I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point. Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups? Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated.Carleton StockSt. Louis, MO
ICA Canada has an online study of the book Courage to Lead. (The spring session is nearly finished: there will be another in the fall.) The study of the week before last was on Chapter 8: Trans-establishment Style. This chapter has some good points about the trans-establishment style that it is easy to forget. Here is a pertinent quote: “While the disestablishment and pro-establishment argue over the shape of the present or the past, the trans-establishment asks the futuristic questions on behalf of everyone else, and dares to imagine something different.” The participants had some good examples of how they are asking the “what if?” questions about the future and stepping into the trans-establishment role in their organizations and communities. Personally, one thing I am doing that I think is trans-establishment is sharing stories on my blog (jofacilitator.ca) of “Ordinary People who are Making a Positive Difference”. My intention is to highlight the places where positive change is happening that we can affect, and to support a stance of gratitude. Some of these stories are quite mundane. Others show ordinary people who have made radical changes that have benefitted their communities. I believe that this is where we can impact change. I share a story every week, from the ones people sent for my 70th birthday. I currently have 36 more to share. Everyone is invited to send a story to me to add to the list to share What are others doing to ask the futuristic questions to make a difference? Take care, Jo -- Jo Nelson, CPF, CTF <jnelson@ica-associates.ca> Certified Professional Facilitator and ICA Certified ToP™ Facilitator ICA Associates, Inc. 401 Richmond Street West, Suite #405, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5V 3A8 Ph. 1 416-691-2316, x2230 Toll-free 1 877-691-1422 Fax 1 416-691-2491 Website http://ica-associates.ca Cellphone 647 233 6910 Skype "jofacilitator" Vendor of Record: Government of Ontario Learning and Training Services #OSS-00154215 Vendor of Record: Public Works and Government Services Canada E60BQ-01ISSA/353/ST, Organizational Management. Pre-qualified Vendor, Alberta Education Resource List “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” R. Buckminster Fuller From: Dialogue <dialogue-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net> on behalf of Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Reply-To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Date: Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 1:31 PM To: "dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net" <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Carleton Stock <carletonstock@aol.com> Subject: [Dialogue] The Transestablishment Stance I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point. Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups? Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated. Carleton Stock St. Louis, MO
Thanks Jo. On Thu, May 30, 2019, 12:54 PM Jo Nelson via Dialogue < dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
ICA Canada has an online study of the book Courage to Lead. (The spring session is nearly finished: there will be another in the fall.)
The study of the week before last was on Chapter 8: Trans-establishment Style. This chapter has some good points about the trans-establishment style that it is easy to forget. Here is a pertinent quote: “While the disestablishment and pro-establishment argue over the shape of the present or the past, the trans-establishment asks the futuristic questions on behalf of everyone else, and dares to imagine something different.”
The participants had some good examples of how they are asking the “what if?” questions about the future and stepping into the trans-establishment role in their organizations and communities.
Personally, one thing I am doing that I think is trans-establishment is sharing stories on my blog (jofacilitator.ca) of “Ordinary People who are Making a Positive Difference”. My intention is to highlight the places where positive change is happening that we can affect, and to support a stance of gratitude. Some of these stories are quite mundane. Others show ordinary people who have made radical changes that have benefitted their communities. I believe that this is where we can impact change. I share a story every week, from the ones people sent for my 70th birthday. I currently have 36 more to share. Everyone is invited to send a story to me to add to the list to share
*What are others doing to ask the futuristic questions to make a difference?*
Take care,
Jo
-- Jo Nelson, CPF, CTF <jnelson@ica-associates.ca> Certified Professional Facilitator and ICA Certified ToP™ Facilitator ICA Associates, Inc.
401 Richmond Street West, Suite #405, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5V 3A8
Ph. 1 416-691-2316, x2230 Toll-free 1 877-691-1422 Fax 1 416-691-2491 Website http://ica-associates.ca Cellphone 647 233 6910 Skype "jofacilitator"
Vendor of Record: Government of Ontario Learning and Training Services #OSS-00154215 Vendor of Record: Public Works and Government Services Canada E60BQ-01ISSA/353/ST, Organizational Management. Pre-qualified Vendor, Alberta Education Resource List
*“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” R. Buckminster Fuller*
*From: *Dialogue <dialogue-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net> on behalf of Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> *Reply-To: *Colleague Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> *Date: *Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 1:31 PM *To: *"dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net" <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> *Cc: *Carleton Stock <carletonstock@aol.com> *Subject: *[Dialogue] The Transestablishment Stance
I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point.
Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups?
Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated.
Carleton Stock
St. Louis, MO _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course. I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now. For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going. Terry On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue < dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point.
Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups?
Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated. Carleton Stock St. Louis, MO _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Lots of good questions and insights in this dialogue. Back in the day we understood that the transestablishment dynamic was to hold the tension between the establishment and disestablishment, and all 3 were fairly identifiable. But in the era of Trump I really don’t know which he and his minions are; none of the above as far as I can discern. He is clearly not the transestablishment, and I can’t relate to him as either of the other 2 without myself becoming the polar opposite. I just don’t know how to play the transestablishment role in this situation unless I totally ignore Trump. That’s not only nearly impossible to do, but ignoring him may well be immoral.So that’s the point of my frustration. Randy
On May 30, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Terry Bergdall via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course.
I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now.
For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going.
Terry
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point.
Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups?
Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated. Carleton Stock St. Louis, MO _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
The three categories don’t seem to beexhaustive. I understood the establishment to be about preserving the statusquo, keeping things in being; and disestablishment to be the forces that seekto question and bring in the new. But what do you do about forces that appearto be establishment but are clearly corrupt and bent on hidden goals? Or the globalrole of the US with its exceptionalism and refusal to be part of any globalconsensus regarding issues like climate change, war crimes etc? Are they “establishment”?The categories don’t fit or clarify anything. On Friday, 31 May 2019, 04:23:22 GMT+8, Randy Williams via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Lots of good questions and insights in this dialogue. Back in the day we understood that the transestablishment dynamic was to hold the tension between the establishment and disestablishment, and all 3 were fairly identifiable. But in the era of Trump I really don’t know which he and his minions are; none of the above as far as I can discern. He is clearly not the transestablishment, and I can’t relate to him as either of the other 2 without myself becoming the polar opposite. I just don’t know how to play the transestablishment role in this situation unless I totally ignore Trump. That’s not only nearly impossible to do, but ignoring him may well be immoral.So that’s the point of my frustration.Randy On May 30, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Terry Bergdall via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course. I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now. For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going. Terry On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point. Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups? Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated.Carleton StockSt. Louis, MO_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
I don't think we ever said that the Establishment was not totally corrupt or "bent on hidden goals." In fact that's exactly the distortion of the social process that keeps the Establishment in power. Marshall Jones On Thursday, May 30, 2019, 6:37:28 PM EDT, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: The three categories don’t seem to beexhaustive. I understood the establishment to be about preserving the statusquo, keeping things in being; and disestablishment to be the forces that seekto question and bring in the new. But what do you do about forces that appearto be establishment but are clearly corrupt and bent on hidden goals? Or the globalrole of the US with its exceptionalism and refusal to be part of any globalconsensus regarding issues like climate change, war crimes etc? Are they “establishment”?The categories don’t fit or clarify anything. On Friday, 31 May 2019, 04:23:22 GMT+8, Randy Williams via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Lots of good questions and insights in this dialogue. Back in the day we understood that the transestablishment dynamic was to hold the tension between the establishment and disestablishment, and all 3 were fairly identifiable. But in the era of Trump I really don’t know which he and his minions are; none of the above as far as I can discern. He is clearly not the transestablishment, and I can’t relate to him as either of the other 2 without myself becoming the polar opposite. I just don’t know how to play the transestablishment role in this situation unless I totally ignore Trump. That’s not only nearly impossible to do, but ignoring him may well be immoral.So that’s the point of my frustration.Randy On May 30, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Terry Bergdall via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course. I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now. For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going. Terry On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point. Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups? Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated.Carleton StockSt. Louis, MO_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
So what useful light do these three categories provide then? On Friday, 31 May 2019, 07:44:03 GMT+8, W. J. <synergi@yahoo.com> wrote: I don't think we ever said that the Establishment was not totally corrupt or "bent on hidden goals." In fact that's exactly the distortion of the social process that keeps the Establishment in power. Marshall Jones On Thursday, May 30, 2019, 6:37:28 PM EDT, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: The three categories don’t seem to beexhaustive. I understood the establishment to be about preserving the statusquo, keeping things in being; and disestablishment to be the forces that seekto question and bring in the new. But what do you do about forces that appearto be establishment but are clearly corrupt and bent on hidden goals? Or the globalrole of the US with its exceptionalism and refusal to be part of any globalconsensus regarding issues like climate change, war crimes etc? Are they “establishment”?The categories don’t fit or clarify anything. On Friday, 31 May 2019, 04:23:22 GMT+8, Randy Williams via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Lots