 Survival
and Subversion:
Toward guidelines for those working within the system
1. Introduction
It is indeed a pleasure to be able to speak at a festival of ideas.
What a liberation from the normal conference circuit where the emphasis
is not on ideas but on practical outcomes, not on concepts but on
conclusions. This paper is unashamedly exploratory and incomplete.
It is a book in progress. It crosses the spheres of psychology,
philosophy, spiritualism and sociology. To use American legal jargon,
it aims to stimulate rather than stipulate. A wise person once said
"if you are remaining calm whilst those around you lose their head,
you probably do not understand the issues". This paper is designed
to help you lose your head a little in coming to terms with the
choices we have made and continue to make.
There are two preliminary points I need to make. Firstly, I am
not up here as a Magistrate. That is what I do for a living, and
this is what I do when I am on leave. I am speaking in a personal
and not a professional capacity. Secondly, this paper has evolved
out of a process of sharing a short draft and seeking responses
from sixty or so people including Buddhists, scholars, lawyers,
judges, doctors, environmental/legal/prison/drug activists, priests,
academics, psychologists, film makers, prostitutes, truck-drivers,
shopkeepers, teachers, counselors, health workers, students, welfare
workers and others working within and without. They were asked to
respond to their own dilemmas in the workplace, to tell their own
story and to comment on and suggest other practical solutions. They
in turn sought the views of others and the input has been collated
and further researched. So whilst the paper has my name, the outcome
is a compilation of the ideas of many. This is a snapshot of where
that organic process is at this moment.
In order to explore the ideas I am discussing it is first necessary
to consider two extreme approaches to working within the system.
2. Exploring the Extremes from A - Z.
The ultimate Extreme A is Nelson Mandela who refused to work within
the apartheid system. True, he practiced law, but when the legal
system proved incapable of addressing injustice, he chose the path
of passive, and then active resistance to the extent where he spent
decades in prison. The personal costs were enormous, and one cannot
read his autobiography without sharing his sorrow at the loss of
family, friendships and opportunities as a result of choosing the
path of working outside the system. Very few of us have the strength
to follow his lead, or others of the same ilk such as Aung Sun Suu
Kyi, Oskar Schindler. And perhaps that is why we love him so, particularly
the white middle class, because he reflects a part of ourselves
that we keep in check - a total dedication to the cause.
I have been blessed with the opportunity to be a part of three
movements where there are people who work outside the system - prison
reform, drug law reform and the environment. Within each of these
movements there are Extreme A people who are homeless, jobless,
careless and regularly put their liberty on the line in pursuit
of change. I have spent days on blockades in the forest with those
who have spent years on blockades in the forest. I have obtained
bail for those who politely refuse it choosing instead to remain
in custody for their beliefs. I have represented those who deliberately
take a joint into police stations to be arrested. These are people
who deserve to have the national parks they save named after them.
They are our own Nelson Mandela’s.
Finally on Extreme A there are another group that exemplify this
position. In an extraordinary piece titled "Truth, Good and Evil",
Winton Higgins [1]
seeks a common trait in the Righteous - the "obscure, baffling collection
of rugged non-conformists - those who saved Jews from Nazi persecution
at great risk to themselves. They enjoyed a spontaneous access to
the core of their being that resulted in a natural and irresistible
proclivity to see the truth and act upon it." We must be alert to
these moments in our lives and act without fear or favour.
On the other hand there is the Extreme Z those who choose to work
within the system and allow themselves to be swept along with the
flow without any resistance or struggle. Reading the transcripts
of the Neuremburg trials, there is a recurring theme - "we were
good people who chose to work within the system. Yes, we worked
within the system, but we had children to feed, orders to follow,
and we did our best. What else could we do?". Of course we all know
people like this, there are some sure signs. An obsession with superannuation
options, share derivatives, promotion at any cost. These are people
who succumb to the dollar in a big way, devoid of political views
except for who will lead to more money in my pocket. And this is
not a party political distinction. I have encountered Extreme Z’s
in the Labour Party, the Liberal Party, One Nation and the Greens.
Between these two examples most of us spend our working lives.
We will not put Zyklon B in gas chambers, but we will not lose everything
in an effort to right the wrongs around us. And our knowledge of
the state of the environment and Aboriginal oppression and third
world debt and the treatment of new arrivals haunts us in our air
conditioned car, our holiday houses and our business class travel.
We look in the mirror and realise how smug and inactive we have
become. We lay awake seeing wrong so clearly but unable to grasp
the nettle whilst still changing nappies, earning a living, satisfying
our parents expectations and working through past trauma. And once
a week or so I send a person to prison. And I have friends who were
once tripod builders at blockades who are now environmental consultants
to developers, prison activists who work for private prisons, Christians
who work for finance companies, anarchists who are now police officers.
