups in West Papua, she explained, and all of these tribes have the basic belief that nature is a gift from God and that people are stewards. Women in particular are regarded in traditional Papuan society as nurturers and protectors with a gift for maintaining harmonious relationship with nature. However, in West Papua today, this relationship has been destroyed and the women’s situation mirrors this disaster. Logging, mining and conversion of forest lands into plantations have polluted their rivers and poisoned their soil as Indonesian government continues their development policies that have removed indigenous peoples from their habitats and replace them with buildings and palm oil plantations. These created social problems such as prostitution, wife abuse, and the spread of AIDS/HIV. Removal from their lands also means loss of access to their traditional sources of food and medicines, thus the high incidence of hunger and malnutrition. Health in West Papua is a major concern. The Australia West Papua Association reports that West Papua has half of all the diagnosed cases of HIV/AIDS in Indonesia, at 20 times higher the rate of the rest of Indonesia, while malaria remains endemic, and cases of tuberculosis, including new drug resistant strains, are on the rise. Infant mortality rate is among the highest in the world, along with maternal mortality rate.
But unlike the Lumad struggle in Mindanao which of late has resorted to peace lobbying and civil society mobilization, there is in West Papua today a yet unquelled armed resistance. This movement seeks complete independence from the central government in Jakarta as ultimate expression of West Papuan political and cultural sovereignty. This conflict has its beginning since 1962 when indigenous Papuans first resisted annexation to Indonesian territory and has since claimed an estimated 100,000 lives.
“We can pray, but there are no ritualists among us, said Frida when Bae Magagaw of the Matigsalug tribe strongly suggested a joint ritual as among the future activities they should be holding to be conducted at an appointed hour of the day. Through this ritual, Bae Magagaw said, their joint prayers and supplication for protection from Manama (God) as they fight for their rights over ancestral lands will be better heard.
By ritual Bae Magagaw meant pamuhat, the slaughtering of a white chicken and making offerings of betel nuts, betel leaves and lime and other gifts to the spirits. The indigenous peoples of Mindanao and other parts of the country have been assiduously doing this since they embarked on a cultural regeneration project, and the Talaandigs and Matigsalugs of Bukidnon have been particularly tireless in ensuring that all activities that are conducted, including development activities and researches that have an import in their communities, are first and foremost sanctioned and blessed by Manama through this ritual.
The Mindanao women’s efforts towards reviving culture, the West Papuan visitors said, had been admirable, and it is a source of inspiration for them, because in Papua expressing ideas of indigenous identity has become a bad dream. Assertion of indigenous identity is suppressed and celebration of international day of indigenous peoples, as may be expressed in the raising of the West Papuan flag, invites political repression.
Bernadetha Mahuse, another member of the Working Group for Women in the People’s Assembly also explained that the situation in Papua is very different from the situation here in Mindanao. “Indigenous spirituality in Papua is a thing of the past,” she said. One proof to this is they themselves, women delegates. They are all indigenous Papuans, but they are now practicing one world religion or another. Bernadetha is a Catholic while Frida is a Prostestant. Their other companions, Atakiah Serfita, Martha Ollap, and Fientje Salomina Jarangga, are also Muslim, Catholic, and Protestant, respectively.
But even with the national ID system and the compulsory subscription to one major world religion or another, the West Papuans said, there is room for growth. And that’s what they are trying to do today, to make room for indigenous faith to live.
“Within the context of major religions we are now trying to situate and reflect our adat (customary law), so we have been trying to promote what we call contextual spirituality,” Frida said. The West Papuan delegates also explained that in Papua today there is a tendency for indigenous spirituality to be reduced to mere symbols. Because of the dominance of the world religions, indigenous knowledge and spirituality has been weakened. This situation is made worse by the presence of migrants who are either Christians or Muslims. Within this context indigenous spirituality becomes old and irrelevant.
Some Papuans are aware that they have lost something, Frida said. “That’s what we are trying to regenerate.” Organizations that are sensitized towards cultural regeneration are being established and the churches have been very instrumental in this work. The armed conflict is West Papua has something to do with this sense of loss, this sense of trauma and suffering that the West Papuan people suffered under Indonesian government.
“And when we say we want peace in Papua that means we want an end to this sense of persecution, this sense of injustice.”
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Indigenous Spirituality Anyone?
In Papua today, to talk about indigenous spirituality is to talk about something that is true in the past.
Sometime last year, I went with a group of women to join an exposure and educational trip in Bukidnon among the Talaandig and Matigsalug tribes. The occasion was a cultural exchange between West Papua and Mindanao facilitated by Mindanao People’s Caucus and Concord, a Dutch development agency engaged in indigenous people’s development. With us were one journalist from the Suara Perempuan Papua (Voice of Papuan Women), an alternative weekly, and five members of the Majelis Rakyat Papua (MRP) or Papuan People’s Assembly, four of whom women.
MRP is a state body established in 2005 to represent the interests of the indigenous peoples in West Papua. Established in compliance with a provision in the Special Autonomy granted the West Papuans in 2001, it is tasked to protect the cultural sovereignty of the Papuans. Part of MRP’s authority is ensuring that custom and culture are respected, women’s rights protected and harmonious religious life upheld.
Mindanao indigenous women, like the West Papuan women in the delegation, are also currently engaged in a struggle for peace. An important aspect of this struggle is the reclaiming of their ancestral lands which are now largely in the hands of outsiders, mainly migrant and corporate business interests. Conflict in both West Papua and Mindanao, participants to the cultural exchange believe, have their roots in the historical injustice that had turned indigenous peoples into marginal farmers and virtual scavengers in their own lands.
West Papuan women’s interest in Mindanao’s indigenous women partly comes from the latter’s rather famed role in conflict resolution and peace-building. The visit to Mindanao, it was hoped, would make an important learning experience especially in the practice of indigenous spirituality and customary law and in how these serve their peace-making roles. But in Papua today, according to Frida Tabita Kelasin of the MRP’s Women Working Group and head of the Papuan delegation that visited Mindanao, to talk about indigenous spirituality is to talk about something that is true in the past as most of West Papua are now practicing one or the other of the five world religions, namely, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Judaism.
What West Papuans have today, Frida Tabita Kelasin said, is contextual spirituality, a syncretic blend of indigenous belief and world religions. This syncretic faith rose from people’s deep involvement in indigenous people’s struggle to claim their heritage, an important aspect of which is the reclaiming of their ancestral lands and their relationship with Mother Nature. There are 253 ethnic groups in West Papua, she explained, and all of these tribes have the basic belief that nature is a gift from God and that people are stewards. Women in particular are regarded in traditional Papuan society as nurturers and protectors with a gift for maintaining harmonious relationship with nature. However, in West Papua today, this relationship has been destroyed and the women’s situation mirrors this disaster. Logging, mining and conversion of forest lands into plantations have polluted their rivers and poisoned their soil as Indonesian government continues their development policies that have removed indigenous peoples from their habitats and replace them with buildings and palm oil plantations. These created social problems such as prostitution, wife abuse, and the spread of AIDS/HIV. Removal from their lands also means loss of access to their traditional sources of food and medicines, thus the high incidence of hunger and malnutrition. Health in West Papua is a major concern. The Australia West Papua Association reports that West Papua has half of all the diagnosed cases of HIV/AIDS in Indonesia, at 20 times higher the rate of the rest of Indonesia, while malaria remains endemic, and cases of tuberculosis, including new drug resistant strains, are on the rise. Infant mortality rate is among the highest in the world, along with maternal mortality rate.
