Revolution or Evolution?
For a long time I wanted to read Homage to Catalonia because two of my favorite books are by George Orwell (1984 and Down and Out in Paris and London). So recently while I painted, I listened to Homage to Catalonia on tape. I had to listen to it on tape because although I’d been wanting to read it for years, I can see now that I never would have had the patience for it. It left me with a terrible sense of frustration. I am glad I listened to it, mainly to learn more about the history of that time and place – he was in Spain in 1936 and 1937 – but I found the experience he describes to be very difficult, or virtually impossible, to assimilate.
The revolutionary fervor of the anarchists was exciting – there’s no doubt about that -- but in the end, their revolution was demolished. All that was left was the useless fighting, killing, and destruction of war. Even as Orwell describes it himself, the so-called “fascist” enemies that he was shooting at and trying to kill were just working-class men like himself. They had been conscripted to fight for the fascists. And in many cases the young men fighting were as young as eleven and twelve years old. I wondered what was really gained from it all in the end.
If anything, it made me realize that if we want to create a better world, we’ll get a lot farther through peaceful evolution -- though it may be slow -- than through violent revolution, which many times leads to dictatorship and more suffering, rather than to freedom.
For years, I had wanted to read the book because I had hoped it would be an example of the success of an anarchist experiment (even though it was put down in the end), but there's very little of that in the book. It's mostly about the horrors of war. As a pacifist, I am naturally opposed to war on principle, but I’m also a pragmatist and understand there may be occasions when violence is necessary to meet violence. Yet, in this case I was left with a very bad taste in my mouth. Even Orwell, himself, drives home the utter uselessness of his efforts in the war in Spain. What he managed to accomplish through writing this book was not so much to expound the benefits of true equality and participatory democracy, or anarchism, but to expose the overwhelming plethora of lies that filled the news at the time. It’s not surprising he later wrote 1984.
The book is interesting for the historical aspect, but unfortunately, I didn't see much in terms of how to build democratic/anarchic communities in the early 21st century. What Orwell was writing about was a different place and time. The circumstances were different. What I was hoping for were ideas that would be relevant to our current times.
If I did learn anything by way of ideas for creating anarchic communities in the early 21st century, I learned that it's not going to happen by picking up a rifle, aiming it at my so-called "enemy," and killing him or her. Such a tactic won't work in this place and time (which is just fine with me because I don't want to kill anyone anyway). It didn’t even work in Spain in 1936 and 1937 when such a tactic might have had the best chance of succeeding.
So what WILL work? That's what I’d like to know. That's what I want to think about and explore. What will work?
In this place and time, it's not going to be a violent revolution that changes things quickly. It's going to be a peaceful evolution that changes things slowly, but in a way that will be strong and enduring. The changes will be small, subtle, and incremental, but over time they could have a tremendous impact. I think community activism is the key.
I’d like to see people becoming more self-reliant -- growing their own food, creating their own work, walking with their own two feet, using their creativity. I’d like to see the mega-corporations like Walmart imploding because people forget that they exist.
But this lead me to something I've been wondering about. That's technology. I am very pro-technology (not for its own sake, but as it benefits the world). There are many ways that technology has improved our lives and can continue to improve our lives. Technology can help us to live better and at the same time live more in harmony with the environment. But it seems to require the structure of the mega-corporations -- like Microsoft -- corporations that can afford to bring intelligent and creative people together and pay for research and development, then develop and mass-produce the products and distribute them around the world.
Just look at computer technology and the internet. How could we have these things if it weren't for mega-corporations like Microsoft and Cisco?
Maybe it would be possible for small cooperative businesses to build their own computers and develop their own software, but it has to be compatible with other products (like Microsoft and IBM). Products that aren’t compatible don’t sell and the companies that make them go out of business. Creating a product that isn’t compatible would be like building an appliance with a plug that won’t fit in the standard socket. It would be completely useless. I learned about this first-hand when I was in France and bought a Russian radio. The batteries wouldn’t fit into the radio so it was completely useless to me. I tried to return it to the store, but they wouldn’t take it back. They were probably glad some fool had finally cleared the shelf space.
