CONTENTS
LINKING THE NETWORK INTO THE WIDER LOCAL COMMUNITY
LACEWEB AND FUNCTIONAL MATRICES
THE LACEWEB AS A SOCIAL MOVEMENT
COMPARING LACEWEB AND NEW LATIN AMERICAN SOCIAL
MOVEMENTS
A MODEL FOR A 200 YEAR TRANSITION TO A HUMANE CARING EPOCH
WRITING BY OTHERS ABOUT WORLD ORDER TRANSITIONS
EXAMPLES OF RECENT LACEWEB ACTION
INDIGENOUS GLOBAL HUMANE DISCOURSE AND CONSCIOUSNESS RAISING
DIAGRAMS
Diagram 1 The Growth Curve of any System
PHOTOS
Photo 1 Tailings from Bougainville’s Panguna Mine
fills the valley with toxic sludge.
Photo 2 Spontaneous Dance as Change Process
SOCIOGRAMS
Sociogram 26
- Integrated network (above) Dispersed network (below)
Sociogram 32 - Rumors network linking very small
healing groups at different
locations
Sociogram 33 - A dispersed network with a nodal
link person in the middle
This, the
final Chapter commences with a sociogram based discussion of some of the
structures and processes associated with evolving, enabling, and supporting
Laceweb networks and the passing on of nurturing ways. A big picture overview
is then made including a comparison between Laceweb and new forms of Latin
American Social Movements. The Chapter then explores more of Neville’s own
writings about his macro-framework for the next 200 years. The Chapter
concludes with evolving action and future possibilities for the Laceweb Social
Movement.
This section uses qualitative
sociogram based research to map and encapsulate the transfer of
micro-experiences, understandings and healings within Laceweb networks. This
sociogram research draws upon my prolonged deep interviews with Neville along
with my action research (some of it jointly with Neville) in Laceweb contexts
from 1988 onwards. When I showed Neville that I was using sociograms in my
mapping and modeling of Laceweb process in 1993, Neville was delighted and drew
my attention to the Fraser House sociogram research into the friendship patterns among staff and patients in Fraser
house (Clark and Yeomans 1969).
As stated in other parts of this
Thesis, the processes outlined below are pervasively tentative. In much of
mainstream Western service based action, predictability and certainty is deemed
a requirement (Davis and Meyer 1999; Pascale,
Millemann et al. 2000). Laceweb tentativeness re-cognizes
the natural self-organizing nature of local action. Everything depends on local
healers. Nothing may happen unless
local healers want it. This is why
tentative language is used in describing linkings and exchange. Even in giving
examples it is understood that everything is cast as possibilities. Typically,
wellbeing enablers and natural nurturers are present among local Indigenous and
small minority communities. Both
Laceweb enablers or local Indigenous, small minority and other
intercultural people may identify local wellbeing nurturers and local enablers.
Locals seeking well-being support tend to use these local nurturers. Typically,
these local nurturers are ‘self starters’. The black disk symbol Sociogram 1 is
used to depict a local Indigenous, small minority or intercultural wellbeing
nurturer.
It is understood that these nurturers
are always living among other locals depicted as in sociograms 2
The crosshatched disk symbol
(Sociogram 3) is used to depict a non-local Laceweb enabler. Enablers, as their
name implies, enable others to help themselves towards wellbeing. Enablers may
share micro-experiences of healing ways and peacehealing that other Indigenous,
small minority or intercultural nurturers have found to work. Learning is
typically by personally experiencing using the healing way on self and others –
embodying.
The darker crosshatched disk symbol
(Sociogram.4) is used to depict a local Laceweb enabler
Typically, co-learning takes place. That is, as a person shares embodying
healing ways with others, the sharer also
receives insights and understandings back from these recipients; hence,
lines in the sociograms (as in Sociogram 5) represent a two-way flow of healing sharings. Typically what flows between
people are rumors – rumors of what works. Typically the ‘author’ of the rumor
is not disclosed. It does not matter.
