For those of you who don't know, I have long been considering doing a three year service term with MCC in the future. I started the whole talking process with MCC back in December, with the idea of taking a year off in the US after my SALT term, then coming back to Latin America somewhere. As it turns out, it seems God had other plans.

As I described what my interests were in an assignment, I was informed about a position that has just been created in MCC Colombia, which is a place I have always wanted to work ("always" being as long as I've been interested in working overseas). The problem was that they wouldn't want to wait until summer 2009 to fill the position. However, the job description sounded like something I was really interested, and since it was in Colombia, I decided to start reconsidering my original plan. My hopes went from having a year at home to having three months at home to having one month at home. In the end, the it was decided that the best thing would be for me to end my SALT term early to start in Colombia. So, I will be leaving Bolivia and going directly to Colombia at the end of April, so I can participate in a Learning Tour in early May (part of my job will be organizing Learning Tours, so they thought it would be good for me to be there for this one). I will still get my month at home (actually more like 6 weeks) in June/July, just not in between assignments.

You can imagine, this has been a major shift for me as far as what my future looks like, and honestly it's a little hard for me to believe that I actually committed to it. It is also a little bittersweet, since I am cutting my time short here in Bolivia by a little more than two months. I have really come to love my job, church, and family. Nevertheless, I feel confident about the decision, and I am thrilled about what it means. Ultimately, I believe that Colombia will be an ever better situation for me than Bolivia. Now, if I can only convince my mother to see it that way. . .

Typically, I don't like to put large quotes in my blog entries. I don't want this to become a bunch of small pieces from other books, but mostly my own thoughts. But, I read this recently, and I think it's pretty relevant to the topic I'm on. It's from a book by Noam Chomsky. (disclaimer: I tend to make more typos when I copy texts)

Q: What do you think can actually be done by activists working today?

A: Well, everything can be done - everything can be done up to the point of eliminating all structures of authority and repression: they're human institutions, they can be dismantled. If you ask what's most important at this point - well, you know, that's not the kind of thing you just decide right on the spot, those are decisions that come by serious thought and discussion in groups like this, among people who are really trying to institute change.

I mean, you have to start with where the world is. Like, you don't start by saying, "Okay, let's overthrow transnational corporations" - because right now it's just not within range. So, you start by saying, "look, here's where the world is, what can we begin to do?" Well, you can begin to do things which will get people to understand better what the real source of power is, and just how much they can achieve if they get involved in political activism. And once you've broken through the pretense, you just construct organizations - that's it. You work on things that are worth working on. If it's taking control of your community, it's that. If it's gaining control of your workplace, it's that. If it's working on solidarity, it's that. If it's taking care of the homeless, it's that.

With regard to the domestic scene, take the fact that the criminal justice system increasingly is becoming a system for targeting the poor and minorities, who are being turned into people under military occupation. Look, that's an easy one to change - you really just have to change public opinion on that one. You aren't striking at the core of private power when you begin to have a civilized criminal justice system instead of a brutal, barbaric one. So that's an example of something I think is changeable. . .

On things like what's taking place in the international economy, you're getting into harder territory - because there, crucial interests of authoritarian institutions are at stake. And at that point, you're going to have to face the fact, which sooner or later we're going to have to face after all, that maybe the most totalitarian institution in human history - or certainly close to you - is a corporation: it's a centrally-managed institution in which authority is structured strictly from top to bottom, control is in the hands of owners and investors, if you're inside the organization you take orders from above and transmit them down, if you're outside it there are only extremely weak popular controls, which indeed are fast eroding. And this isn't some new insight of mine, incidentally - for example, it was pointed out by Thomas Jefferson in his later years, which were only the early days of corporations. Jefferson warned that if power was going to shift into the hands of what he called "banking institutions and moneyed incorporations," then the democratic experiment would be over: we'd have a form of absolutism worse than what the colonists had struggled against.

Okay, Thomas Jefferson is not exactly a figure who's off the mainstream spectrum in American history, so this is not some new off-the-wall insight - it's as American as apple pie, and we should recognize it, you realize it's a hard nut to crack - because there are ENORMOUS agglomerations of power, indeed concentrating, and indeed transnational, which are almost totally protected from public scrutiny and popular participation. And that's just got to change.

After all, why do corporations have the rights they do? Why are they treated as "immortal persons," contrary to the warnings of people like Adam Smith and others? It's not by nature - in fact, these rights weren't even granted by Congress, this happened because of decisions made in courts by judges and lawyers, which simply changed the world totally.