And still we shy away from the Z’s around us somewhat desperately
seeking intellectual justifications like….
- Yes I am a Magistrate but I am seeking to change from within
- Yes I do work for a property developer but I am making sure
they use passive solar design.
- I am making a cigarette ad this week but it is so that I can
raise funds for a doco.
- I am a member of the Labour Party but I am on the left.
There are examples of those who seem to have managed to work within
the system and remain true to their ideals and act as effective
agents for change. Those of you who know the work of my parents
can see this in much that they have done. In the law, Lionel Murphy
and Michael Kirby are extraordinary examples. In medicine, the work
of Alex Wodak on changing attitudes to drug use shines as a beacon.
In the media, Phillip Adams. There are many others.
And that is the dilemma, how to stop the drift from A to Z, how
to maintain the rage, and still provide. Before moving on to look
at ideas to resolve the dilemma, there are four preliminary points
to make.
A. Chronology.
Of course the situation is far more complex than A - Z. The reality
is that we may well move through different levels at different stages
of our lives. It is said that if you are not a socialist in your
youth you have no heart, not a capitalist in your adulthood you
have no brain. Poverty does get boring, we may well genuinely come
to the conclusion that the only way to move a cause forward is to
work within. The traditional view is that radicalism is the arena
of the young, conservatism of the aged, although I sense a sea change
that is turning that on its head. If time permitted it would be
worth considering some more sophisticated models of this process,
and in particular Bill Moyer and his Movement Action Plan voiced
through his journal "The Practical Strategist". [2] Moyer classifies four roles of activism as citizen, rebel,
social change agent and reformer. For each he lists effective and
ineffective patterns. He recognises that we may be all or one of
these roles at various times in our lives, and at progressive stages
of individual campaigns. No one role is more important than the
other - each are necessary for an effective social change movement.
To these four roles, Dr Lyn Carson [3] convincingly suggests a fifth
- the inquirer role. This role is to research the issues, document
the facts and perpetually question the assumptions of a movement.
B. Urgency
These are issues that will not go away. It really is a minute to
midnight on the environment. People are starving now. As Singer
puts it "We cannot continue with business as usual … the pressure
to re-examine the ethical basis of our lives is upon us in a way
that it has never been before"
[4] I have just returned from the South Pacific where logging
and open sore mining is turning paradise into poverty and coral
into catastrophe. We all know in our hearts that sorting the rubbish
for recycling is not enough any more.
We must never forget that those of us in positions of power are
best placed to speak out, and to effect change. When an establishment
figure sticks out their neck people listen, agendas are shifted
and legitimacy for a cause can be gained. To give two examples,
when Michael Kirby came out as a homosexual, proudly and bravely,
this made a huge shift in thinking and acceptance. When the head
of the NCA spoke out in favour of heroin by prescription there was
significant legitimacy given to the drug law reform movements.
So lest we forget, those of us within the system have real power
if we are brave enough to use it, and there is a real urgency on
many fronts.
C. Essential Goodness
I remain of the belief that people would rather make a good decision
consistent with what Nietzche calls the "tablet of virtues that
hangs over every people" than any other decision.
It is time we shed once and for all the concept that we are somehow
naturally competitive creatures in a dog eat dog world entrapped
forever in a gasping spiral of survival of the fittest. Singer argues
convincingly that selfishness is not in our genes, on the contrary,
we care for kin, and for larger groups. A re-reading of Engels’s
History of the Family, Private Property and the state, and other
anthropology reinforces this view. Our natural state is one that
has strong elements sharing, caring for others, of wanting to do
right and it is conditioned crap that gets in the way.
To illustrate this Singer explores the example of the giving of
blood [5] . Why do
we do it - it is not for money or self interest, it is not painless
and it can be inconvenient. Yet the system works Even more amazingly
is the numbers who have registered for bone marrow transplants in
the United States. This involves the potential for a much greater
gift, involving invasive surgery under general anesthetics. As far
back as 1992 in the US 650,000 had registered and 1300 had donated.
As Singer comments,
"With calm deliberation, in a situation untouched by nationalism
or of the hysteria of war, and with no prospects of any tangible
reward, a number of ordinary citizens are prepared to go to considerable
lengths to help a stranger" [6]
Don Juan, in his teachings to Carlos Castaneda says that in approaching
the ultimate decisions
"Look at every path closely and deliberately. Try it as many
times as you think necessary. Then ask yourself and yourself alone
one question. This question is one that only a very old man asks.
My benefactor told me about it once when I was very young and
my blood was to vigorous for me to understand it. Now I do understand
it. I will tell you what it is: Does this path have a heart? If
it does, the path is good. If it doesn’t it is of no use" [7]
I believe all of us want to choose a path with heart.