But unlike the Lumad struggle in Mindanao which of late has resorted to peace lobbying and civil society mobilization, there is in West Papua today a yet unquelled armed resistance. This movement seeks complete independence from the central government in Jakarta as ultimate expression of West Papuan political and cultural sovereignty. This conflict has its beginning since 1962 when indigenous Papuans first resisted annexation to Indonesian territory and has since claimed an estimated 100,000 lives.
“We can pray, but there are no ritualists among us, said Frida when Bae Magagaw of the Matigsalug tribe strongly suggested a joint ritual as among the future activities they should be holding to be conducted at an appointed hour of the day. Through this ritual, Bae Magagaw said, their joint prayers and supplication for protection from Manama (God) as they fight for their rights over ancestral lands will be better heard.
By ritual Bae Magagaw meant pamuhat, the slaughtering of a white chicken and making offerings of betel nuts, betel leaves and lime and other gifts to the spirits. The indigenous peoples of Mindanao and other parts of the country have been assiduously doing this since they embarked on a cultural regeneration project, and the Talaandigs and Matigsalugs of Bukidnon have been particularly tireless in ensuring that all activities that are conducted, including development activities and researches that have an import in their communities, are first and foremost sanctioned and blessed by Manama through this ritual.
The Mindanao women’s efforts towards reviving culture, the West Papuan visitors said, had been admirable, and it is a source of inspiration for them, because in Papua expressing ideas of indigenous identity has become a bad dream. Assertion of indigenous identity is suppressed and celebration of international day of indigenous peoples, as may be expressed in the raising of the West Papuan flag, invites political repression.
Bernadetha Mahuse, another member of the Working Group for Women in the People’s Assembly also explained that the situation in Papua is very different from the situation here in Mindanao. “Indigenous spirituality in Papua is a thing of the past,” she said. One proof to this is they themselves, women delegates. They are all indigenous Papuans, but they are now practicing one world religion or another. Bernadetha is a Catholic while Frida is a Prostestant. Their other companions, Atakiah Serfita, Martha Ollap, and Fientje Salomina Jarangga, are also Muslim, Catholic, and Protestant, respectively.
But even with the national ID system and the compulsory subscription to one major world religion or another, the West Papuans said, there is room for growth. And that’s what they are trying to do today, to make room for indigenous faith to live.
“Within the context of major religions we are now trying to situate and reflect our adat (customary law), so we have been trying to promote what we call contextual spirituality,” Frida said. The West Papuan delegates also explained that in Papua today there is a tendency for indigenous spirituality to be reduced to mere symbols. Because of the dominance of the world religions, indigenous knowledge and spirituality has been weakened. This situation is made worse by the presence of migrants who are either Christians or Muslims. Within this context indigenous spirituality becomes old and irrelevant.
Some Papuans are aware that they have lost something, Frida said. “That’s what we are trying to regenerate.” Organizations that are sensitized towards cultural regeneration are being established and the churches have been very instrumental in this work. The armed conflict is West Papua has something to do with this sense of loss, this sense of trauma and suffering that the West Papuan people suffered under Indonesian government.
“And when we say we want peace in Papua that means we want an end to this sense of persecution, this sense of injustice.”
Friday, 29 May 2009
What is Democracy?
Lecture at Hilla University for Humanistic Studies
January 21, 2004
Democracy consists of four basic elements:
January 21, 2004
Democracy consists of four basic elements:
I want to begin with an overview of what democracy is. We can think of democracy as a system of government with four key elements:
political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections.
- The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life.
Protection of the human rights of all citizens. - A rule of law, in which the laws and
- procedures apply equally to all citizens.
I want to talk about each of these four elements of what democracy is. Then I will talk about the obligations and requirements of citizens in a democracy.
Then I will conclude by talking about the obligations that we, the international community, have to the people of Iraq as you seek to build the first true democracy in the Arab world.
I. Democracy as a Political System of Competition for Power
Democracy is a means for the people to choose their leaders and to hold their leaders accountable for their policies and their conduct in office.
The people decide who will represent them in parliament, and who will head the government at the national and local levels. They do so by choosing between competing parties in regular, free and fair elections.
Government is based on the consent of the governed.
In a democracy, the people are sovereign—they are the highest form of political authority.
Power flows from the people to the leaders of government, who hold power only temporarily.
Laws and policies require majority support in parliament, but the rights of minorities are protected in various ways.
The people are free to criticize their elected leaders and representatives, and to observe how they conduct the business of government.
Elected representatives at the national and local levels should listen to the people and respond to their needs and suggestions.
Elections have to occur at regular intervals, as prescribed by law. Those in power cannot extend their terms in office without asking for the consent of the people again in an election.
For elections to be free and fair, they have to be administered by a neutral, fair, and professional body that treats all political parties and candidates equally.
All parties and candidates must have the right to campaign freely, to present their proposals to the voters both directly and through the mass media.
Voters must be able to vote in secret, free of intimidation and violence.
Independent observers must be able to observe the voting and the vote counting to ensure that the process is free of corruption, intimidation, and fraud.
There needs to be some impartial and independent tribunal to resolve any disputes about the election results.
This is why it takes a lot of time to organize a good, democratic election.
Any country can hold an election, but for an election to be free and fair requires a lot of organization, preparation, and training of political parties, electoral officials, and civil society organizations who monitor the process.
II. Participation: The Role of the Citizen in A Democracy
The key role of citizens in a democracy is to participate in public life.
Citizens have an obligation to become informed about public issues, to watch carefully how their political leaders and representatives use their powers, and to express their own opinions and interests.
Voting in elections is another important civic duty of all citizens.
But to vote wisely, each citizen should listen to the views of the different parties and candidates, and then make his or her own decision on whom to support.
Participation can also involve campaigning for a political party or candidate, standing as a candidate for political office, debating public issues, attending community meetings, petitioning the government, and even protesting.
A vital form of participation comes through active membership in independent, non-governmental organizations, what we call “civil society.”
These organizations represent a variety of interests and beliefs: farmers, workers, doctors, teachers, business owners, religious believers, women, students, human rights activists.
It is important that women participate fully both in politics and in civil society.
This requires efforts by civil society organizations to educate women about their democratic rights and responsibilities, improve their political skills, represent their common interests, and involve them in political life.
In a democracy, participation in civic groups should be voluntary. No one should be forced to join an organization against their will.
Political parties are vital organizations in a democracy, and democracy is stronger when citizens become active members of political parties.
However, no one should support a political party because he is pressured or threatened by others. In a democracy, citizens are free to choose which party to support.
Democracy depends on citizen participation in all these ways. But participation must be peaceful, respectful of the law, and tolerant of the different views of other groups and individuals.
III. The Rights of Citizens in a Democracy
In a democracy, every citizen has certain basic rights that the state cannot take away from them.
These rights are guaranteed under international law.
You have the right to have your own beliefs, and to say and write what you think.
No one can tell you what you must think, believe, and say or not say.
There is freedom of religion. Everyone is free to choose their own religion and to worship and practice their religion as they see fit.
Every individual has the right to enjoy their own culture, along with other members of their group, even if their group is a minority.
There is freedom and pluralism in the mass media.
You can choose between different sources of news and opinion to read in the newspapers, to hear on the radio, and to watch on television.
You have the right to associate with other people, and to form and join organizations of your own choice, including trade unions.
You are free to move about the country, and if you wish, to leave the country.
