Seeding Slow Revolutions

October 29, 2012

In my earlier note, “Slow Revolutions?” I suggested that every revolution was slow, that we are now living through one, and that their presence can be detected by changes in the momentum of existing social systems, themselves driven by (perhaps many) disparate smaller changes reinforcing one another. One tendency in such turbulent times is likely to be highly conservative; hunker down, put up protective shields and stick to your knitting. But there is an exciting and less obvious alternative; to use those times and that environment for deliberate and effective social change.

Of course, much has been written about social change and an enormous amount of energy, both individual and collective, academic and operational, has been devoted to efforts to enable, strengthen, guide and modify it. To put it mildly, success has been highly elusive. I believe that slow revolutions provide an opportunity to initiate and effect desired social changes, for several reasons. First, even though social change by definition concerns communities and relatively large groups of people, this emerging and complex character of revolutions means that deliberate changes will be easier in part because they will appear as just another happening among many. That is, there will be less attention.

The second and related point is that every social change in its earliest stages is fragile, easily derailed and therefore usually born only to die. Its emergence in an already complicated world means that more time and support of the initial action will be possible. This provides much-needed space and time to become more substantive and rooted. Third, it is possible, even perhaps probable, that the new initiative will be able to build on or gain support from some of the many other changes already underway. Fourth, there are likely to be other initiatives that specifically could appropriately support this new one. And finally, fifth, there will be a growing body of potentially useful knowledge and experience about social change in general. Overall, a slow revolution provides an opportunity.

This is therefore a very good time to launch a social movement. This is not the same thing as hijacking a revolution (or another movement), which means capturing its momentum and reorienting it toward other ends. (This is historically one of the most important ways social revolutions have succeeded. An excellent example is the Communist revolution in Russia, in which the Bolsheviks captured the momentum built by the much more peaceful Mensheviks.) But this is different.  Application to the launching of a new social movement simply takes advantage of the loosening of traditional structures, so that new ideas and policies can also be incorporated. It isn’t quite the same thing as filling a vacuum; rather it takes advantage of the feeling that things are already somewhat out of control and that “steps need to taken.”

That raises an important question. What deliberate steps can or even should be taken to launch a social change program during a slow revolution? In particular, what steps can help support that infant change seed? To answer that, think for a minute about the standard political image of a “big tent.” The first target is to get into that tent. Why is that important? Because more or less by definition that image arose to denote the presence of all of the acceptable and important threads. In Republican circles, where (I believe) that image started, it meant for them a way to include everyone whose supporters were likely to vote that way. But it served to legitimize those as plausible and worth pursuing.  Social movements need to do the same.

There is another important lesson in this. The record will show that once a point of view or philosophy, even a very non-mainstream one, is allowed inside the tent, it has taken the most important single step towards legitimacy. The history of movement towards alternative modes of energy production is a good example. Wind power, followed a bit later by solar power, has gotten into the big tent of energy production methods. That means, for example, that ever discussion of energy scenarios now includes a discussion of their possible contributions. Similarly, when federal energy regulations or requests for proposals are promulgated, respondents are asked to include these alternatives in their proposals, even though neither of them has yet become significant in the US.

Social movements also need a rationale that can be widely disseminated and has the capacity to interest people.  Revolutions do not succeed without attracting followers. The Occupy campaign is a lesson in how to do some things extremely well, but it failed completely in its presumed main objective (shifting the national dialogue on the 1%) because there was no way to engage with the movement, even for those who wished to help move its ideas  into the mainstream (that is, letting it under the tent.) That’s another lesson about slow revolutions:  ideas and campaigns need spokespeople (spokes-groups?) and figureheads.

So, does a new idea get under the tent? Here there is another lesson from slow revolutions. One way it can be done is by influencing powerful and respected people or champions, who are willing to speak for the issue and whose personal credibility assures respectful attention. But another way is by publicizing the idea(s) in respected publications or these days, web sites. Indeed, the proliferation of Internet access across the world creates a very special opportunity.

Never in history have so many people, and so many diverse people, had such easy access to a simple and far-reaching link to others, everywhere in the world. Add to that the availability of remarkably effective automatic translators and spread is virtually guaranteed IF enough attention can be captured. What is lacking is an efficient aggregation engine, a program or protocol that easily clusters ideas and their sources, and indicates their strength, and translates that into social momentum.

There is much more to be said on this topic but perhaps this at least scratches the surface of the issue. Slow revolutions are prime opportunities for engendering social change. We should take full advantage of the current one.