D. Other Theorists
Admittedly, related ethical dilemmas have been considered by philosophers
and religious leaders in many different contexts. The notion of
appropriate response to obligation and responsibility is considered
by Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics [8] . I have waded through Niebuhr [9] who compares reason and responsibility,
Spinoza [10] on
reason over passion, Kant [11] who considers the ethical dilemma of the
"altruistic lie", Chomsky [12] on the responsibility of writers and intellectuals. In the
end, whilst each are of assistance in analysing dilemma, only Chomsky
really points to solutions, and then only in general and sweeping
terms. This paper is attempting to create a practical approach that
the theorists seldom stoop to.. Singer, on the other hand is an
inspiration despite being such a bloody intellectual. "How are we
to live" is a great book.
3. Toward resolution
So, thus far I have defined the dilemma, and now the tricky part.
How do we resolve it. As I previously indicated this is a work in
progress and the chapter headings for the second part of this work
toward resolution are listed below:
- Spirituality
- Money
- Evaluation
- Giving
- Nature
- Creativity
- Lines in the Sand
- Knowledge and the rejection of mainstream media
- Plan for the worst
Obviously, there are time restraints and I intend to deal briefly
with the first three.
A. Money
Let us be honest in acknowledging that it is a desire for material
comfort that keeps us from doing a lot more of what we believe in.
We are all captives to some extent of the material world and the
desire to have more. I have never thought about money more than
when I have been lacking it. Having an income sufficient so that
one can pay the bills without juggling and planning is a liberating
experience. But money is a drug and it quickly becomes impossible
to regulate the dose so that it leads to happiness rather than dependency.
This is Aristotles paradox of hedonism - the more determinedly
we pursue our desire for pleasure, the more elusive we will find
its satisfaction. Aristotles doctrine of "the sterility of money"
views the process of making money as a means in itself as being
an unnatural mistaking of the means for the end [13] .
As Singer puts it, "once we have satisfied our basic needs, there
is no level of material comfort at which we are likely to find significantly
greater long term fulfillment than any other level" [14] .
Indeed, it is more likely that we will not find satisfaction at
any level of material wealth if material wealth is our goal because
it such a flexible comparison-driven concept. As Veblen comments
on those who form the habit of perpetual comparison:
"So long as the comparison is distinctly unfavourable to himself,
the normal, average individual will live in chronic dissatisfaction
with his present lot; and when he has reached what may be called
the normal pecuniary standard of the community, this chronic dissatisfaction
will give place to a restless staining to place a wider and ever-widening
pecuniary internal between himself and this average standard."
[15]
And this is true of humanity collectively as well as individually.
There have been a series of studies that measure national happiness
and comparative wealth. The landmark study was by Easterlin in 1974
where he concluded that "economic growth does not raise a society
to some ultimate state of plenty. Rather, the growth process itself
engenders ever-growing wants that lead it ever onward" [16]
Rather than see money as an evil, it should be seen as a tool.
We only need enough to do the job. This idea is of course not new.
Never should we forget the legend of Midas who wished that everything
he touched turned to gold. He starved to death when the very food
that he was eating turned to gold in his mouth.
On this topic I am reminded of a story of a young Jewish man who
travelled from New York to Europe to visit a great teacher with
whom he had been corresponding. Upon entering his room he was struck
to find this great Rabbi living in a room with a bed, a chair and
a few books. The young man had expected something more grand. "Rabbi"
he said "Where are your things?" The Rabbi asked in return "Where
are yours?" His visitor replied "But I am only passing through".
The master answered "So am I. So am I".
So being aware of these truisms we must somehow pledge anew each
day that money does not buy happiness, I need no more that I need
and that more than I need is counterproductive.
B. Spirituality
I have come to the conclusion, tentatively at first, and with ever
increasing firmness that an essential part of the resistance to
becoming a Z person is to be in touch with the spiritual. Of course
this needs to be contrasted with organised structural religion.
Our spiritual pathways have been hijacked by institutions that put
power before people, replaced faith with doctrine, and substituted
the dollar for the search for enlightenment. Spirituality can be
sought in simpler non doctrinaire manners - meditation for example.
The importance of spirituality is in the humility, in the bowing
down, the acceptance of our smallness that we are not the centre
of the universe.
Bertrand Russell was fond of reminding his readers of the unimportance
of our own cosmic insignificance. Our entire world is only one planet
encircling one star in a galaxy of 300,000 million stars and is
in turn one of several million galaxies [17] .
For myself I find huge comfort and strength in the practices and
teaching of Buddhism. The precepts, the virtues, the breathing,
the living for the moment are a wonderful starting point to keep
me in touch with core values that sometimes have become strangers
to me. For many in the environment movement they bow down in a truly
spiritual way to the power of the trees, the magic of the rivers.
Cosmic - yes. But it is the spiritual base that is part of their
motivation.