You have the right to assemble freely, and to protest government actions.
However, everyone has an obligation to exercise these rights peacefully, with respect for the law and for the rights of others.
IV. The Rule of Law
Democracy is a system of rule by laws, not by individuals.
In a democracy, the rule of law protects the rights of citizens, maintains order, and limits the power of government.
All citizens are equal under the law. No one may be discriminated against on the basis of their race, religion, ethnic group, or gender.
No one may be arrested, imprisoned, or exiled arbitrarily.
If you are detained, you have the right to know the charges against you, and to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the law.
Anyone charged with a crime has the right to a fair, speedy, and public trial by an impartial court.
No one may be taxed or prosecuted except by a law established in advance.
No one is above the law, not even a king or an elected president.
The law is fairly, impartially, and consistently enforced, by courts that are independent of the other branches of government.
Torture and cruel and inhumane treatment are absolutely forbidden.
The rule of law places limits on the power of government. No government official may violate these limits.
No ruler, minister, or political party can tell a judge how to decide a case.
Office holders cannot use their power to enrich themselves. Independent courts and commissions punish corruption, no matter who is guilty.
V. The Limits and Requirements for Democracy
If democracy is to work, citizens must not only participate and exercise their rights. They must also observe certain principles and rules of democratic conduct.
People must respect the law and reject violence. Nothing ever justifies using violence against your political opponents, just because you disagree with them.
Every citizen must respect the rights of his or her fellow citizens, and their dignity as human beings.
No one should denounce a political opponent as evil and illegitimate, just because they have different views.
People should question the decisions of the government, but not reject the government’s authority.
Every group has the right to practice its culture and to have some control over its own affairs, but each group should accept that it is a part of a democratic state.
When you express your opinions, you should also listen to the views of other people, even people you disagree with. Everyone has a right to be heard.
Don’t be so convinced of the rightness of your views that you refuse to see any merit in another position. Consider different interests and points of view.
When you make demands, you should understand that in a democracy, it is impossible for everyone to achieve everything they want.
Democracy requires compromise. Groups with different interests and opinions must be willing to sit down with one another and negotiate.
In a democracy, one group does not always win everything it wants. Different combinations of groups win on different issues. Over time, everyone wins something.
If one group is always excluded and fails to be heard, it may turn against democracy in anger and frustration.
Everyone who is willing to participate peacefully and respect the rights of others should have some say in the way the country is governed.
VI. What the International Community Owes Iraqi Democracy
I want to conclude with a few words about what we in the United States and other democracies around the world owe the Iraqi people, as you seek to build the first true Arab democracy.
I know some of you fear that we will abandon Iraq, and your effort to build democracy, when Iraqis regain their sovereignty on July 1.
I want to tell you from my deepest conviction, this will not happen.
We have all sacrificed together to give the people of Iraq this opportunity to live in freedom.
For this just cause, the blood of many nations has been spilled on this soil.
People in the United States are still divided about whether we should have gone to war in Iraq.
But the overwhelming majority of Americans support what we are trying to do here now to assist the emergence of a new Iraq.
We in the United States, and in the international community, are going to spend more money and energy to help you build a democracy and rebuild your economy than we have spent to help any other country in the last fifty years.
Over the coming months and years, this assistance will help you develop your political parties and civic organizations, your legislatures and local governments, your elections and your courts.
It will go to rebuild your schools and your mass media, your electricity grids and roads, and all the different foundations of your economy and infrastructure as well.
Most Americans support this work—whether they are Republicans or Democrats, whether they will vote to reelect George Bush as president this year or vote for his opponent.
Building a democracy out of the ruins of a brutal dictatorship requires great courage, effort, and patience on the part of ordinary people. It takes a long time.
We understand how difficult it is. We know how important it is—not only to the future of Iraq, but to the whole Arab world.
We do not wish to dictate who will rule you. That is for Iraqis to decide.
Our desire is to see that Iraqis be free to choose their leaders and speak their minds, while living at peace with themselves and their neighbors.
If you choose this path of democracy, freedom, and peace, the democratic peoples of the world—not only the US, but the European Union, Japan, Canada, and so on—will all be with you.
We will be your partners for many years to come.
[PDF] Democracy: A Model for Tribal Democracy
[PDF] Democracy: A Model for Tribal Democracy: A Model for Tribal ...
Democracy: A Model for Tribal. Government. Government. Why is it important to teach tribal. Government? •. Studying tribal government helps in understanding ...
Democracy: A Model for Tribal. Government. Government. Why is it important to teach tribal. Government? •. Studying tribal government helps in understanding ...
isite.lps.org/dpricha/web/documents/Tribalgovernment.pdf - Similar pages -
Wednesday, 30 July 2008
Invoking Mandela: How do we make democracy work for the poor?
Fazila Farouk
2008-07-30, Issue 391
http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/49787
It's just been a few weeks since Nelson Mandela was taken off the United States terrorism watch list. No doubt so that they too could join in the celebrations of this living icon, without the embarrassment of hoisting up a revolutionary.
I gather that a revolutionary in America is, someone, not quite viewed through the same rose-tinted lens worn by us Southerners.
Mandela made the cover of Time Magazine again this week. It's his fourth time on the cover. I couldn't resist picking it up as I walked past the magazine rack at the local store, knowing well that I was going to be presented with yet another romantic glorification of his role as reconciler.
Not that I disagree with the sentiment. I join the rest of the world in praising the power of his peacemaking in our deeply divided nation. But Mandela is my hero for a few different reasons too. There is much more to our beloved leader than the image of the sanitised reconciler we've been fed since his release from prison.
In the early days of the apartheid struggle, Mandela was a stirring political activist. Those are the dark days when the very people who are celebrating him today, had their backs turned to him.
The political activist that I wish to remember is the terrorist that the Americans want to forget. The man, who frustrated by the savage methods of his oppressors, took up arms against them, earning himself the unfair label of terrorist, while it was the apartheid government, run by a bunch of racist bullies, which should have been put on America's terrorist list.
Mandela's journey to the top has been strewn with perils, including the threat of death, which he embraced as a political activist prepared to die for his principles. The sacrifice he offered in the closing remarks of his Rivonia Trial speech continues to inspire a new generation of activists even today. He said:
"I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal, which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die" (Nelson Mandela. Rivonia Trial, April 20, 1964).
Forty-four years later, on the eve of Mandela's 90th birthday, listening to a podcast of his Rivonia Trial speech, it occurs to me that many of the things he was prepared to lay his life on the line for, have not changed. His seminal speech was about the appalling socio-economic conditions of black South Africans and the gross inequality between the lives of white and black South Africans.
How tragic and ironic that despite Mandela's sacrifices - with only the difference of political freedom - if the dates were changed in his Rivonia Trial speech, he could easily rerun it as a commentary on modern day South Africa. The downtrodden of South Africa are still stuck in the trenches of a struggle for their socio-economic freedom.
Nevertheless, even as Mandela has become far removed from his people, he continues to be a man of extraordinary character and integrity and even enjoys the love and respect of those who have been betrayed by the democratic transition.
Sbu Zikode, president of Abahlali Basemjondolo, the shack dwellers organisation, says "We take Mandela as a second Jesus Christ, who was jailed for all of us. We really appreciate the sacrifice that he made. We all fought together as brothers and sisters … and it is more hurt(ful) when it is our own brothers … who are now oppressing us."
