[Chapter_Fourteen] The Realth of Nations

[Antonio Roman-Alcala]

rachel, margaretha:

thanks much for your comments and leads...in response, some
clarifications/additional questions:

1) individualist/collectivist: i'm referring here to the increasing focus,
in our consumer culture at least, on individual solutions to our collective
problems, like the buying of "green" products. I have lots of skepticism
about this approach, but figure there must be some way to more effectively
link those who see this as their form of activism to collectivist (group)
forms. we can't deny that this is a popular trope in an individualist
culture that sees everyone having the prerogative to dictate their own
actions. so i guess what i'm trying to get at is how to encourage emerging
individual-level activists to see the value in forms that link one's actions
to others.

2) commons: i am not directly addressing commons, although I think the
concept is an important one for framing future political decisions around
resource use regulation, and for seeing alternate values for resource use as
possible (ie if we study historical commons we see both the sad reality of
the "tragedy of the commons" and that the commons *do* work in systems with
local control and social cohesion--among other necessary factors missing in
our current political-economic milieux).

3) definitions of realth: this is the most difficult aspect. I do plan on
using existent metrics to define "realth", but the newness of the concept (I
believe) is not in these metrics, but seeing one's own activist work and
life as working towards or against individual pieces of the metrics pie. For
example, like Rachel's personal example: material gain as a value held less
pull, and so she left the corporate world (to pursue permaculture
projects?). This is a clear example of someone prioritizing realth over
wealth. So the purpose of my piece will be to show how many different
avenues exist for people (as individuals AND collectives) to turn their
actions towards the creation of realth, and how to meaningfully connect
those differing approaches towards more effective levers of change.

the challenge is: how do we KNOW for sure that our actions are leading
toward realth? I think that both the definitions of realth and
quantifications of it are, like anything else, subjective and liable to
change and be refined over time and between places (though most activists I
presume would probably agree at minimum with things like low income
inequality, poverty, suicide, etc). thus, i don't expect to spend as much
time defining realth precisely as focusing on how activists can judge their
own actions in relation to their own conceptions of it. I expect that people
in this world of activism will already be holding each other up to scrutiny,
so my approach is to put forth the most basic aspects of realth, like that
measured by GNH or HDI--though HDI includes conventional GDP--or like
Eisler's lists:
http://www.rianeeisler.com/documents/812publicplicyRWAtwo-pager.pdf
http://www.rianeeisler.com/documents/RWAMetricsFactSheet.pdf
then ask the reader to work through analyses of how each can be effected.

the second challenge is: if we are self-defining our contributions to
realth, how do we avoid false solutions or cop-outs (similar to co-optation
but coming from ourselves not the power structure's accommodations of our
critiques)? how do we say, without belittling or denying someone's effort,
that really, this or that isn't a good solution? What comes to mind
immediately is cap-and-trade. Without implementing it and reading the
results in relation to our realth indicators, how can we tell if a proposed
solution really is one or not? For me, the intuition re: cap and trade is
that it follows the current model of capitalism, commodifying yet another
thing (carbon), so it's not a "realth" solution, as it still is led by
profit motive. but what sort of indicators/realth definitions can we use
that can preemptively address proposed solutions?

all best,
antonio
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 4:19 PM, margaretha haughwout <
xmargarethax at gmail.com> wrote:

> dear antonio, rachel & all,
>
> thank you for an interesting prompt.
>
> i agree with rachel's inquiry insofar as a clear definition of "real
> wealth", and what its indicators are is necessary. depending on the sources
> you use to flesh this out, i could see some potential rabbit holes around
> the terminology of "real" versus "unreal" wealth. this could also be very
> illuminating though, given that what i presume is unreal wealth is not only
> floating, but unsustainable, largely dependent on exploitative labor
> practices. one could also say, however that this wealth is very real when it
> comes down to privilege: who gets to eat what, move freely, luxuriate when
> and where, and make or break laws. then again, if the proverbial plug is
> pulled, who is in the strongest position?
>
> i wonder if you are talking about a kind of commons, perhaps something a
> bit broader than a purely land-based commons, but a commons still: a shared
> set of resources, be it gleaned produce, physical public space, or creative
> work <http://creativecommons.org/> that isn't constricted by copyright.
> i'm curious if you agree. the dangers of co-optation are great, particularly
> if all the diverse movements were to unite somehow. i've heard it said that
> production/ distribution houses actually want to see a controlled amount of
> music shared; this actually boosts sales. so how is this accounted for in
> your analysis of co-optation? do you see potential for a balance? between
> real wealth and unreal wealth, commons and corporations? i ultimately don't,
> though i may be persuaded that there are some necessary interim stages on a
> "path" towards sustainability. curious if you do. maybe this would tie into
> your synthesis of reality-based and fantasy-based modes of activism...
>
> in regards to some of your other points and questions, i'm curious about 3
> and 4:
> 3) How can individualist and collectivist activisms become mutually
> reinforcing?
>  -- what do you define as individualist and as collectivist?
>
>  4) The use and misuse of "natural" metaphors for designing our activism
> (e.g. horizontalist movements as ecosystem "networks").
>  -- the use and misuse of permaculture/ ecosystem metaphors for people make
> me very uncomfortable as well; they frequently sound like social darwinism
> to me, and usually (accidentally) imply a dismaying dismissal of lives,
> perspectives, positions.
>
> i think it would also be good to hear a range of real world examples....
>
> looking forward to hearing more about all this!
>
> best wishes,
> /m
>
> PS
> in regards to reading, i might suggest the gift by lewis hyde, radical
> materialism for definitions of reality, and perhaps an understanding of
> levinas for the politics of difference. perhaps hardt and negri's
> multitude.... not at all necessary to draw upon for the text itself, but to
> develop the background ideas.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Rachel A. Buddeberg <rachel at rabe.org>wrote:
>
>> This sounds like a very interesting and rather important project, Antonio,
>> and i am excited that you are sharing it here on the list.  It sounds like
>> you are trying to figure out a way to hold together diverse movements
>> without forcing them to give up their identity.
>>
>> Before i answer your questions, i'd like to share a question that kept
>> running through my head while reading what you wrote:  How is realth
>> different from other alternative indicators?  For example, Amartya Sen's
>> Human Development Indicator (used by the UN) or the Gross National Happiness
>> (here's a list of sustainability indicators:
>> http://www.eoearth.org/article/Indicators_of_sustainable_development).
>>  From what you wrote, i suspect the difference is that these indices measure
>> something of a country whereas you are interested in measuring the impact of
>> movements?  If so, how would you measure it, especially since many movements
>> are defining "real wealth" differently...
>>
>> Now to your questions:
>>
>> 1) Do you see relevance in this project? Does "realth" as a concept mean
>> anything to you? Whether or not the neologism is necessary, can you see the
>> concept of realth as helpful to activists examining their own activism?
>>
>>
>> Most definitely.  I've recently left corporate America because financial
>> wealth had lost its luster for me a long time ago... But i would have to
>> ponder what "realth" means to me before i would find that concept useful
>> (so, unlike GDP/GNP, it's not something "top of mind" but that might be part
>> of what you're trying to address...).  Also, i am not sure if it's one
>> thing.  I suspect it would be a cluster of things: realth of nations could
>> be the health of the soil; realth of people could be the amount of
>> supportive friends we have, the amount of leisure that's available to spend
>> with those friends.  Those definitions will depend, though, greatly on our
>> situation in life: If i don't have enough food, i might not care much about
>> leisure... So, realth could also "just" mean having enough food to eat...
>>
>> 2) Is breaking down the divisions between diverse anti- and
>> post-capitalists possible? Personally, I'm sick of arguing with communists
>> about whether or not the proletarian revolution is coming, with anarchists
>> about the unlikelihood of masses of people "dropping out" of society, and
>> with new "green" capitalists about the historic benefits of capitalism. Is
>> it worth trying to convince others that maybe these different ideologies
>> aren't necessarily incompatible? That each has something to offer, as long
>> as its adherents can remain self-critical and open to new ideas, and can
>> collaborate with those with differing ideologies?
>>
>>
>> Iris Marion Young tried to formulate an umbrella definition for
>> "oppression" because she was tired of one group arguing with another over
>> who is more oppressed. Basically, she helps us see how many people are
>> oppressed in at least one of five ways - and that oppression is really much
>> more prevalent than these discussions suggest (since they seem to present
>> people as oppressed or not...).  I don't think she got very far with that...
>> BUT i think that these attempts are crucial because they help us experience
>> diversity: just because i don't agree with your end goal, doesn't mean that
>> we can't agree to work together on some things.  So, i think it definitely
>> is "worth trying" to find the common threads.  Actually, the "Right" has
>> been rather good at this, so maybe it's time for us to do the same - we
>> can't move a mountain with one strategy alone.
>>
>> 3) Part of my impetus for writing this was beginning my schooling at UC
>> Berkeley, where there are so many young people who are being exposed to
>> critiques of capitalism, without necessarily being offered clear ideas about
>> how capitalism has been and could be challenged/altered/abolished/improved.
>> In talking to classmates, I figured a simple, historically contextualized
>> description of options could help some people define for themselves what
>> they can do with their time to create social change. So, in that vein, I'm
>> wondering if anyone has heard of similar books/projects, which I could look
>> at to decide whether or not this is a project worth putting a lot of time
>> into (if someone else has already done this...I'd like to know!).
>>
>>
>> Aside from the indicators i mentioned above, you might want to look at
>> Young's work (I can email you the "Five Faces of Oppression," which is a
>> chapter from her book "Justice and the Politics of Difference," which came
>> out in 1990, so is a bit dated).  In her 1990 book, she sketches - rather
>> vaguely, imo - an ideal city, which allows for diversity to thrive without
>> demanding an artificial unity, something she accuses both liberals and
>> communitarians of imposing.  The other book you might want to look at is
>> David Schlosberg's "Defining Environmental Justice." He, too, is interested
>> in using diverse definitions to bring together various movements to increase
>> their impact but also to teach diversity (my suggestion in #2 is based on
>> that).  There is also a chapter in Loretta Pyles book "Progressive Community
>> Organizing," which deals with identity politics (chapter 10).  Essentially,
>> she suggests that the most important thing is to keep them out in the open,
>> acknowledge them, and use them as strengths (I found this book a bit
>> superficial, so i am not sure how useful the chapter is...).
>>
>> If anything isn't clear, you'd like more details (or better cites), please
>> let me know!
>>
>> I look forward to more discussion!
>>
>> Rachel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>
>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Biodiversity Team, Hayes Valley Farm
> http://www.hayesvalleyfarm.com/
>
> Lecturer, Film and Digital Media
> University of California Santa Cruz
> Communications 151
>
> chapter fourteen<http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net>
> http://www.beforebefore.net/
> http://www.bitterpattern.net/
>
> I am best contacted by email:
> xmargarethax at gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>
> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>
>


-- 
sf urban ag alliance @ sfuaa.org
movie and blog @ insearchofgoodfood.org
community farm @ www.alemanyfarm.org
permaculty @ www.permaculture-sf.org
newspaper @
http://soex.org/alternativeexposure/index.php/antonio-roman-alcala/
personal music @ www.myspace.com/ammra
people people @www.myspace.com/mercurialbombastictenacity
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.beforebefore.net/pipermail/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net/attachments/20110102/deab00eb/attachment-0003.htm>