Bright Green Cities
Nov 4th, 2009 | By Jesse Fox | Category: UncategorizedWhy is it so hard to change our cities, even when it’s obvious to everyone that things need to change? Maybe we’re just looking at things the wrong way.
In an article entitled Transition Towns or Bright Green Cities?, Alex Steffen of Worldchanging.com takes a critical look at the popular Transition Towns movement, which attempts to prepare communities for the challenges they face due to peak oil and climate change.
But what I found fascinating, and indeed inspiring, about his piece were his thoughts on transforming local politics.
What Steffen proposes is a new way of looking at civic engagement, minus the standard cynicism and defeatism. “Cynicism is obedience,” he writes, while public processes are too often crafted to sap the will of the public to engage. Such processes, he says, which attempt to deter citizen participation with the promise of boredom, should be viewed with “deep distrust.”
Below, excerpts from Steffen’s piece. Well worth reading:
What can any of us do in the face of planetary catastrophe?
Staring into the ecological abyss, it’s easy to feel small and unimportant. Edward Abbey wrote truly, “Sentiment without action is the ruin of the soul.” But it’s often hard to see how any actions we might actually take, as individuals, will have any meaningful effect, whatsoever: leaving aside the pablum about small steps and each doing our part, we all know in our hearts that taking out the recycling will not do much to slow the melting of Greenland…
What we need is a movement of local efforts aimed at changing things that matter at scales that matter, based on the politics of optimism. The first step in those efforts is to stop seeing the systems we depend on as out of our control. They aren’t, and that we’re so convinced they are is a testament to the dedication of the powers that be to shoo us away from interfering in their profits.
Cynicism, boredom and fear are their tools. They reinforce, at every opportunity, the idea that government is broken, that civic engagement is for dupes, that real rebellion involves shutting up, making money and spending it. They craft public process to sap the will of the public to engage: as Richard White writes, bureaucracies use boredom the way a skunk uses smell. They make an effort to keep us in a state of constant economic and social anxiety undermining our willingness to connect with and trust each other. Whether these tools are used consciously or unconsciously is completely beside the point — you can apply whatever degree or lack of conspiracy theory you like: the effects are observable, and well-documented.
The great secret here is that we are more powerful than any of us usually admits. While it is true that organized greed beats unorganized democracy every time, it’s also true that organized, educated, passionate democracy is the most powerful political force ever seen, and we live amidst an exploding proliferation of tools for organizing our communities, sharing our knowledge and connecting our passions.
What is more, we live in a time where transparency and collaborative insight give ad hoc groups the capacity to understand the vast, complex systems we depend on, but which the powers that be have cloaked in layers of exclusionary expertise, regulation and jargon. We are not only capable of understanding the systems around us, but of imagining and inventing their replacements, and mobilizing the constituency to make that happen…
What would it take to design a movement that actually changed what needs to be changed? How can we design a networked movement that aims to forestall and undo catastrophe, by building bright green regions and sharing innovation?
Here are a few of the larger design challenges involved:
- Finding places where a system has been draped in complexity, and revealing it in clear, beautiful, interesting ways. How things work is of inherent interest to many people. How can we reveal the workings of the systems around them in ways that help them see the usefulness of change?
- Making public life exciting where boredom has dampened people’s enthusiasm, if not simply driven them completely out of civic involvement. How can we simultaneously reject needless process in favor of quick, transparent and measured decisions and enliven participation? Being part of democracy ought to feel exciting, and invigorating: we should view every part of it that’s boring with deep mistrust.
- Launching a counter-attack on pervasive cynicism and finding fresh ways to call it what it is: cynicism is obedience. The very origins of the word mean “like a dog.” Stripping cynicism of its rebelliousness, making it looks as entirely whipped an attitude as it is, is a huge step towards reclaiming the public realm. Indeed, I think we need to deploy our full battery of humorists, satirists and artists on looking at what part of us makes us so ready to accept the idea that all is sham and we’re beaten before we start.