Through 'anger, hunger and frustration' Abahlali's shack dwellers have taken to the streets to protest the conditions under which they live. They are pained and disappointed by the lack of priority assigned to their plight by the democratically elected government and have, in recent years, been increasingly active in expressing their constitutional right to protest.
When laws don't work for people, civil disobedience is allowed. This is the lesson that we learned from the young Mandela. Not that Abahlali's protest action is unlawful.
Given the history of our leaders, it is surprising to note the crackdown on community activists of today. The story of Jerome Daniels and Ridwaan Isaacs is a case in point. They are both community leaders from the Delft informal settlement, involved in the struggle for decent housing, who have recently been sentenced to a year in jail for their political activism.
In handing down their stiff sentences, the magistrate contended that he was doing so in order to "teach the Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign a lesson." This campaign, which both the accused are members of, is a sister organisation of Abahlali.
So as we get caught up in the heady moment of this iconic birthday celebration - and in the rhetoric of reconciliation, it would also serve us well to remember that the struggle is far from over for many South Africans who are enslaved by their socio-economic conditions.
Mandela, the struggle activist of the 60's understood that contestation is an essential part of democratic engagement. We draw on the strength of this knowledge in the South Africa of 2008, where the struggle for social justice is far from over.
*Fazila Farouk is the founder and executive director of the South African Civil Society Information Service.
*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/
2008-07-30, Issue 391
http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/49787
It's just been a few weeks since Nelson Mandela was taken off the United States terrorism watch list. No doubt so that they too could join in the celebrations of this living icon, without the embarrassment of hoisting up a revolutionary.
I gather that a revolutionary in America is, someone, not quite viewed through the same rose-tinted lens worn by us Southerners.
Mandela made the cover of Time Magazine again this week. It's his fourth time on the cover. I couldn't resist picking it up as I walked past the magazine rack at the local store, knowing well that I was going to be presented with yet another romantic glorification of his role as reconciler.
Not that I disagree with the sentiment. I join the rest of the world in praising the power of his peacemaking in our deeply divided nation. But Mandela is my hero for a few different reasons too. There is much more to our beloved leader than the image of the sanitised reconciler we've been fed since his release from prison.
In the early days of the apartheid struggle, Mandela was a stirring political activist. Those are the dark days when the very people who are celebrating him today, had their backs turned to him.
The political activist that I wish to remember is the terrorist that the Americans want to forget. The man, who frustrated by the savage methods of his oppressors, took up arms against them, earning himself the unfair label of terrorist, while it was the apartheid government, run by a bunch of racist bullies, which should have been put on America's terrorist list.
Mandela's journey to the top has been strewn with perils, including the threat of death, which he embraced as a political activist prepared to die for his principles. The sacrifice he offered in the closing remarks of his Rivonia Trial speech continues to inspire a new generation of activists even today. He said:
"I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal, which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die" (Nelson Mandela. Rivonia Trial, April 20, 1964).
Forty-four years later, on the eve of Mandela's 90th birthday, listening to a podcast of his Rivonia Trial speech, it occurs to me that many of the things he was prepared to lay his life on the line for, have not changed. His seminal speech was about the appalling socio-economic conditions of black South Africans and the gross inequality between the lives of white and black South Africans.
How tragic and ironic that despite Mandela's sacrifices - with only the difference of political freedom - if the dates were changed in his Rivonia Trial speech, he could easily rerun it as a commentary on modern day South Africa. The downtrodden of South Africa are still stuck in the trenches of a struggle for their socio-economic freedom.
Nevertheless, even as Mandela has become far removed from his people, he continues to be a man of extraordinary character and integrity and even enjoys the love and respect of those who have been betrayed by the democratic transition.
Sbu Zikode, president of Abahlali Basemjondolo, the shack dwellers organisation, says "We take Mandela as a second Jesus Christ, who was jailed for all of us. We really appreciate the sacrifice that he made. We all fought together as brothers and sisters … and it is more hurt(ful) when it is our own brothers … who are now oppressing us."
Through 'anger, hunger and frustration' Abahlali's shack dwellers have taken to the streets to protest the conditions under which they live. They are pained and disappointed by the lack of priority assigned to their plight by the democratically elected government and have, in recent years, been increasingly active in expressing their constitutional right to protest.
When laws don't work for people, civil disobedience is allowed. This is the lesson that we learned from the young Mandela. Not that Abahlali's protest action is unlawful.
Given the history of our leaders, it is surprising to note the crackdown on community activists of today. The story of Jerome Daniels and Ridwaan Isaacs is a case in point. They are both community leaders from the Delft informal settlement, involved in the struggle for decent housing, who have recently been sentenced to a year in jail for their political activism.
In handing down their stiff sentences, the magistrate contended that he was doing so in order to "teach the Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign a lesson." This campaign, which both the accused are members of, is a sister organisation of Abahlali.
So as we get caught up in the heady moment of this iconic birthday celebration - and in the rhetoric of reconciliation, it would also serve us well to remember that the struggle is far from over for many South Africans who are enslaved by their socio-economic conditions.
Mandela, the struggle activist of the 60's understood that contestation is an essential part of democratic engagement. We draw on the strength of this knowledge in the South Africa of 2008, where the struggle for social justice is far from over.
*Fazila Farouk is the founder and executive director of the South African Civil Society Information Service.
*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/
Sunday, 15 June 2008
Monday, 28 November 2005
The Renaissance of Cooperative Democracy
by Natylie Baldwin
It is troubling indeed to think of how many people I have talked to recently who regurgitate the truism that corporate capitalism may have its negative effects such as ecological destruction, gross exploitation and greed but humans have regrettably been unable to come up with anything better. And these are not conservative or uneducated folks. When I suggest the eventual abandonment of neo-liberal capitalism and, no, I�m not talking about a Marxist-inspired state monolith but economies that are more localized and democratically-run since the end of cheap oil will soon necessitate such re-tooling, I simply get the blank stare. Or, better yet, I am greeted with a sneer coupled with the insistence that we�re all greedy, domineering bastards at heart and our collective future is basically mapped out for us. May as well just crack open a beer, watch The Sopranos and not bother our pretty little heads about such cryptic abstractions.
Despite this Hobbesian viewpoint echoed by many, cooperative democracy is wired into us as it is a form of governance commonly observed in nature (1). Among groups of red deer, African buffalo and various primates, the decision to move from one location to another was made when a majority of those within the group indicated a desire to move in a particular direction. The number of individuals comprising the majority was higher the greater the danger of the situation. This is in contrast to misconceptions about the role of alpha males who actually only dominate in the context of sexual mating and pecking order. Among predator animals the alpha males lead the hunt and do not appear to enjoy any particular privileges with this role but instead carry the extra risk of death or injury. (1, 2, 3)
The myths surrounding hierarchy in the animal world are reminiscent of those surrounding human governance which claim that a centralized form of authority with concentrated power (eg. dictator, monarch, oligarchy, etc.) can govern more effectively and efficiently, especially in times of danger or crisis. But like these other animal species, before formal laws and other complex social and political organizational institutions were devised, human beings practiced a more equitable and sustainable form of democracy based upon thousands of years of trial and error and natural selection. (4)
What Thom Hartmann, Daniel Quinn and other writers, scholars and activists are finding, based on ancient history, anthropology and ecological studies, is that many of the features of what is reverently referred to as civilization are reflective of relatively young, ultimately self-destructive values and habits. In other words, rapacious corporate capitalism, overindulgence and domination with no regard for the long-term consequences or effects on others is analogous to the adolescent who gets gratification from driving recklessly only to find he has one day caused a three-car pile-up and is responsible for grave destruction to other�s lives as well as his own. His only hope usually involves turning to wiser elders for guidance and a bail-out.