The darker line between two locals in
Sociogram 5 represents a two-way flow
of healing sharings and that these sharings have been adapted to local healing ways. That is, non-local
enablers may share with locals many of the micro-experiences that they have
received from other places and cultures. The local may adapt these
micro-experiences to the local healing ways. They may then pass these
‘localized’ healings on to other locals.
Sociogram 6 depicts a non-local
enabler sharing healing ways with three local natural nurturers. The lighter line
depicts transfer between cultures. In this example, let’s assume
different micro-experiences are passed on to each of the three local natural
nurturers.
Let us say the three locals in
Sociogram 6 each receive 3 healing ways from the enabler. They then adapt them
to local healing ways. Sociogram 7
depicts these three locals then passing these micro-experiences on to each
other.
In this example, each local receives
six healing ways via other locals - that is, three from each of the other two
locals. They each receive three healing ways directly from the enabler. That
is, they are receiving more from locals
than from the enabler. Of course, each of these ways was first passed on by the
enabler. This process means that locals are receiving twice as much via other
locals and these other sharings are adapted to local way. Locals become the primary source for shared ways. The
enabler is in the background.
The
Sharing of Micro-experiences Among Locals - a Summary
The following Figure 1 lists Cultural
Keyline aspects of Laceweb action:
·
Locals
adapt micro-experiences to local nurturing ways.
·
Locals
pass on their new skills to each other.
·
In
this way locals become a resource to each other.
·
No
local becomes a ‘font of all wisdom’.
·
Locals
may begin to take on the enabler role.
·
Enablers
are not seen as the ‘font of all wisdom’ either.
·
As
the local healing network strengthens, the enabler becomes even more invisible.
·
Locals
take on or extend their local enabler roles
·
Locals
use naturalistic inquiry and iterative action research
·
Nurturing
takes place as people go about their everyday life
·
The
sharings are self-organizing
·
No
one is ‘in charge’, although everyone has a say
·
Shared
accountability for unfolding action
·
Global
multidirectional communicating and co-learning.
·
Sharing
micro-experiences and the healing/nurturing role
·
Nurturing
is an intrinsic aspect of cultural locality
·
Enacting
of local wisdoms about ‘what works’.
·
What
‘fits’ may be repeated, shared and consensually validated
·
Healing
actions are resonant with traditional Indigenous ways
·
The
use of organic processes - the survival of the fitting
·
Knowing
includes the ever tentative unfolding action
·
Organic
roles - orchestrating, enabling and the like
·
Healing
actions that work may be passed on as rumors that may be validated by action
Figure 1 Cultural Keyline Aspects of Laceweb
Action
Sociogram 8 depicts one of the three
locals linking and sharing with two other local natural nurturers.
Sociograms 9, 10 and 11 depict the
progressive building up of a chain of linked people with sharings going back
and forth along the chain. This is isomorphic with what Neville was doing in
Mackay and Townsville, and in a more sustained form in the Atherton Tablelands
Region inland from Cairns as well as in the Darwin Top end. Recall that Neville
said that he had learnings from those with whom he passed on healing ways -
co-learnings (Yeomans 1990).
Sociogram 10
Sociogram 11
In time, more and more skills are
generated in the healing network and passed on to others. The role of enabler
continues to become more invisible.
In Sociograms 12 and 13 the local who
commenced the chain makes links firstly with the second and then the fourth
person in the chain. This may have the effect of enriching the speed, flow and
feedback of healing ways micro-experience. Note also that in Sociogram 13 a
link has also been made between one of the original three locals and the new
local not in the chain. The healing network is beginning to expand in mutual
support.
Sociogram 12
Sociogram 13
Further links have been made in
Sociogram 14 so that now, the local that started the chain is directly linked
to every member of the chain. The chain is also linked into the original three
via the other new member. Notice that the enabler’s links to the three continue
with the lighter links signifying that the micro-experiences the enabler is
sharing originate outside the local culture. The enabler is in a two-way
co-mentoring/co-learning flow and is receiving feedback from the three locals about
how the healing ways they are receiving from the enabler are being adapted
locally.