of good questions and insights in this dialogue. Back in the day we understood that the transestablishment dynamic was to hold the tension between the establishment and disestablishment, and all 3 were fairly identifiable. But in the era of Trump I really don’t know which he and his minions are; none of the above as far as I can discern. He is clearly not the transestablishment, and I can’t relate to him as either of the other 2 without myself becoming the polar opposite. I just don’t know how to play the transestablishment role in this situation unless I totally ignore Trump. That’s not only nearly impossible to do, but ignoring him may well be immoral.So that’s the point of my frustration.Randy On May 30, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Terry Bergdall via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course. I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now. For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going. Terry On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point. Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups? Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated.Carleton StockSt. Louis, MO_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Certainly not trying to identify the good guys and the bad guys and setting up a we/they perspective. They reflect dynamics that we can use to identify roles and possibilities in multiple situations. From: Dialogue [mailto:dialogue-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 8:41 PM To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net>; W. J. <synergi@yahoo.com> Cc: Dharmalingam Vinasithamby <dvinasithamby@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [Dialogue] The Transestablishment Stance So what useful light do these three categories provide then? On Friday, 31 May 2019, 07:44:03 GMT+8, W. J. <synergi@yahoo.com <mailto:synergi@yahoo.com> > wrote: I don't think we ever said that the Establishment was not totally corrupt or "bent on hidden goals." In fact that's exactly the distortion of the social process that keeps the Establishment in power. Marshall Jones On Thursday, May 30, 2019, 6:37:28 PM EDT, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: The three categories don’t seem to be exhaustive. I understood the establishment to be about preserving the status quo, keeping things in being; and disestablishment to be the forces that seek to question and bring in the new. But what do you do about forces that appear to be establishment but are clearly corrupt and bent on hidden goals? Or the global role of the US with its exceptionalism and refusal to be part of any global consensus regarding issues like climate change, war crimes etc? Are they “establishment”? The categories don’t fit or clarify anything. On Friday, 31 May 2019, 04:23:22 GMT+8, Randy Williams via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: Lots of good questions and insights in this dialogue. Back in the day we understood that the transestablishment dynamic was to hold the tension between the establishment and disestablishment, and all 3 were fairly identifiable. But in the era of Trump I really don’t know which he and his minions are; none of the above as far as I can discern. He is clearly not the transestablishment, and I can’t relate to him as either of the other 2 without myself becoming the polar opposite. I just don’t know how to play the transestablishment role in this situation unless I totally ignore Trump. That’s not only nearly impossible to do, but ignoring him may well be immoral.So that’s the point of my frustration. Randy On May 30, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Terry Bergdall via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course. I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now. For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going. Terry On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point. Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups? Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated. Carleton Stock St. Louis, MO _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: This transmission may contain confidential information belonging to the sender that is legally privileged and proprietary and may be subject to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. Thank you
I did t know we made judgments about the establishment one way or the other but rather just said it was the conserving dynamic. Randy
On May 30, 2019, at 6:43 PM, W. J. via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
I don't think we ever said that the Establishment was not totally corrupt or "bent on hidden goals." In fact that's exactly the distortion of the social process that keeps the Establishment in power. Marshall Jones
On Thursday, May 30, 2019, 6:37:28 PM EDT, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
The three categories don’t seem to be exhaustive. I understood the establishment to be about preserving the status quo, keeping things in being; and disestablishment to be the forces that seek to question and bring in the new. But what do you do about forces that appear to be establishment but are clearly corrupt and bent on hidden goals? Or the global role of the US with its exceptionalism and refusal to be part of any global consensus regarding issues like climate change, war crimes etc? Are they “establishment”? The categories don’t fit or clarify anything.
On Friday, 31 May 2019, 04:23:22 GMT+8, Randy Williams via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Lots of good questions and insights in this dialogue. Back in the day we understood that the transestablishment dynamic was to hold the tension between the establishment and disestablishment, and all 3 were fairly identifiable. But in the era of Trump I really don’t know which he and his minions are; none of the above as far as I can discern. He is clearly not the transestablishment, and I can’t relate to him as either of the other 2 without myself becoming the polar opposite. I just don’t know how to play the transestablishment role in this situation unless I totally ignore Trump. That’s not only nearly impossible to do, but ignoring him may well be immoral.So that’s the point of my frustration. Randy
On May 30, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Terry Bergdall via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course.
I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now.
For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going.
Terry
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point.
Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups?
Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated. Carleton Stock St. Louis, MO _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Not to mention the corruption and ‘bent on hidden goals’ dynamic in the disestablishment – and in all of us! Remember the wars within the SDS factions? Ever wonder why certain parties can’t get it together? I find the doctrine of ‘total depravity’ wonderfully comforting these days – all of us are screwed up. Deal with it! Of course, the next part of the doctrine (TULIP) is unconditional election – no matter how screwed up we are, we’re still responsible… Bill Schlesinger From: Dialogue [mailto:dialogue-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Randy Williams via Dialogue Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 9:04 PM To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Randy Williams <randycw1938@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Dialogue] The Transestablishment Stance I did t know we made judgments about the establishment one way or the other but rather just said it was the conserving dynamic. Randy On May 30, 2019, at 6:43 PM, W. J. via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: I don't think we ever said that the Establishment was not totally corrupt or "bent on hidden goals." In fact that's exactly the distortion of the social process that keeps the Establishment in power. Marshall Jones On Thursday, May 30, 2019, 6:37:28 PM EDT, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: The three categories don’t seem to be exhaustive. I understood the establishment to be about preserving the status quo, keeping things in being; and disestablishment to be the forces that seek to question and bring in the new. But what do you do about forces that appear to be establishment but are clearly corrupt and bent on hidden goals? Or the global role of the US with its exceptionalism and refusal to be part of any global consensus regarding issues like climate change, war crimes etc? Are they “establishment”? The categories don’t fit or clarify anything. On Friday, 31 May 2019, 04:23:22 GMT+8, Randy Williams via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: Lots of good questions and insights in this dialogue. Back in the day we understood that the transestablishment dynamic was to hold the tension between the establishment and disestablishment, and all 3 were fairly identifiable. But in the era of Trump I really don’t know which he and his minions are; none of the above as far as I can discern. He is clearly not the transestablishment, and I can’t relate to him as either of the other 2 without myself becoming the polar opposite. I just don’t know how to play the transestablishment role in this situation unless I totally ignore Trump. That’s not only nearly impossible to do, but ignoring him may well be immoral.So that’s the point of my frustration. Randy On May 30, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Terry Bergdall via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: Good question, Carleton. These are easy days for falling into despair which is what I often do. Beyond the “transestablishment” image. in my more positive moments, I also totally believe that an indirect focus on culture, rathere than direct efforts on the political or economic, still makes total sense. So how is it to be done? That’s the rub, of course. I personally have found inspiration in Margaret Wheatly who, I discovered, has had her own bouts with serious despair. She said she used to think it was a matter of enabling people to see the wisom in objective scientific data, especially in regards to climate change. Then she realized that people simply put on their blinders and deny it. She says such stubborn clinging to that which is passing away means we find ourselves living in a “sea of insanity.” Rather that beating our head against rocks trying to convince others to correctly read the signs of our times, she suggests that the job of awakened people (that might be my words not hers) is to create “islands of sanity” within that dominant “sea of insanity.” This is what give me courage to continue with my personal investment through time, energy, talents, and financial resources, etc., in endeavors like Acclerate 77 and its heir, the Chicago Sustainability Leaders Network, and the transformation of an old broken-down building, which marks its centennial in 2021, into the GreenRise Learning Laboratory, i.e., a demonstration. Local action has never been more urgently required than now. For what it’s worth, that's the story and active engagement that keeps me going. Terry On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM Carleton Stock via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> > wrote: I have been thinking a lot about this lately, especially with The Donald in the White House and Congress in dysfunctional mode. We know how to be the establishment dimension by supporting the status quo and we know how to be the disestablishment dimension by being critical of the establishment. Those of us on the Left do a lot of shouting at screens these days.....anger and frustration with the way things are going in the government. Personally, I have been more engaged in politics since November 2016 than I ever was, sometimes jumping into the mud pit to take on the other side. But what about the third dimension, the trans-establishment, that we talked so much about in the Institute over the past 50 or 60 years?! That was the correct stance we said. But what does it mean to be trans-establishment in the Trump Era when things we love and care about are being dismantled? I didn't worry too much during the Reagan or Bush years though they were conservative Republicans. We knew this too would pass, hopefully after the next election. But during the Trump years I worry about lots of things, not the least of which is the survival of democracy, the survival of life on the planet, White Supremacists in power, human rights for minorities and people of color, women, unconventional life-styles, etc. The list goes on and on but you get my point. Is the trans-establishment stance still viable in these times and if so, what's it mean to live it out as a Movement Network and in individual families and in faith communities and other groups? Any wisdom on this matter would be much appreciated. Carleton Stock St. Louis, MO _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: This transmission may contain confidential information belonging to the sender that is legally privileged and proprietary and may be subject to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. Thank you
participants (8)
-
Beret Griffith -
Bill Schlesinger -
Carleton Stock -
Dharmalingam Vinasithamby -
Jo Nelson -
Randy Williams -
Terry Bergdall -
W. J.