The long saga of humanity characterized by tribal organization that preceded the last 10,000 years is designated as �prehistory� and is largely relegated to obscurity, somehow viewed as having little to contribute to our proper understanding of the human experience or how to approach the challenges we currently face. In short, we have ignored the wisdom of our ancient ancestors under the assumption that empires, capitalism, a glut of superfluous consumer gadgets and a perverse definition of individualism are the apex of human achievement.
All of the ancient-lineage tribes on various continents that Hartmann encountered during his research had a leader (chief) whose role entailed an obligation of service to the community as a whole and, like the hunt leaders of the animal world, involved more sacrifices than opportunities for enrichment or domination over others. (1) Furthermore, prior to contact with European settlers, among most of the long-established tribes in aboriginal North America, economic cooperation and environmental sustainability were moral imperatives in the sense that they were understood as absolutely essential to the survival of the community. Similarly, when both intra-tribal and intertribal conflict arose, the means developed to resolve these conflicts did not typically involve murder or the annihilation of an opponent as these only led to a cycle of vengeance and waste that ultimately drained communities of human resources and diversity of the gene pool.
Elaborate systems of social pressure and rituals evolved to keep members within acceptable bounds of behavior. Transgressors were seriously reprimanded most often by their own kin. If a member had committed an act privately that constituted a cultural taboo or was a source of distress, confession was often encouraged before the entire community so that everyone could learn from it and the violator could obtain redemption. Warfare was characterized mostly by posturing as a predetermined goal was established such as crossing a line, or the taking of an object from or piercing the flesh of an opponent. (4, 5)
The resilient Eskimo culture illustrates the cooperative democratic tribal model. A hunter who is very successful will share his bounty rather than try to exploit his more favorable circumstances over a less fortunate hunter. The successful hunter knows there may come a day when he is less fortunate and will need the reciprocity of others. Thanks are never expressed in Eskimo society since it is considered everyone�s right to have the necessities of life as opposed to the concept of charity within hierarchical societies where the recipient is implicitly considered unworthy or flawed and, therefore, at the mercy of the whims of those more fortunate. (5)
Formal legal systems and police were not seen in ancient tribal societies as they were not recognized as necessary. These mechanisms of social control were not fully realized until the advent of the state (e.g. the Aztecs), although signs of their eventual emergence could be discerned in the chiefdom, an intermediate level of organization.
The Influence of Tribal Democracy on the Founding Fathers�Between Two Paradigms
The agreed upon definition among anthropologists of what we call civilization is that it is predicated upon agricultural settlement. (5, 6) Although most of the population is not now directly involved in farming and much of the work is mechanized and controlled by corporate interests, it is still the basis of how we obtain food. When any group of humans utilizes the techniques of food preservation and cultivates a large amount of land for crops, a surplus soon accumulates and must be stored. Once this situation develops, the stored surplus is protected and distributed by a person or group of persons who then form the foundations of an elite. The social structure of the community becomes stratified by wealth and power. Due to the food surplus, population expands, the majority of which perform menial work to serve the elite. This explains the advanced material development that characterizes the larger, more complex social organization that we refer to as civilization. That size and complexity is largely driven by the hierarchical nature of the society itself. (5, 6)
It was within this level of social organization that Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and many of the other recognized leaders of the American Revolution emerged. These icons of political philosophy, however, particularly Franklin and Jefferson, spent their formative years in friendship with and observation of Native American tribes. (1) In fact, the term American was originally synonymous with Indian and was adopted by the rebels to distinguish themselves from Europeans. (7)
Many of the Enlightenment thinkers who also influenced the Founding Fathers, such as Locke and Rousseau, acknowledged the Native Americans, especially members of the Iroquois Confederacy, as practitioners of the concept of legitimate governance stemming from the governed. They also admired the personal autonomy that was reportedly enjoyed within the tribes.
However, many of these European thinkers whose knowledge of the Native Americans was based on second-hand accounts rather than personal experience or observation, concluded that communal land holdings and the limited nature of agriculture among Native tribes was ultimately indicative of backwardness since complex European societies were built upon the notion that not cultivating the land extensively meant that one was not making full use of the land for human exploitation, a goal which trumped all other considerations in regards to the natural world. (7)
The Founding Fathers� experience with the indigenous tribes of North America was that they all had three distinct branches of government which they believed was a likely window into the pre-Monarchy past of Europe. (8) Hartmann�s research confirms that the direct democracy briefly practiced in ancient Athens was based upon the tribal level of organization. Athenian popular democracy was temporarily overthrown in a coup that many suspected Socrates, who opposed democracy as a �crass� and inferior form of governance, influenced, leading to his trial and execution. Socrates� student, Plato, and his student, Aristotle, also harbored a deep philosophical resentment of genuine democracy that can still be felt in Western political tradition.
Alexander Hamilton and John Adams carried on the Socratic tradition of distrust of common folk by advocating for a modified oligarchy while Franklin, Madison and Jefferson supported a more pure form of democratic rule for the former British colonies. (1) The compromises resulted in an Electoral College, property requirements for voting and a Bill of Rights. And although the Constitution does not mention corporations, Jefferson, Madison and others were deeply concerned by the potential power and abuse of unaccountable corporate entities like the British East India Company, which prompted the Boston Tea Party by dumping huge amounts of cheap tea into the colonies and receiving a massive tax break from the British crown, thereby threatening local small enterprise. Jefferson went so far as to advocate unsuccessfully for an amendment to the Constitution banning commercial monopolies. (1) The ubiquitous control of huge corporations over the government and economy today that is made possible by the legal concept of corporate personhood was antithetical to what many of the Founding Fathers envisioned for a nation that was the namesake of their indigenous tribal friends.
Despite being a far cry from the communal tradition of Native tribes, American private property rights in the agrarian era of the 1700�s were significantly different from what they were after the rapid industrialization and rise of corporations seen in the following century, notably after the Civil War. 18th century businesses were localized and organized in a variety of ways from small-scale merchants to cooperatives. (9) Moreover, any one individual or entity accumulating massive amounts of property, usually in the form of land, was viewed as violating the property rights of others. The public typically had rights to forage, hunt and graze on unenclosed land even if it was owned privately, objections by the landowner notwithstanding. Thus, the right to exclude others was not the essential component of private ownership that it is now. (10)
The democracy of America�s founders then was a blend of certain aspects of the democratic political system of the indigenous tribes, including many of the individual liberties enjoyed by Native tribal members. However, the thirteen colonies, while organized into towns and what would become states, were larger and more complex than tribes. This reality led the founders to conclude that representative democracy and an economy based on private property rights, as opposed to direct consensus democracy and common public �ownership,� would be more workable in terms of preserving the new nation. Industrialization combined with corporate capitalism then hastened the American experiment even further away from a sustainable and cooperative democracy.
Recovering Our Cooperative Democratic Heritage
What many historians and anthropologists refer to as civilizations were empires. From the Sumerians to the Persians, Greeks, Romans, and British, their large hierarchical and insatiable natures ultimately led to their self-destruction. The interesting fact is that there were civilizations in indigenous North America that fell, prior to contact with European colonizers, but the explanations often assumed for their fall are fallacious.