Sociogram 14
Sociogram 15
In Sociogram 15, the fourth person in
the chain has linked with the first and second person in the chain.
These further links may have the
potential to:
·
increase
and strengthen the diversity in healing ways as people share their differing
capacities
·
increase
the intrinsic bonding within the network
·
increase
the availability of potential support
·
increase
the store of micro-experience in the network
·
increase
the potential for self organizing in the network
·
increase
the potential for emergence in the network
In Sociogram 16 the natural nurturer
who has been evolving the network is depicted as evolving into a local enabler.
This enabler role emerges over time. Further linkings have been made. The
expanding network has potential for both unifying experience and enrichment
through diversity.
Sociogram 16
Now the ‘web’ like structure of the
linkings is emerging. Another term for this is ‘functional matrix’. Recall that
the word ‘matrix’ is from the Greek word having the following meanings:
·
the
womb
·
place
of nurturing
·
a
place where anything is generated or developed
·
the
formative part from which a structure is produced
·
intercellular
substance
·
a
mold
·
type
or die in which anything is cast or shaped
·
a
multidimensional network
Latest findings in neuro-biology hint
that there is a massive information carrying capacity in the cytoskeleton – the
very material that makes up cell walls in the human body. Similarly these
Laceweb webworks are vibrant experience exchange networks and an extension of
the connexity work Neville did at the psychobiological – psychosocial interface
in Fraser House.
When Neville got started in Mackay,
Townsville, Cairns, the Atherton Tablelands and around Darwin, Neville was the
one initiating almost all of the linking. He said that this was a very slow
process. In these examples the enabler has only made links with the original
three locals. It may be that further
links are made between the enabler and others in the network. It is not however necessary. In some contexts
the links between locals may increase ahead of the links between locals and
non-local enablers.
It will be noted that by Sociogram 16,
the outside enabler may have become a relatively invisible figure. This may be
the experience in SE Asia and Oceania contexts. The non-local enabler may
continue to share micro-experiences with the original locals. By now most of
the healing ways may be received from locals.
In the contexts that Neville energized
in the Australian Far North most of the natural nurturers had a close connexion
to Neville.
Healing micro-experiences may be
combined and adapted as appropriate to people, place and context. Over 30 years
of experience has demonstrated that these processes may be self-enriching.
People may be intuitively innovative. The local ‘seed-bank’ of healing stories
is soon replanted and bearing fruit.
Sociogram 17
To go back in time, while the local
network depicted in the preceding series of sociograms has been emerging, the
enabler may have been enabling, supporting, mentoring/co-mentoring and linking
with one or more other enablers who are in turn linking with other locals not
known to the local network mentioned above.
Sociogram 18 depicts such a linking.
While this second enabler is also linking with three locals, it may be any
small number. Typically, these linkings start out small.
Sociogram 18
Sociogram 19 to 24 depict the evolving
of this second network. The sequence may differ, though many of the
characteristics of the first network emerge. Linked chains of people may
emerge. Further linking strengthens the number of people available to each
other for mutual sharing and support.
Sociogram 19
Sociogram 20
Sociogram 21
Sociogram 22
Sociogram 23
Sociogram 24
Sociogram 25 depicts later links being
made between the two local networks and the local enabler in the first network
links the two local networks. As these links are extended, the two networks may
merge to be one expanded network.
Sociogram 25
There is always the possibility that
local healers may position themselves such that they generate links to other
local healers without linking the locals to each other. In this way any local
doing this may become the one all the others rely on. Sociogram 26 shows the
original network of eight locals and underneath, another eight locals where
seven locals only have one link and that link is with the local in the center.
A moments reflection may give a feel for the difference between the original
network and this later form of linking, what has been described as integrated
and dispersed networks (Cutler 1984, p. 253-266).
Sociogram 26
- Integrated network (above) Dispersed network (below)
This second pattern may spread healing
ways. This second pattern (the dispersed network with a nodal person in the
middle linking rumor lines is prevalent throughout the Laceweb in SE Asia where
the safety and integrity of the natural nurturers is under threat. This is
discussed later.