It goes against my natural belief in small-scale entrepreneurship and cooperative enterprises to say anything positive about these massive corporations -- because they were born out of and continue to perpetuate a system that I believe is ultimately destructive to the environment and human beings and is unsustainable. Yet as I stated above, I am also a pragmatist. So I can’t blindly disregard the benefits because it goes against my preferences. For the moment, I've just come to the conclusion that it doesn't have to be all or nothing. My pragmatism leads me to believe that the best thing to do is do what works. But it's necessary to look at the whole process from beginning to end. I don't assume that the ends justify the means. In other words, I think computers and the internet are great because of the way they allow us to share information and communicate globally, but it's also necessary to consider the "by-products."
One thing I heard recently that fascinated me is that cds and other plastics are now being made out of corn syrup instead of petroleum so they are compostable and biodegradable. This is what I mean about considering the whole process. I think it's essential that the materials used be either recyclable or biodegradable.
We are creating our world in every moment. We either do so consciously or unconsciously. So many people just go along and never really take the time to think about things or question what might be the best choices or the best course of action. If there were one thing we could do that would really make a difference, it would be to use our minds – to think, to observe, to question, to converse, and to be creative and inventive.
The most important issues of our time are related to oil (the next on the agenda will be clean water). If we have any concern at all for what direction our world is moving in, the issue of oil and other hydrocarbon resources is currently the decisive issue. Whatever changes will occur, and how quickly, will revolve around this issue. Whatever changes we want to make, this is where we should be focusing our attention.
Here is an example: I know many people who say they are opposed to the wars over oil (and other hydrocarbon resources) and yet they have absolutely no intention of ever giving up their private cars or the convenient cheap plastics. It makes me wonder why they even bother to argue against these oil wars. Maybe subconsciously they know their rhetoric won’t make any difference anyway; they won’t have to be inconvenienced; they will never have to feel any discomfort or make any sacrifices, so it’s safe to protest the wars and it salves their guilty consciences so they can drive their cars and fill their homes with plastic products without feeling guilty about it. How convenient it is to have one’s cake and eat it too.
Yet, there are many people out there who want to change things for the better and are willing to do more than just talk. Their actions speak even louder than their words. One person with vision, enthusiasm, and intelligent creative ideas can do a great deal to channel the energy of those people who want to change things for the better. We just have to accept that in the great scope of things these changes are going to appear small, quiet, and subtle. But over time, they could shape the world so it resembles a much greater vision for all life on planet Earth.
The revolutionary fervor of the anarchists was exciting – there’s no doubt about that -- but in the end, their revolution was demolished. All that was left was the useless fighting, killing, and destruction of war. Even as Orwell describes it himself, the so-called “fascist” enemies that he was shooting at and trying to kill were just working-class men like himself. They had been conscripted to fight for the fascists. And in many cases the young men fighting were as young as eleven and twelve years old. I wondered what was really gained from it all in the end.
If anything, it made me realize that if we want to create a better world, we’ll get a lot farther through peaceful evolution -- though it may be slow -- than through violent revolution, which many times leads to dictatorship and more suffering, rather than to freedom.
For years, I had wanted to read the book because I had hoped it would be an example of the success of an anarchist experiment (even though it was put down in the end), but there's very little of that in the book. It's mostly about the horrors of war. As a pacifist, I am naturally opposed to war on principle, but I’m also a pragmatist and understand there may be occasions when violence is necessary to meet violence. Yet, in this case I was left with a very bad taste in my mouth. Even Orwell, himself, drives home the utter uselessness of his efforts in the war in Spain. What he managed to accomplish through writing this book was not so much to expound the benefits of true equality and participatory democracy, or anarchism, but to expose the overwhelming plethora of lies that filled the news at the time. It’s not surprising he later wrote 1984.
The book is interesting for the historical aspect, but unfortunately, I didn't see much in terms of how to build democratic/anarchic communities in the early 21st century. What Orwell was writing about was a different place and time. The circumstances were different. What I was hoping for were ideas that would be relevant to our current times.
If I did learn anything by way of ideas for creating anarchic communities in the early 21st century, I learned that it's not going to happen by picking up a rifle, aiming it at my so-called "enemy," and killing him or her. Such a tactic won't work in this place and time (which is just fine with me because I don't want to kill anyone anyway). It didn’t even work in Spain in 1936 and 1937 when such a tactic might have had the best chance of succeeding.