The Mayan, Olmec and Anasazi peoples, though they did not have as great a tendency toward expansion as Eurasian-derived empires, all experienced the familiar conditions that characterize civilizations: increased population, stratified social structures, gross inequality, strained environments, etc. Neither archeological evidence nor common sense support the familiar assertions of insurmountable natural disasters or armed force as the reason for their eventual decline. Rather, the people abandoned these societies once a critical mass recognized they clearly were unworkable in terms of sustainability and fulfilling their basic needs. (5, 6)
The idea of abandoning the current civilization has enjoyed varying degrees of support and popularity from the hippies with their admonition to �drop out� to intentional communities and alternative policies advocated by many opponents of corporate globalization. Many of these alternative lifestyle plans increasingly share the basic values observed in ancient tribes: an emphasis on smaller localized economies, environmental sustainability and cooperative democracy.
Bioregional or ecoregional democracy is a decentralized movement based on democratic control of the economic and political planning that affects a particular locality which corresponds to ecologically-defined areas observed in nature rather than borders imposed by humans. Such a defined area may comprise a key species, soil type, watershed or micro-climate that reflects natural capital constraints in that region. The philosophy of natural capitalism posits that since all life forms in an eco-region are dependent upon a system from which breathing, eating, hydration and waste disposal occur, then that system must be maintained within its capacity for function and renewal. Hence, political and economic decisions that will impact the region must be limited as much as possible to local inhabitants, which would lead to a decrease in threats to natural capital. These ecoregional democratic entities need not interfere with the larger body of civil and human rights protections within a nation state and may cooperate with international bodies as appropriate. (11)
Variations on the ecoregional democratic model are being discussed and implemented by those wishing to prepare for the challenges that �peak oil� will likely produce in the next 5-10 years. Conservation biologist/botanist Jason Bradford lives in a small town called Willits in Mendocino County, California. Since August of last year, he has hosted three screenings of The End of Suburbia. The issues raised in the film ignited so much interest in the community to take action that Bradford quit his academic job to become an organizer with the Willits Economic Localization project (WELL), which he founded.
About 60 residents attend bi-weekly meetings and have formed committees to research and create ways to make the community more self-reliant and independent of fossil fuels. The first two priorities are providing sufficient amounts of locally produced food and alternative energy to fuel other basic needs such as light, refrigeration and hospital equipment. Some of the ideas taking shape presently include working with local farmers to figure out the logistics of community farms, recycling rain water from roofs with expandable pillow tanks underneath buildings, solar and biomass utilities. (12, 13)
Bradford has stated that the small size of the towns in Mendocino and the forward-looking mindset of the people motivated his decision to move there in the first place and will undoubtedly be a key factor in the future success of the project. A statement calling for �sustainable local production of necessary goods and services including food� was endorsed unanimously by the Willits City Council this past August. Although the statement did not bind the city to commit resources to the goals it is recognized as a vital first step in shaping future city actions. Moreover, other local groups like the Willits Chamber of Commerce and the countywide Economic Development and Finance Committee are also expected to endorse the statement. (14)
Similar policies have been instituted with positive results in other communities throughout the world in resistance to corporate globalization policies. A general consensus of values emerging among global justice activists include democracy, sustainability and what has been termed subsidiarity, or the idea that economic and political decision-making should come from the local community as much as possible. Such activists further agree that when local cultural customs conflict with basic universal human rights standards, human rights standards should take precedence. (15)
So the question remains, why has it taken so long for communities in the United States to start walking away from a system that is not only inhumane but devouring the very resources necessary for all survival? The answer, of course, is complex and multilayered but author Daniel Quinn suggests that perhaps the most crucial and ironic factor is the stories or memes unique to our civilization (4, 6). In other words, that set of beliefs in society that is so pervasive that it is considered conventional wisdom: that civilization is the ultimate achievement of humanity and, despite its most destructive elements, can never be forsaken.
Endnotes
1) What Would Jefferson Do? by Thom Hartmann. Harmony Books. New York, NY. 2004.
2) �Group Decision-making in Animals� by L. Conradt & T.J. Roper. Nature. Volume 421, pp. 155-158. January 9, 2005.
3) �Democracy Beats Despotism in the Animal World� by James Randerson. New Scientist. January 8, 2003. Available at www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3248.
4) The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight by Thom Hartmann. Three Rivers Press. New York, NY. 2004.
5) Man�s Rise to Civilization as Shown by the Indians of North America from Primeval Times to the Coming of the Industrial State by Peter Farb. E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc. New York, NY. 1968.
6) Beyond Civilization: Humanity�s Next Great Adventure by Daniel Quinn. Three Rivers Press. New York, NY. 1999.
7) �American Indian Influences on the America of the Founding Fathers� by Robert Venables. Exiled in the Land of the Free: Democracy, Indian Nations and the U.S. Constitution, edited by Chief Oren Lyons & John Mohawk. Clear Light Publishers. Santa Fe, NM. 1992. Chapter 3.
8) �Iroquois Political Theory and the Roots of American Democracy� by Donald A. Grinde, Jr. Exiled in the Land of the Free: Democracy, Indian Nations and the U.S. Constitution, edited by Chief Oren Lyons & John Mohawk. Clear Light Publishers. Santa Fe, NM. 1992. Chapter 6.
9) Taking Care of Business: Citizenship and the Charter of Incorporation by Richard L. Grossman & Frank T. Adams. Project on Corporations, Law & Democracy (POCLAD). 1993. Available at www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/TakingCareBusiness.html.
10) �Property Law: Mirror of the Era� by Erick T. Freyfogle. Orion Magazine. March/April, 2005. p. 23.
11) �Bioregional democracy� at Wikipedia public encyclopedia. Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecoregional_Democracy
12) Willits Economic Localization Group at the Post Carbon Institute. www.postcarbon.org/groups/willits.
13) Interview with Jason Bradford of Willets Economic Localization (WELL) on KZYX. January 9, 2005. Transcript available at Global Public Media, http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/336.
14) �Council Supports Sustainable Willits: Unanimous Vote for Economic Localization� by Claudia Reed. The Willits News. August 26 2005. Available at www.postcarbon.org/node/728.
15) Alternatives to Economic Globalization: A Better World is Possible. Second Edition. Edited by John Cavanagh & Jerry Mander. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. San Francisco, CA. 2004.
Last Updated November 28, 2005 7:32 PM
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and
do not necessarily reflect those of the World Prout Assembly.
The World Prout Assembly is a non-profit organization affiliated with
Proutist Universal Global Headquarters, Kolkata, India
It is troubling indeed to think of how many people I have talked to recently who regurgitate the truism that corporate capitalism may have its negative effects such as ecological destruction, gross exploitation and greed but humans have regrettably been unable to come up with anything better. And these are not conservative or uneducated folks. When I suggest the eventual abandonment of neo-liberal capitalism and, no, I�m not talking about a Marxist-inspired state monolith but economies that are more localized and democratically-run since the end of cheap oil will soon necessitate such re-tooling, I simply get the blank stare. Or, better yet, I am greeted with a sneer coupled with the insistence that we�re all greedy, domineering bastards at heart and our collective future is basically mapped out for us. May as well just crack open a beer, watch The Sopranos and not bother our pretty little heads about such cryptic abstractions.