Experience has shown that the
integrated network with the multiple cross linkings has many advantages such
as:
·
Members
have multiple people to call on for support
·
The
flow of information tends to be faster and richer
·
The
diversity enriches the micro-experiences being shared
·
It
is possible to get cross-checks on others’ outcomes
So far we have only depicted the links
between enablers (non-local and local) and local healers and nurturers.
Typically, these local natural nurturers are regularly being approached by
local friends and family for nurturing. Sociogram 27 depicts three other locals
(shown as the striated circles) that have links with one of the healers.
Typically, each of the healers has a number of locals that seek out their
support from time to time. As healers pass on healing ways to locals that
enable them to help themselves, often these other locals emerge as healers and
start to merge with the wider healing network.
Sociogram 27
Enablers are also part of an enabling
network. Sociogram 28 depicts the original enabler’s links to the Laceweb
enabler network.
Sociogram 28
After a time, the network may start to
link more widely into the wider local community and extend through a number of
surrounding villages (settlements/towns) with links to more distant places. The
healing network starts to enable self-healing among the local communities. More
and more people discover that they can change their wellbeing as depicted in
Sociogram 29. Nurturers begin to
identify other nurturers living in their area with whom they have not yet
established links.
Sociogram 29
After a time, whole villages
(settlements/towns) may enter cultural healing action as depicted in Sociogram 30. The triangular symbol represents a
dwelling and the three rings of dwellings depict three villages located in
reasonable close walking distance from each other. After conversations in
Cairns with a Bougainvillian living in Bougainville during the Bougainville
Conflict, he said that how I described Laceweb action was very resonant with
Bougainville local ways, and that when he went back he would keep and eye open
for the natural nurturers. A few months later I received a message through a
Bougainville person, Alex Dawia from this person. The message was, ‘The
nurturer women networks are alive and well in the hills around Arawa. in
Bougainville’.
Sociogram 30
Note the differing patterns of
transfer depicted in Sociogram 30.
At
the top right:
·
an
integrated support network
·
an
isolated link
·
a
dispersed chain linking 5 people
At
bottom right:
·
one
nodal person is a source for five separate others in a dispersed network
After a time, locals may evolve as
enablers and so further assist in the spreading of cultural healing action
At other times there may be campout
festivals, celebrations, and gatherings of enablers, nurturers and other locals
from a number of villages (settlements/towns). These may last for days with
diverse and spontaneous cultural healing action occurring. An example of this
was the Small Island Coastal and Estuarine People Gathering Celebration in 1994
(Roberts and Widders 1994). Note that it called a ‘Gathering
Celebration’. Sociogram 31 depicts the network shown in Sociogram 30 after they
have gathered together in a healing festival (healfest). Typically such
gatherings create opportunities for a sudden large increase in linking. You may
note that the people in the lower right who had relied on the central person
have now met up with each other and formed into a mutually supporting net and
that this net has linked with the enabler to their left and into that little
network. The network on the upper left has also made further linkings and one
person has made many linkings throughout the other networks. All of this
linking may hold forth promise for further enriching.
.
Sociogram 31
All of the
foregoing depicts
the forms of networks Neville was evolving in the Australia Top End. Sometimes
an intercultural enabler may set up links with healers who do not want
information about themselves, their links, or their Laceweb involvement known
to anyone else. This is because healing in some contexts may be a very
subversive activity – for example, during the decades that Indonesia had
control of East Timor, militia were systematically used to terrorize and
traumatize the local population for social control. possibly killing around
150,000 people out of a population of approximately 700,000 (Mares 2001). In this context, healing becomes a
subversive activity and hence healers may be at high risk and specifically
targeted for elimination.
An enabler may set up links with a
number of these ‘anonymous’ healers. Each of these may have ‘trust’ links with
between one or as many as four or five people along ‘rumor lines’. Sociogram 32
depicts such a rumor line where each of the link-people has a small group of
healers they know in their local area. Each of these sets of other local
healers is not known to any of the others in the rumor line.
