It has always been my intention that the New Civilization Network will be a
reflection of what it takes to make a whole planet work.
I've often commented that an important aspect is how open we are to
diversity. And an important element in that is the issue of sub-cultures.
Several of you have mentioned that along the way.
The way I see it, a civilization isn't going to work if we're all trying to
be the same, or if some powerful agency (e.g. a government) is trying to
force us all to live by the same rules. Sure, there are a few rules that
are quite convenient to share for a whole civilization, like what side of
the road we drive on, or how we measure distances or weight or temperature.
But there are a whole lot of other rules that are merely an expression of
personal preferences, or that are the attempt to enforce the same solution
on everybody, just because some group in authority found it to be a good
idea.
My vision is essentially that those who have similar preferences will find
each other and live according to those preferences, without having to
collide with those who have contrary preferences, and without feeling the
need to enforce their personal preferences on the rest of the world.
The overall civilization would have a minimum of rules. However, within the
whole there would be sub-cultures and communities that might live by all
sorts of rules, morals and modes of behavior.
Where I see the old civilization running into trouble is where we assume
that we're all living in the same space all the time and therefore we all
have to agree on the rights and wrongs of how to do so. So we get entangled
in discussions about whether abortion is permissible, whether one should be
allowed to smoke in restaurants, and what building codes houses should be
built by.
We ARE living in the same space in the form of the planet. Because this is
our home and we're all traveling on the same spaceship Earth we can't very
well have a few people make decisions for the whole planet that don't serve
the whole. Dropping nuclear bombs and depleting the rain forrest isn't
exactly just a personal life style choice. It will affect all of us, so we
all need to be involved somehow.
However, the planet has lots of local space for different, more personal or
more regional activities that don't have to collide at all. It shouldn't
have to bother me that the people in the next house or the next city live
by totally different behavioral standards than I do, as long as I know that
I am able to stay clear of them if I don't like it.
A gentleman named Roger Knight suggested to me the simple principle of
"voting with one's feet". If you don't like how things work in one place,
you simply go somewhere else where you're more in tune with the standards
of behavior. If you want to be with people who wear black clothes and stay
away from pork, go where you find these people and enjoy your choice of
life style. If you want to be with people who have neat gardens and who
drive minivans, move to that kind of neighborhood. If you want to wear a
turban and have five wives, go find a place where that fits in. If you want
to be with people who smoke dope and wear flowers in their hair, go and do
that.
The problem only exists when we assume we all have to have the same
culture, or when our freedom of choice is taken away from us.
The problem exists when there are powerful national or international groups
with guns and police forces who would like to decide what kinds of vitamins
you're supposed to eat, or who would like to decide how you build your
house, or what kind of words you use, or how you have sex and with whom.
I see it as essential to a new civilization that there's space enough for
all of us. This requires some differentiation between different kinds of
spaces. It requires the freedom to get together and create a sub-culture.
It requires the freedom to leave if you don't like it. And it requires that
there's always somewhere else to go.
If you're willingly part of a culture that requires women to cover their
faces, based on a religious moral code, fine. But if you'd rather leave you
should of course be free to do so. I think it should be a planetary law
that no nation or region owns its citizens. If you want to live in a
neighborhood where somebody's enforcing strict building codes, sure, do so,
and you might live with peace of mind that your house is built right. But
if you want to build a geodesic dome or a mud hut, according to your own
design and rules, there needs to be a place you can go and do so.
Sub-cultures probably need to have a "declaration of content" attached to
them. You would want to be clear on what the rules are before you enter. If
you want a house made by building codes, the mud hut village might be the
wrong place to go. If you only want to hang out with vegetarians, don't go
to the meat-eating village. If you take offense to nudity, don't go to a
strip club.
I wrote a comprehensive vision a couple of years ago called "HoloWorld",
which is about a society that is based on exactly such principles.
http://www.worldtrans.org/hw/ You can do whatever you want as a personal
choice, as long as you don't hurt others with it, and as long as it doesn't
harm society as a whole. Things are decided collaboratively, not by the few
wielding their power over the many. Some of you might take offense to the
"permissiveness" of my vision. No problem, you don't have to agree, and
even within that model the idea is exactly that you're free to create
sub-cultures that are as restrictive and moral as you want them to be. You
just aren't free to force everybody else to live by your personal standards.
Now, the reason I bring it up here is that NCN could probably better
facilitate the existence of sub-cultures.
There's the danger that we somehow assume that there's a certain New
Civilization mindset or set of beliefs and behaviors that is the Right one.
I don't think there is. I think there's an underlying basis of tolerance
for diversity, honoring of the processes we go through, celebration of the
many expression of life, desire to make the whole work. But as to the
details and personal choices, we might have quite different standards and I
think we should have.
We don't all have to agree on whether one should be a vegetarian or whether
it is bad to take drugs. We don't have to decide that the new civilizaton
is a no-smoking area and you pay X% in taxes and you all show up for a
community meeting every Thursday. Sure, discuss these things, make up your
own mind, but don't try to make everybody else believe the same thing,
because, I can assure you, everybody doesn't agree on these things.
So, my question is how we can better use NCN to ensure the safe existence
of diverse sub-cultures, either in our midst or elsewhere in the world.
One might venture to say that NCN is TOO homogenous, that there's maybe a
common mindset which holds us back from expressing what we're really about.
I don't know, but think about it. Somebody can easily come along and say
that NCN is too new agey, too intellectual, too something. But really it
isn't meant to be. So how can we make more sure that we serve the more
specialized needs that people have? How can we make sure that smaller
groups of people can find each other and work constructively together,
without having to buy into any bigger agenda?
Discussion is welcome on the NCN discussion list. If you're not on it, send
a message to listserv@newciv.org with the message 'subscribe ncndiscuss-L'.
- Flemming
o o
/ \------------------ Flemming A. Funch -------------------/ \
/ * \ New Civilization Network / Synchronicity Networks / * \
/ * * \ ffunch@newciv.org / * * \
o-------o----------- http://www.worldtrans.org/ -----------o-------o
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 07 2000 - 23:22:12 PST