Despite this Hobbesian viewpoint echoed by many, cooperative democracy is wired into us as it is a form of governance commonly observed in nature (1). Among groups of red deer, African buffalo and various primates, the decision to move from one location to another was made when a majority of those within the group indicated a desire to move in a particular direction. The number of individuals comprising the majority was higher the greater the danger of the situation. This is in contrast to misconceptions about the role of alpha males who actually only dominate in the context of sexual mating and pecking order. Among predator animals the alpha males lead the hunt and do not appear to enjoy any particular privileges with this role but instead carry the extra risk of death or injury. (1, 2, 3)
The myths surrounding hierarchy in the animal world are reminiscent of those surrounding human governance which claim that a centralized form of authority with concentrated power (eg. dictator, monarch, oligarchy, etc.) can govern more effectively and efficiently, especially in times of danger or crisis. But like these other animal species, before formal laws and other complex social and political organizational institutions were devised, human beings practiced a more equitable and sustainable form of democracy based upon thousands of years of trial and error and natural selection. (4)
What Thom Hartmann, Daniel Quinn and other writers, scholars and activists are finding, based on ancient history, anthropology and ecological studies, is that many of the features of what is reverently referred to as civilization are reflective of relatively young, ultimately self-destructive values and habits. In other words, rapacious corporate capitalism, overindulgence and domination with no regard for the long-term consequences or effects on others is analogous to the adolescent who gets gratification from driving recklessly only to find he has one day caused a three-car pile-up and is responsible for grave destruction to other�s lives as well as his own. His only hope usually involves turning to wiser elders for guidance and a bail-out.
The long saga of humanity characterized by tribal organization that preceded the last 10,000 years is designated as �prehistory� and is largely relegated to obscurity, somehow viewed as having little to contribute to our proper understanding of the human experience or how to approach the challenges we currently face. In short, we have ignored the wisdom of our ancient ancestors under the assumption that empires, capitalism, a glut of superfluous consumer gadgets and a perverse definition of individualism are the apex of human achievement.
All of the ancient-lineage tribes on various continents that Hartmann encountered during his research had a leader (chief) whose role entailed an obligation of service to the community as a whole and, like the hunt leaders of the animal world, involved more sacrifices than opportunities for enrichment or domination over others. (1) Furthermore, prior to contact with European settlers, among most of the long-established tribes in aboriginal North America, economic cooperation and environmental sustainability were moral imperatives in the sense that they were understood as absolutely essential to the survival of the community. Similarly, when both intra-tribal and intertribal conflict arose, the means developed to resolve these conflicts did not typically involve murder or the annihilation of an opponent as these only led to a cycle of vengeance and waste that ultimately drained communities of human resources and diversity of the gene pool.
Elaborate systems of social pressure and rituals evolved to keep members within acceptable bounds of behavior. Transgressors were seriously reprimanded most often by their own kin. If a member had committed an act privately that constituted a cultural taboo or was a source of distress, confession was often encouraged before the entire community so that everyone could learn from it and the violator could obtain redemption. Warfare was characterized mostly by posturing as a predetermined goal was established such as crossing a line, or the taking of an object from or piercing the flesh of an opponent. (4, 5)
The resilient Eskimo culture illustrates the cooperative democratic tribal model. A hunter who is very successful will share his bounty rather than try to exploit his more favorable circumstances over a less fortunate hunter. The successful hunter knows there may come a day when he is less fortunate and will need the reciprocity of others. Thanks are never expressed in Eskimo society since it is considered everyone�s right to have the necessities of life as opposed to the concept of charity within hierarchical societies where the recipient is implicitly considered unworthy or flawed and, therefore, at the mercy of the whims of those more fortunate. (5)
Formal legal systems and police were not seen in ancient tribal societies as they were not recognized as necessary. These mechanisms of social control were not fully realized until the advent of the state (e.g. the Aztecs), although signs of their eventual emergence could be discerned in the chiefdom, an intermediate level of organization.
The Influence of Tribal Democracy on the Founding Fathers�Between Two Paradigms
The agreed upon definition among anthropologists of what we call civilization is that it is predicated upon agricultural settlement. (5, 6) Although most of the population is not now directly involved in farming and much of the work is mechanized and controlled by corporate interests, it is still the basis of how we obtain food. When any group of humans utilizes the techniques of food preservation and cultivates a large amount of land for crops, a surplus soon accumulates and must be stored. Once this situation develops, the stored surplus is protected and distributed by a person or group of persons who then form the foundations of an elite. The social structure of the community becomes stratified by wealth and power. Due to the food surplus, population expands, the majority of which perform menial work to serve the elite. This explains the advanced material development that characterizes the larger, more complex social organization that we refer to as civilization. That size and complexity is largely driven by the hierarchical nature of the society itself. (5, 6)
It was within this level of social organization that Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and many of the other recognized leaders of the American Revolution emerged. These icons of political philosophy, however, particularly Franklin and Jefferson, spent their formative years in friendship with and observation of Native American tribes. (1) In fact, the term American was originally synonymous with Indian and was adopted by the rebels to distinguish themselves from Europeans. (7)
Many of the Enlightenment thinkers who also influenced the Founding Fathers, such as Locke and Rousseau, acknowledged the Native Americans, especially members of the Iroquois Confederacy, as practitioners of the concept of legitimate governance stemming from the governed. They also admired the personal autonomy that was reportedly enjoyed within the tribes.
However, many of these European thinkers whose knowledge of the Native Americans was based on second-hand accounts rather than personal experience or observation, concluded that communal land holdings and the limited nature of agriculture among Native tribes was ultimately indicative of backwardness since complex European societies were built upon the notion that not cultivating the land extensively meant that one was not making full use of the land for human exploitation, a goal which trumped all other considerations in regards to the natural world. (7)
The Founding Fathers� experience with the indigenous tribes of North America was that they all had three distinct branches of government which they believed was a likely window into the pre-Monarchy past of Europe. (8) Hartmann�s research confirms that the direct democracy briefly practiced in ancient Athens was based upon the tribal level of organization. Athenian popular democracy was temporarily overthrown in a coup that many suspected Socrates, who opposed democracy as a �crass� and inferior form of governance, influenced, leading to his trial and execution. Socrates� student, Plato, and his student, Aristotle, also harbored a deep philosophical resentment of genuine democracy that can still be felt in Western political tradition.
Alexander Hamilton and John Adams carried on the Socratic tradition of distrust of common folk by advocating for a modified oligarchy while Franklin, Madison and Jefferson supported a more pure form of democratic rule for the former British colonies. (1) The compromises resulted in an Electoral College, property requirements for voting and a Bill of Rights. And although the Constitution does not mention corporations, Jefferson, Madison and others were deeply concerned by the potential power and abuse of unaccountable corporate entities like the British East India Company, which prompted the Boston Tea Party by dumping huge amounts of cheap tea into the colonies and receiving a massive tax break from the British crown, thereby threatening local small enterprise. Jefferson went so far as to advocate unsuccessfully for an amendment to the Constitution banning commercial monopolies. (1) The ubiquitous control of huge corporations over the government and economy today that is made possible by the legal concept of corporate personhood was antithetical to what many of the Founding Fathers envisioned for a nation that was the namesake of their indigenous tribal friends.
Despite being a far cry from the communal tradition of Native tribes, American private property rights in the agrarian era of the 1700�s were significantly different from what they were after the rapid industrialization and rise of corporations seen in the following century, notably after the Civil War. 18th century businesses were localized and organized in a variety of ways from small-scale merchants to cooperatives. (9) Moreover, any one individual or entity accumulating massive amounts of property, usually in the form of land, was viewed as violating the property rights of others. The public typically had rights to forage, hunt and graze on unenclosed land even if it was owned privately, objections by the landowner notwithstanding. Thus, the right to exclude others was not the essential component of private ownership that it is now. (10)
The democracy of America�s founders then was a blend of certain aspects of the democratic political system of the indigenous tribes, including many of the individual liberties enjoyed by Native tribal members. However, the thirteen colonies, while organized into towns and what would become states, were larger and more complex than tribes. This reality led the founders to conclude that representative democracy and an economy based on private property rights, as opposed to direct consensus democracy and common public �ownership,� would be more workable in terms of preserving the new nation. Industrialization combined with corporate capitalism then hastened the American experiment even further away from a sustainable and cooperative democracy.