Sociogram 32 - Rumors network linking very small
healing groups at different locations
Considerable portions of the Laceweb
throughout the SE Asia Oceania Region take this form. The larger black circles
depict the healing people who pass on the healing rumors backwards and forwards
to healers in other localities. There
are small groups of healers in the different locations. Number 1 is a nodal
person with links to other parts of the Laceweb as shown in Sociogram 33.
Number 1 knows 2, 3, 4 and 5. Numbers 4, 5 and 6 know each other. Numbers 6, 7
and 8 know each other. Typically, no one knows more than 4 or 5 people in the
chain. In the Laceweb there can be very long chains where healers know only
between two and five people in the chain. In this respect the network is very
similar to neural networks. Also like the brain, information may travel very
quickly.
Note that the small groups at
different locations may have different forms of linking with each other. It is
possible that these little local networks may extend as per the processes
outlined earlier in this section. At any point in the chain and from any person
in the local small network, rumors can be passed on to natural nurturers in
other localities and hence the network spreads.
Sociogram 33 - A dispersed network with a nodal
link person in the middle
The healer in the middle in Sociogram
33 is a nodal person and a key energizer in passing rumors from one segment of
a network into many other rumor lines linking local small networks. Often a
nodal person is able to pass on the healing ways from one cultural rumor line
into the rumor line of another culture. Any of the little local networks may
have potential to expand in the local area by locating other natural nurturers
or by so enriching others in their self-healing that they also become enablers
and natural nurturers. The above sociogram is idealized in the linear nature of
some of the lines. This was only for ease of drawing. In practice, the links
jump between different places in the region and a healing rumor may start in
the Southern part of Siberia, pass to the Deccan Plateau in India, jump down to
Australia and then pass out in many rumor lines all over SE Asia and Oceania, arriving
back in Siberia for the first time a few hundred kilometers from where it
started.
While these linkings are between
caring enablers and natural nurturers Neville spoke of there been many links
‘falling out’. Misunderstandings can cause people to sever links. Neville would
from time to time tell me not to contact certain ones till he lets me know
things have been ‘cleared up’. I also was rejected by some and after about
seven years re-established good relations. It is not all peace and love. As intimated
before, Neville and I both experienced enabling work at times as emotionally
exhausting.
Neville indicated ambivalence about
the nature of the Laceweb in saying ‘whatever it is’ in his Inma poem included
at the start of this research. Inma is another name for Laceweb.
There seems
to be a new spirituality going
around - or a philosophy - or is it an ethical
and moral movement, or a feeling?
Anyway, this Inma religion or whatever it
is - what does it believe in?
Neville was recognizing that
attempting to categorizing the Laceweb is problematic. The Laceweb is not an
organization in the familiar sense. Laceweb is a loosely integrated functional
matrix of functional matrices (holons in holarchy). As a functional matrix
structure, the Laceweb has no central ‘organization’ that any one can ‘belong
to’ or ‘re-present’. Recall that the psycho-social structure and processes
where entangled in Fraser House just as the process of spiraling water
structures the whirlpool. Similarly, the Laceweb is not ‘organized’ into an
‘organization’. Its structure is process energy in action - resonant with the
whirlpools structure that only exists as water in process in a vortex. Just as
the whirlpool is entangled in the water process so the Laceweb’s tenuous
structure is sustained as self-organising human energy in action.
Some indigenous and small minority
people can have as much difficulty coming to terms with this aspect of the
Laceweb as mainstream Western people. While spurning the idea that any one
could represent (re-present) them, Indigenous and small minority people
sometimes expect non-local Laceweb enablers to be ‘from’ or be part of some
organization and to re-present it. It typically takes a while to recognize and
understand the organic nature of the Laceweb. Often it is a few of the women
elders who recognize it first and say that Laceweb action is like their old
ways. Recall that when I outlined grassroots Laceweb networking to a
Bougainvillian with senior management experience in Australian mining
companies, he was able to report upon his return to Bougainville that the
‘nurturer women networks are alive and well in the hills around Arawa. in
Bougainville’. They were already there, though he had never noticed them
before.
