participating to produce changes in society.is about people
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900)… Madness is rare in individuals—but in groups, political parties, nations and eras, it is the rule.
People en masse behaving similarly in a spontaneous way without coordination or mobilization, is the most powerful force in society. So both stability and change depend in large part on .
The value we all give to a peaceful, stable social order is associated with our desire to go about life and pursue our interests without thinking too much about politics. However, such stability is simply the counterpoint to change. When change is required, then stability is the challenge.
Although we think ofat dramatic times, like a stock-market mania, it should be primarily associated with stability. Vast numbers of diverse people pursue unique daily activities and yet the myriads of choices and actions all somehow hang together and support each other in a way that is referred to as «normal».
On an everyday basis we see harmful aspects of mass action e.g. the habit of shopping for things that are not needed, or the epidemic of junk food outlets. We can also note mass action in cultural differences: e.g. people in some societies, like Vietnam, work hard naturally, while fun is the norm in societies like Thailand. These mass preferences, expressed in action, not only shape a society but also provide for stability.is critically important for the evolution of political institutions.
If tensions reach a certain degree within society, urges to take political action emerge in one or more sections of the populace. Their goal becomes to force change.
Will that change emerge from peaceful activity? i.e. will it be political? Or: will tensions release violence?
Renouncing violence requires tolerance and depends on willingness. If the political change is widely desired, then it may occur by alterations inwithout organization. Most change, however, needs to be based on specific, explicit, coordinated participation, and that perspective takes us to .
A non-violent society cannot exist without an expectation of social participation by each and all. This is delivered at out of a sense of responsibility and it leads to a social commitment, of a sort appropriate to each person.
This level can be considered society’s infrastructure. Much of what is involved here may seem to be peripheral to the big political picture, even wholly apolitical for some, but that is misleading.
absolutely requires a robust functioning society of individuals to provide the necessary order, wealth and power for progressive change.
Given an infrastructure of commitment to society, no change will occur unless Participation now turns into a demand that requires far more personal and public effort. Here we distinguish the in society from the rest of us. Any significant power-play pushes a person into the media spotlight, as well as providing a portal to the temptation to abuse power.is done.
Eachmust accumulate and use personal power for the purposes of his own group. Each often develops a further limited and divisive focus within their group. Nevertheless, if corruption were actively managed, the invisible hand in politics probably benefits society as a whole.
The significance of politics within society becomes evident at the next level with forces participation. Mostly the is focused on areas of group power and commonalities of personal interest or discontent. However, at times like elections, everyone should be encouraged to rise to the challenge. When tensions run high, physical aspects of mobilizing, like rallies or marches, discharge tensions and the urge for physical action.which
Given mobilization, Participation here is about suggesting possible policy ideas that are believed (if implemented) to signify change in a desired direction. At this level, participation once more shrinks to a special few.lie on the borderland with change.
Actually the few are many, but the many are still few in comparison to those who may be affected.and their debate span society: including government, industry, academia, the law, concerned individuals and the media.
At this point, a focus on the people and their participation shifts abruptly to a focus on change. Sources of power in society come into play, interacting with the higher levels of participation as they produce change.
expectation: but now it relates to social change. Whatever the issue under consideration, the public expects to be delivered by the various and the often arcane processes of the . Public trust and respect for politicians, governance and any constitution would seem to be required.is the lowest level of the change-set, and is like in being about
Although we each want changes that we personally approve of, no person participates at this level. Even the leaders are less «persons» in the ordinary sense, and more «creations of the people» i.e. role-receptacles for popular projected fantasies. More… It’s human and warm to emphasize personalities, but the political leadership is largely chosen for their mirroring and embodiment of society's power structure meshed with the people’s strengths and weaknesses, their hopes and fears.
Society must change to manage social forces liberated by technology, demography, inequalities and injustices, environmental needs and global factors. Although the forces are social, the source of power in politics comes from widespread emotions and experiences. At power of the entire populace becomes significant: given the name , this demands change. (Even conservatives recognize that if society is to stay the same, then many things have to change!)the
It seems that everyone contributes to this force-field, but no individual exists uniquely and idiosyncratically within it, other than as its creature.
The demand for change at takes us up to , where we find the condition that enables stability and the possibility of peace, order and prosperity in society. The that produces stability also plays a role in forcing change. Even if there is no mass movement for change, people experience a right and duty to protest and seek change amidst tensions and injustices generated by diversity.
If unity within a social territory is not desired, participation might sensibly lead to formal division of the community. The political context will then have changed, but not the political challenge to seek change while maintaining unity in each of the two new territories. To reiterate: there is no escape from.
Levels/Groupings 1 to 4 deal with participation, &
Levels/Groupings 5 to 7 deal with change.
L4, the heart of any 7 Level THEE hierarchy, uses participation to investigate and articulate possibilities for change.
Originally posted: August-2009; Last updated: 15-Nov-2010