So what WILL work? That's what I’d like to know. That's what I want to think about and explore. What will work?
In this place and time, it's not going to be a violent revolution that changes things quickly. It's going to be a peaceful evolution that changes things slowly, but in a way that will be strong and enduring. The changes will be small, subtle, and incremental, but over time they could have a tremendous impact. I think community activism is the key.
I’d like to see people becoming more self-reliant -- growing their own food, creating their own work, walking with their own two feet, using their creativity. I’d like to see the mega-corporations like Walmart imploding because people forget that they exist.
But this lead me to something I've been wondering about. That's technology. I am very pro-technology (not for its own sake, but as it benefits the world). There are many ways that technology has improved our lives and can continue to improve our lives. Technology can help us to live better and at the same time live more in harmony with the environment. But it seems to require the structure of the mega-corporations -- like Microsoft -- corporations that can afford to bring intelligent and creative people together and pay for research and development, then develop and mass-produce the products and distribute them around the world.
Just look at computer technology and the internet. How could we have these things if it weren't for mega-corporations like Microsoft and Cisco?
Maybe it would be possible for small cooperative businesses to build their own computers and develop their own software, but it has to be compatible with other products (like Microsoft and IBM). Products that aren’t compatible don’t sell and the companies that make them go out of business. Creating a product that isn’t compatible would be like building an appliance with a plug that won’t fit in the standard socket. It would be completely useless. I learned about this first-hand when I was in France and bought a Russian radio. The batteries wouldn’t fit into the radio so it was completely useless to me. I tried to return it to the store, but they wouldn’t take it back. They were probably glad some fool had finally cleared the shelf space.
It goes against my natural belief in small-scale entrepreneurship and cooperative enterprises to say anything positive about these massive corporations -- because they were born out of and continue to perpetuate a system that I believe is ultimately destructive to the environment and human beings and is unsustainable. Yet as I stated above, I am also a pragmatist. So I can’t blindly disregard the benefits because it goes against my preferences. For the moment, I've just come to the conclusion that it doesn't have to be all or nothing. My pragmatism leads me to believe that the best thing to do is do what works. But it's necessary to look at the whole process from beginning to end. I don't assume that the ends justify the means. In other words, I think computers and the internet are great because of the way they allow us to share information and communicate globally, but it's also necessary to consider the "by-products."
One thing I heard recently that fascinated me is that cds and other plastics are now being made out of corn syrup instead of petroleum so they are compostable and biodegradable. This is what I mean about considering the whole process. I think it's essential that the materials used be either recyclable or biodegradable.
We are creating our world in every moment. We either do so consciously or unconsciously. So many people just go along and never really take the time to think about things or question what might be the best choices or the best course of action. If there were one thing we could do that would really make a difference, it would be to use our minds – to think, to observe, to question, to converse, and to be creative and inventive.
The most important issues of our time are related to oil (the next on the agenda will be clean water). If we have any concern at all for what direction our world is moving in, the issue of oil and other hydrocarbon resources is currently the decisive issue. Whatever changes will occur, and how quickly, will revolve around this issue. Whatever changes we want to make, this is where we should be focusing our attention.
Here is an example: I know many people who say they are opposed to the wars over oil (and other hydrocarbon resources) and yet they have absolutely no intention of ever giving up their private cars or the convenient cheap plastics. It makes me wonder why they even bother to argue against these oil wars. Maybe subconsciously they know their rhetoric won’t make any difference anyway; they won’t have to be inconvenienced; they will never have to feel any discomfort or make any sacrifices, so it’s safe to protest the wars and it salves their guilty consciences so they can drive their cars and fill their homes with plastic products without feeling guilty about it. How convenient it is to have one’s cake and eat it too.
Yet, there are many people out there who want to change things for the better and are willing to do more than just talk. Their actions speak even louder than their words. One person with vision, enthusiasm, and intelligent creative ideas can do a great deal to channel the energy of those people who want to change things for the better. We just have to accept that in the great scope of things these changes are going to appear small, quiet, and subtle. But over time, they could shape the world so it resembles a much greater vision for all life on planet Earth.
posted by Evon Davis at 1:17 PM
0 comments