And in the end the lessons from all religions are really the same.
Rabbi Hillel was asked by a gentile to teach him the lessons of
the Talmud in the time that he could stand on one leg. The Rabbi
replied "What is hateful to you do not do to your neighbour". This
very simple rule is the essence of religions, of life and of the
passages we must take. Whether we call it Karma, or reciprocity.
Reciprocity is Cicero’s "first demand of duty" [18] the Confucian "single thread" [19] and is one of the few moral
ideas that are universally accepted in every society.
[20] Jesus said love your neighbour as you would love yourself.
Mahabharata says "Let no man do to another that which would be repugnant
to himself". [21]
C. Evaluation
Self doubt and a continuous process of weighing actions against
belief is an uncomfortable state of mind. But it is inevitable and
preferable to becoming an automaton. I strive to welcome these doubts
like an old friend, embrace them. I name them and talk to them in
the shower. "Ah hello Mr Conscience - what will we do with you today?".
It is the price we pay for keeping alive our dreams, and it is a
question of keeping the process within defined time limits. Philosophers
such as Jean-Paul Satre see this kind of dilemma as an expression
of our ultimate freedom.
Recognise too that working to bring about social change is the
outer manifestation of working on our inadequate selves to bring
about internal change.
"So we are healing our inner child as we make the world a better
place for children. We are defouling our inner nest while we take
on environmental activism. We are freeing our little imprisoned
self with law reform. It is our chosen way of integrating internal
and external growth."
Whilst little seems to be black and white any more, it is crucial
not to get lost in the grey. Have faith that there is a right side
and a wrong side to most issues and that choosing to act in favour
of what seems right is almost always better than to wallow in wondering
if it is right or not. If we take a medium to long term view it
is easy to see that in some issues there has been right and wrong
and that those who fought on one side were the good. No-one seriously
wants to return to the days when women or Aboriginals were not permitted
to vote. No one seriously advocates a return to slavery. The concentration
camp were wrong. Even conservatives now see the value in wilderness
areas saved by protest action. So have faith. Choose the path with
heart. Then act like the true warrior you are.
4. Conclusion
I trust that this has given you some idea of the ideas that I am
grappling with. I am happy to answer questions or receive comments.
In particular, you may like to ask me about the other chapters I
have not had the time to deal with.
[1] Higgins W, Truth Good and Evil, Buddhist Library
and Meditation Centre, 18 October 2000.
[2] Moyer, Bill (1990) "Movement Action Plan "The
Practical Strategist. Social Movement Empowerment Project, San Francisco
[3] Carson, Dr L, "Innovative consultation
processes and the changing role of activism" Keynote address, Education
in Social Action Conference, Centre for Popular Education, University
of Technology, Sydney 30th November 2000.
[4] Singer P, How are we to live: Ethics in an age
of self interest, Random House 1993. p17
[5] Singer P, op cit , 1993, 194- 195.
[6] Singer P op.cit., 1993, p194 - 196
[7] Quote taken from "A path with heart", Jack Kornfield,
1994, Bantam Books, New York, p12
[8] W D Ross, The Works of Aristotle, 1925, Vol IX
Ethica Nicomachea Bk 1 Claredon Press, Oxford
[9] H Richard Niebuhr, The Responsible
Self, 1963 Harper and Row, New York
[10] Benedoctus de Sinaza, Ethics,
in The Rationalists, New York, Doubleday 1960
[11] Immanuel Kant, Critique of
Practical Reason and Other Writings in Moral Philosophy, Lewis White
Beck ed and trans, University of Chicago Press, 1949
[12] Noam Chomsky, Writers and
Intellectual Responsibility, Ch 3 in Powers and Prospects - Reflections
on Human Nature and the Social Order, Allen and Unwin, Sydney 1996
[13] Aristotle, Politics, Book II, Claredon Press,
Oxford 1905, p43 - 46.
[14] Smith, op.cit. p61.
[15] Velben T The theory of the leisure class, Unwin
Books, London 1970 p 111.
[16] Easterlin, RA, "Does Economic Growth Improve
the Human Lot: Some Empirical Evidence" in David and Abramovitz
eds, Nations and Households in Economic Growth, Academic Press,,
New York, 1974, p121.
[17] Russell, B "The expanding
mental universe" in Egner R and Donnan L, eds, the Basic Writings
of Bertrand Russell, Allen & Unwin 1961, p392-3.
[18] Cicero, de Officiis, JM Dent ed Everyman, London,
1955, vol 1, par 47
[19] Hansen, C, "Classical Chineese
Ethics" in Singer, P ed, A companion to Ethics, Blackwell, Oxford,
1991, p72
[20] Gouldner A, "The Norm of Reciprocity",
American Sociological Review, vol 25, no2, 1960, p171
[21] Singer op.cit. 1993, 273
|