So, if you ask what should be done: well, I don't think any sane human being can look around at the world and not figure out things that have to be done - take a walk through the streets, you'll find plenty of things that have to be done. So you know, you get started doing them. But you're not going to be able to do them alone. Like, if you take a walk down the streets and say, "That ought to be done," nothing's going to happen. On the other hand, if people become organized enough to act together, yeah, then you can achieve things. And there's no particular limit to what you can achieve. I mean, that's why we don't still have slavery.

Obviously, the topic of the last post has been on my mind a lot lately. In part, because I didn't complete the thought, but also because I've been reading an excellent book by Noam Chomsky that has been extremely affirming and thought provoking for me.

I mentioned awareness, not just about events but about how the whole systems of power function. I do believe this has to be step number one, no matter what. From there people often move on to other steps, although here I'm going to be a little critical of them because, while they are all good things to do, I do not think they hit the root of the problem.

1) Vote. This is often listed as the number one thing to do. It's like if you say you want to change the world, but you don't vote, you're pretty much contradicting yourself and have no integrity. Supposedly, in our system the people have the power and voting is the exercise of that power. The problem is that I think there's more power in our financial institutions (such as multinational corporations) than in our political institutions. These strong powers carry a lot of political influence, and changing politicians can sometimes be just like changing cogs in the machine. Of course I do believe that politicians can make some changes, I just am not sure that voting is really exercising control over the system.

2) Vote with your money. Dollars vote, too, and you vote for certain companies every time you spend your money. While this is true, there are some disturbing things about it. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it appeals to people to look beyond simply their own immediate interests to the interests of others. But the fact that corporations are not doing this is the problem in the first place. Second of all, it is extremely undemocratic. It says that whoever has the most money has the most votes; therefore a rich person has a lot more say in what companies make it than a poor person. It's a good thing to do if you want to have personal integrity, but it's not the solution.

3) Writing letters, making phone calls, signing petitions, etc. These are things that can definitely change the decisions made inside of the system. But as for chronic problems, they are not much of a prescription.

4) Generosity. It's hard for me to be too hard on this one, since at the moment I am 100% supported by people who have chosen to give money to an organization, many of which I have never personally met. Surely, that show of generosity is meaningful to me. However, the idea that somehow the generous rich people are going to save the world is totally bogus. Again, it's appealing to people's sense of compassion and selflessness, when expecting their greed is what our system runs on. Also, it's completely missing the root of the problem. It's like if your kid keeps scraping his leg on a nail that's sticking out, so all you do is buy some better band-aids.

Now, like I said, all of these things are good things. However, I am absolutely convinced that so many of the world's problems are structural in nature. They are the result of the way the systems of power run, and I believe that a lot of the work that the power systems do is aimed at keeping their power. This can be everything from discrediting other possible solutions, providing misinformation and indoctrination about the current set up, and encouraging activism that does not really change the balance of power.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Steve, this hasn't really answered the original question at all." To this I say, "Hm, fair enough. I'll try to make a third installment on this subject."

In comments for one of my previous post, TJ asked a tough, but important, question. "What are some nonviolent ways that in everyday life we can promote nonviolent conflict resolution between countries and between factions like the groups currently experiencing so much violence in Kenya. I'm interested to hear your thoughts about how we can effect change on any of the numerous systems that make up our society."

As I've often said, I sometimes think leaving a question unanswered is sometimes better than actually answering it. While a quick answer may provide a summary of a possible solution, it may ignore some of the complex realities. In addition, it may prematurely quell the searching or put an end to the journey, which I believe is vital in allowing us to really own the solutions.

With that being said, I will provide some of my thoughts on this subject (although maybe not many specific examples, just some starting points). I think it's important, because as people start to look at the problems with the world systems, "What can we possibly do?" is a common response. There are powerful forces against change, and it's easy to feel like you can't do anything. So, you can believe that change isn't possible (and therefore guarentee that it won't happen), or you can believe change is possible (and remain a sane person).

This position is different than optimism, where you would blindly believe that good things will happen no matter what the odds look like. Instead, you simply say that change is possible, and you choose to put your hope in that. Personally, I think this is the position you have to take when you get an honest look at the world's systems.

All right, that's a long introduction. So, where do we start on these problems?
1) I am convinced that the first step is awareness. I don't mean simply knowing about world news, although it's important. Simply knowing that there's violence in Kenya is a start, but awareness for me means more. It means learning some of the dirt behind the way our systems really work. As I find out about some of the things that have happened in the past, I see that the ignorance and/or shaping of public opinion has been a major part of allowing these things to happen. People like Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, John Perkins, and John Stockwell are good places to start.

Ok, I'm kind of tired and it's getting late. I'll finish this later.