josephine |
September 29, 2009
Yesterday we were asked to write a blog about what we have learned during the day. It was a very inspiring day and we were working concentrated with specific tools to enable us to structure and think about organisational processes.
What I want to spend a few lines of my blog discussing is, however, not these concrete tools, but what the process we went through inspired me to reflect upon: The art of communication. It is inspiring to experience that even though we, the team at Global Change, have to make several decisions every time we meet – and despite the fact that we do not always agree on everything - are able to create an environment where we listen, give space and learn from each other.
Marshall Rosenberg talks about constructive communication as nonviolent language or giraffe language - as opposed to jackal language. The giraffe is the animal with the biggest heart. Contrary to the giraffe, the jackal is close to the ground and preoccupied with its own needs. It might sound a bit hippie-like to talk about communication this way, but the essence is crucial. It is crucial in every single bit of social interaction, because it is the language of empathy and openness. The way we communicate can turn a critical situation into a constructive discussion – and the reverse. It is rather banal in theory, but actually practising it can be a challenge. I do not talk about this to get lost in platitudes and clichés, but because I believe that it is relevant for us in the work with the campaign both external and internal. It can be key in the work of empowering ourselves to make change.
josephine |
September 17, 2009
Yesterday I read an article about climate friendly food. The woman who was interviewed listed several ’sins’ with regard to food and suggested that we choose our sins – red wine and meat or a trip to Vietnam, in order to cut down on CO2 emissions.
What struck me in this small input in the huge field of the climate debate was the focus on guilt – and the sense of guilt creeping into my mind as so many times before when I read about the climate change. My reaction was twofold. On the one hand the feeling of guilt is somehow positive; since before guilt comes reflection. In that respect we could rename guilt to the rising awareness of the consumer. On the other hand I could not help feeling lonely and unimportant, and actually a bit angry as well. So, I stop eating beef – but what about the big companies - the Danish shipping company, Maersk, for instance - who emits as much carbon dioxide as the Danish population all together?
What we need is a political will. A will to change policies. I believe that it is the core of the issue. And what do I mean by changing policies? I think that it is important to cut down the CO2 emissions, however, I believe that it is even more important to discuss how we adapt to climate changes. People have always been very good at adapting to the context they live in, and to changes in that context. We need to draw on this ability and to implement policies that support the adaptation. Stop eating food produced far away from where we live may be one of these adaptations (and I believe it is a good one), but then we need policies that make it possible for local farmers to sell their products cheaper or at least not more expensive than products coming from Israel or Spain or Australia.
A consequence of climate change, whether it is human-made or not, is that parts of the world’s population will have to move. There is already climate refugees and the number will grow rapidly. Again, we need policies that are able to deal with this “redistribution” of people around the world. It is possible that this would change the perception of the nation-state and make us think of the world in more global terms. (On the dark side of the moon is cultural conflict and economic and political crisis…)
“If we could only redistribute the water” said Jørgen Steen Nielsen, journalist at the Danish newspaper Information. What he indicated was that areas that are dry now will become desert areas in the future, and areas experiencing heavy rain will have severe floodings. I think that his idea goes for more than water. If we could only redistribute food we would experience that it is not that there is not enough food in the world – but the way we have organised the world politically make some people die of starvation and other people die from obesity. We have to start using political instruments in a way that makes it possible to deal with the problems of our time in a more fair and inclusive way.
Global warming is, of course, about nature and climate and the environment, but it is just as much about politics and strategics and power.
josephine |
September 9, 2009
Okay, so here I am. I never thought that I would be writing blogs… I’m excited and a bit scared at the same time. Anyway, the reason for starting blogging is that I’m attending the Global Change program. We’re focusing on climate change and we’ll spend the next four months planning and carrying out a campaign in Copenhagen in December. This is our second day and there’s already so much going on. No social change yet, but changes in my approach to how to work for social transformation… I’m used to analyse, splitting the world into pieces by using complex theories – now it’s time to put it together again!