On one occasion I had
dialogue extending over four days at a ConFest with a Bougainvillian person
with a Masters degree in Clinical Psychology from an American University. He
was one of three Bougainvillians who had traveled down to see me and experience
ConFest. One was a member of the PNG National Parliament representing
Bougainville. The other was Alex Dawia. Alex, the Clinical Psychologist and
myself shared conversations about Laceweb and socio-medicine. The three of us
co-enabled many hours of workshops. One workshop explored resonances between
Laceweb mediation therapy and the Bougainville tradition of having whole
village to whole village mediation sessions. Around 80 people attended this
workshop. Alex divided workshop attendees into two groups of ‘villagers from
two metaphorical villages in conflict and used real-play to enact a traditional
Bougainvillian whole-village to whole-village mediation session. It was potent.
At the end of the three days of discussions and workshops I
asked the Clinical Psychologist how he saw Laceweb Way resonating in the
Bougainville context. He started by saying that it may be introduced as a
service delivered by centralized bureaucracies. During all the discussions
about ‘self help’ over the three days I had not been aware that he had been
constantly converting what I was saying into ‘service delivery’. I said in
response that ‘service delivery’ was not the way Laceweb worked (Yeomans, Widders et al. 1993). I told him that my understanding was that Laceweb way is
local natural nurturers mutually helping themselves. It was not service through
service delivery people as intermediaries. His face showed sudden recognition
and he beamed. He said, ‘You REALLY mean that it is really
self-organizing; that things just happen because of local energy,
and the enablers support. That is truly extra-ordinary!’ All through the three
days he had been hearing what I was saying and then attempting to squeeze the
ideas into the conventional paradigm of Western service delivery. He then went
on and on about how this self-organizing way would be very appropriate
in Bougainville. I sense that internal decolonisation is a key aspect of
understanding the Bougainville Crisis.
Turner and Killian define a social
movement as:
‘A collectivity acting with some
continuity to promote or resist change in the society or group of which it is a
part. As a collectivity a movement is a group with indefinite or shifting
membership and with leadership whose position is determined more by the informal
response of adherents than by formal procedures for legitimating authority (Turner and Killian 1972)
Laceweb is a social movement within
the terms of that definition. Laceweb has its origins in Australia over forty
years ago and is spreading throughout the SE Asia Oceania Australasia Region.
Another factor in the forming of the Laceweb is that it has been spreading
among healers and natural nurturers within the most marginalized of people in
the SE Asia, Oceania, Australasia region - the disadvantaged Indigenous and
micro-minority people. Natural nurturers are already present in these
grassroots local communities. That they are already there naturally is
resonant with the Yeomans using local natural resources on their farms. After I
outlined the Laceweb Way during discussions with a person from East Timor in
July 2000, and a person from Aceh in Indonesia in 2003, they both confirmed
that natural nurturer networks aleady existed in their respective communities
back home. Another resonance with Keyline is that the Laceweb is
self-organizing in fostering emergent properties. The only non-local people
with other backgrounds who have been linked into the movement are healers who
are fully resonant with Laceweb ways. I gather there are only a handful of
these people. Typically, non-resonant people are not in the least bit
interested. This minimizes interference from people who would attempt to
subvert the Laceweb way.
A majority of people linked with the
Laceweb are consumed with survival from one day to the next. The Laceweb, as
‘local action’, is just local healers going about their everyday life using
practical wisdom based on local knowings - nothing special - though Neville
passionately believed that this ‘nothing special’ may have the potential to
change the World. Every now and then they may have an opportunity to pass on a
story or two. Laceweb ‘stuff’ does not take them away from the other parts of
their life; it is their life. The
Laceweb is simultaneously very fragile and very strong. Following Tikopia, a
feature of the Laceweb is ‘passing on a mountain trail’ networking. In this the
Laceweb is very resonant with ‘sitting on the train’ informal networking
mentioned by Ireland discussed below; that is, natural nuturers are embedded
within and between local communities and involve socio-cultural action and
interaction in micro-aspects of community life.