Recovering Our Cooperative Democratic Heritage
What many historians and anthropologists refer to as civilizations were empires. From the Sumerians to the Persians, Greeks, Romans, and British, their large hierarchical and insatiable natures ultimately led to their self-destruction. The interesting fact is that there were civilizations in indigenous North America that fell, prior to contact with European colonizers, but the explanations often assumed for their fall are fallacious.
The Mayan, Olmec and Anasazi peoples, though they did not have as great a tendency toward expansion as Eurasian-derived empires, all experienced the familiar conditions that characterize civilizations: increased population, stratified social structures, gross inequality, strained environments, etc. Neither archeological evidence nor common sense support the familiar assertions of insurmountable natural disasters or armed force as the reason for their eventual decline. Rather, the people abandoned these societies once a critical mass recognized they clearly were unworkable in terms of sustainability and fulfilling their basic needs. (5, 6)
The idea of abandoning the current civilization has enjoyed varying degrees of support and popularity from the hippies with their admonition to �drop out� to intentional communities and alternative policies advocated by many opponents of corporate globalization. Many of these alternative lifestyle plans increasingly share the basic values observed in ancient tribes: an emphasis on smaller localized economies, environmental sustainability and cooperative democracy.
Bioregional or ecoregional democracy is a decentralized movement based on democratic control of the economic and political planning that affects a particular locality which corresponds to ecologically-defined areas observed in nature rather than borders imposed by humans. Such a defined area may comprise a key species, soil type, watershed or micro-climate that reflects natural capital constraints in that region. The philosophy of natural capitalism posits that since all life forms in an eco-region are dependent upon a system from which breathing, eating, hydration and waste disposal occur, then that system must be maintained within its capacity for function and renewal. Hence, political and economic decisions that will impact the region must be limited as much as possible to local inhabitants, which would lead to a decrease in threats to natural capital. These ecoregional democratic entities need not interfere with the larger body of civil and human rights protections within a nation state and may cooperate with international bodies as appropriate. (11)
Variations on the ecoregional democratic model are being discussed and implemented by those wishing to prepare for the challenges that �peak oil� will likely produce in the next 5-10 years. Conservation biologist/botanist Jason Bradford lives in a small town called Willits in Mendocino County, California. Since August of last year, he has hosted three screenings of The End of Suburbia. The issues raised in the film ignited so much interest in the community to take action that Bradford quit his academic job to become an organizer with the Willits Economic Localization project (WELL), which he founded.
About 60 residents attend bi-weekly meetings and have formed committees to research and create ways to make the community more self-reliant and independent of fossil fuels. The first two priorities are providing sufficient amounts of locally produced food and alternative energy to fuel other basic needs such as light, refrigeration and hospital equipment. Some of the ideas taking shape presently include working with local farmers to figure out the logistics of community farms, recycling rain water from roofs with expandable pillow tanks underneath buildings, solar and biomass utilities. (12, 13)
Bradford has stated that the small size of the towns in Mendocino and the forward-looking mindset of the people motivated his decision to move there in the first place and will undoubtedly be a key factor in the future success of the project. A statement calling for �sustainable local production of necessary goods and services including food� was endorsed unanimously by the Willits City Council this past August. Although the statement did not bind the city to commit resources to the goals it is recognized as a vital first step in shaping future city actions. Moreover, other local groups like the Willits Chamber of Commerce and the countywide Economic Development and Finance Committee are also expected to endorse the statement. (14)
Similar policies have been instituted with positive results in other communities throughout the world in resistance to corporate globalization policies. A general consensus of values emerging among global justice activists include democracy, sustainability and what has been termed subsidiarity, or the idea that economic and political decision-making should come from the local community as much as possible. Such activists further agree that when local cultural customs conflict with basic universal human rights standards, human rights standards should take precedence. (15)
So the question remains, why has it taken so long for communities in the United States to start walking away from a system that is not only inhumane but devouring the very resources necessary for all survival? The answer, of course, is complex and multilayered but author Daniel Quinn suggests that perhaps the most crucial and ironic factor is the stories or memes unique to our civilization (4, 6). In other words, that set of beliefs in society that is so pervasive that it is considered conventional wisdom: that civilization is the ultimate achievement of humanity and, despite its most destructive elements, can never be forsaken.
Endnotes
1) What Would Jefferson Do? by Thom Hartmann. Harmony Books. New York, NY. 2004.
2) �Group Decision-making in Animals� by L. Conradt & T.J. Roper. Nature. Volume 421, pp. 155-158. January 9, 2005.
3) �Democracy Beats Despotism in the Animal World� by James Randerson. New Scientist. January 8, 2003. Available at www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3248.
4) The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight by Thom Hartmann. Three Rivers Press. New York, NY. 2004.
5) Man�s Rise to Civilization as Shown by the Indians of North America from Primeval Times to the Coming of the Industrial State by Peter Farb. E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc. New York, NY. 1968.
6) Beyond Civilization: Humanity�s Next Great Adventure by Daniel Quinn. Three Rivers Press. New York, NY. 1999.
7) �American Indian Influences on the America of the Founding Fathers� by Robert Venables. Exiled in the Land of the Free: Democracy, Indian Nations and the U.S. Constitution, edited by Chief Oren Lyons & John Mohawk. Clear Light Publishers. Santa Fe, NM. 1992. Chapter 3.
8) �Iroquois Political Theory and the Roots of American Democracy� by Donald A. Grinde, Jr. Exiled in the Land of the Free: Democracy, Indian Nations and the U.S. Constitution, edited by Chief Oren Lyons & John Mohawk. Clear Light Publishers. Santa Fe, NM. 1992. Chapter 6.
9) Taking Care of Business: Citizenship and the Charter of Incorporation by Richard L. Grossman & Frank T. Adams. Project on Corporations, Law & Democracy (POCLAD). 1993. Available at www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/TakingCareBusiness.html.
10) �Property Law: Mirror of the Era� by Erick T. Freyfogle. Orion Magazine. March/April, 2005. p. 23.
11) �Bioregional democracy� at Wikipedia public encyclopedia. Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecoregional_Democracy
12) Willits Economic Localization Group at the Post Carbon Institute. www.postcarbon.org/groups/willits.
13) Interview with Jason Bradford of Willets Economic Localization (WELL) on KZYX. January 9, 2005. Transcript available at Global Public Media, http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/336.
14) �Council Supports Sustainable Willits: Unanimous Vote for Economic Localization� by Claudia Reed. The Willits News. August 26 2005. Available at www.postcarbon.org/node/728.
15) Alternatives to Economic Globalization: A Better World is Possible. Second Edition. Edited by John Cavanagh & Jerry Mander. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. San Francisco, CA. 2004.
Last Updated November 28, 2005 7:32 PM
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and
do not necessarily reflect those of the World Prout Assembly.
The World Prout Assembly is a non-profit organization affiliated with
Proutist Universal Global Headquarters, Kolkata, India
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