- Reaching out to people have been made afraid of participation, and spreading enthusiasm and a delight in civic life. How can we make civic participation more welcoming, and jam the manufactured reactionary anger that conservatives use to gum up our public processes (through tea-bagging and astroturfing)?
- Reclaiming the media sphere by supporting local journalism that actually reveals, informs and educates. How can we develop means to support reporting, writing, filmmaking and public discussion that advances our understanding of what to do, leaving behind the tired debates of the last generation?
- Reinventing or replacing the kinds of civic institutions — the university departments, think tanks, research labs, planning agencies — that democracies need to make informed decisions, in the wake of 40 years of work by the right wing to either destroy these institutions or overwhelm them with new, better-funded ideologically-conservative versions.
- Diffusing innovation through our local businesses and industry groups. Unsustainable business is bad business, even in the fairly short run: sound economic strategy in times like ours is to get in the business of replacing the broken systems around us. How do we build local business cultures that support transformation as the opportunity it is?
- Above all else, reimagining the future. Since we can’t build what we can’t imagine, and visions of the future dominate our ability to understand the present, how can we embrace future-making tools to redefine the possible in our communities? Because the powers that be have one gigantic weakness: they offer us no future, none at all, and every time we shift the debate to be about where we’re going, we win.
We don’t yet know how to do all this, but we can iterate our way into it through experimentation, exploration and innovation, consciously practicing ally etiquette to link efforts across a spectrum of systems into a collaborative whole. Indeed, since the whole thing starts with vision, simply sharing our visions for what this looks like is a huge step in the right direction.
We don’t need to wait for some mythical cultural awakening, either. There are more than enough of us, already. In most cities around the world, a fraction of one percent of the citizens getting energized and turning out — using new tools to learn together, coordinate strategy and exert public pressure — would feel like a tsunami of democracy and creative engagement.
And hidden allies can be found everywhere. Public life is full of people who want to see change, but need political cover. Change agents await activation in our government agencies, businesses, schools, political parties and media. If we can begin to engage the systems in which they’ve been quietly laboring at the systems level, we can expect unseen helpers in unexpected places.
It’s time to make ourselves into the people who can do what’s needed. To fight the powers that be, we need to see ourselves as the powers that will be, building the future we want.
![[Digg]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Newsvine]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/newsvine.png)
![[Reddit]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/reddit.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Twitter]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.sustainablecityblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
As someone who has been involved in environmental politics since the 1970’s, both as a professional and as an enthusiast, I can only say that whilst I heartily support many of the environmental policy notions set forth here, it is disheartening to hear the same simplistic “us against them”, conspiracy theory rhetoric that has so disabled not only the environmental movement but many other progressive movements throughout my adult life. The notion that the “big, bad authorities” are all reactionaries plotting to ruin our lives and stick it to the oh so “innocent and enlightened” masses is not only an unequivocably outdated and palpably false notion, it is also one of the major stumbling blocks to any real progress in all areas of social politics, environmental politics in particular. No effort to improve the sustainablity of our communities has any chance of success without the good will and co-operation of all parties involved, which in turn requires the often frustratingly slow processes of informing and persuading, alternative seeking and small-step compromises that make up the bulk of the decision-making procedures in the real political world. Whilst their fervour and energy may be vital to the cause, this will understandably frustrate the young, whose zeal and vague understanding of the problems involved will bring them out in the streets one day, but will ultimately see them abandon the cause altogether once they grow older and the bigger issues of real life take over. What is really required is an informed general public, whose immediate interests lie not in Greenland but in the “shop around the corner”. So as far-reaching as the consequences of global warming may be, and as vast and complicated as the mechanisms required to combat it may be, we can only succeed in bringing about real change if we succeed in making it all accessible. And we can only make it accessible if we fine-tune the issues to where people “live”, without any preconceptions of support, and by approaching the authorities with conviction and perserverance, yes, but also with a modicum of respect and understanding. One need only look at the past year of American politics in particular to see what perils lie ahead if we fail to do so.