In their local communities, other
locals may not know nurturers as ‘Laceweb’ people. Even the local Laceweb
people may not see themselves as ‘Laceweb’ people. Laceweb is very thin on the
ground. In some small remote communities there may be a few ‘Laceweb’ people
and paradoxically, the Laceweb as ‘social movement’ is typically not their scene. For them, Neville’s
macro foci linking into adapting models from the World Order Model Projects may
seem scary and alien (refer later). An international focus may seem alien. Some
Aboriginal natural nurturers have shrunk from any conversation about linking
with Indigenous healers in SE Asia, especially those who may be on a
government’s assassination list. Terry Widders has written that Indigenous
people in the Region generally live in 'contested geographies'. There are
issues of land rights and conflict over resources, for example mines, dams, forests
and fishing. Global Capitalism pressures and seduces cooperation from national
governments to the detriment and potential destruction of the local
Indigenous/micro-minority people. James Speth, a United Nations Development
Program administrator believes, ‘the world has become more economically
polarised’ and that ‘if present trends continue, economic disparities between
industrial and developing nations will move from inequitable to inhuman (Speth 1996; Widders 1997).’
Photo 1 Tailings from Bougainville’s Panguna
Mine fills the valley
with toxic sludge.
Acording to Widders these
disadvantaged people face issues of communal survivability in the physical,
psychosocial and cultural senses. Diverse cultures face issues of their
survive-ability as cultural localities/cultural groups (both dispersed and
compact) and as territorial groups in relation to cultural localities, regions,
environments, and relationship to place. There is also the loss of 'habitat' for hunter gathers and swidden
gardeners (the short-term use of relocated small gardens). With all the above,
they daily face the economics of survivability as individuals and communities (Widders 1997).
Within the Indigenous/micro-minority
communities in the Region there may be energy resisting the forces creating the
issues outlined above. However, within the Laceweb social movement it is
‘healing’ that is the central focus and potential for social transformation,
not ‘power’ or ‘resistance’. The Laceweb functions at the socio-cultural level.
Laceweb action is for healing, for
friendly relating, - quality living, psychosocial wellbeing (being well),
celebrating and nourishing in all its forms. As well, it is for a culture (as in ‘way of life’) that
meets the needs of the locals. This is very ‘Yin’ in focus.
The Laceweb is not ‘against’ anything - there is no ‘Yang’
element. It does not want to ‘preclude’, or ‘resist’, or ‘attack’. This appears
to be a big difference between the Laceweb and the new Latin American social
movements discussed below. When warrior types within some Indigenous groups
discovered that Neville was a psychiatrist/barrister, they invariably sought to
have him take up their fight with
authorities. Neville always refused.
In a conversation with Neville in May 1999 he said, ‘Healing is the ultimate
subversive act. There is nothing so subversive as healing to ‘warriors’ within
an aggressive type of system, as it threatens their value system’. Laceweb ‘Yin
healing’ is all the more subversive for its subtleness. The quiet and
unobtrusive Yin healing within the Laceweb Yin ‘equality reality’ is typically
not noticed, or if noticed is dismissed as weak, contradictory, and irrational
by the ‘warrior’ system. In Fraser House, half were aggressive under-controlled
over-active warrior types and they mellowed. Even if Yin healers are not in the
least bit interested in politics, their healing may be profoundly subversive
and in the medium to long term (perhaps hundreds of years) may have major
consequences for political change.
The view that appears prevalent within
the Laceweb is that country-based governments, at national, state or local
levels, are not relevant to the movement’s actions. Recall that Neville viewed
them as already dinosaurs in a 500-year timeframe. No evidence has been found
that the Laceweb movement as ‘movement’ has ever accepted government funding.
Yang activists in social movements in
the Region fighting the status quo, are also warriors. Healing equally
threatens their value system. They also dismiss healing as weak and
ineffectual. Yang activists may become interested in the subversive
consequences of healing if they do perceive this, but not the healing per se -
its just not ‘their thing’. They can change – like the former ‘bank robber’
who, with over 20 years of criminology research behind him since leaving Fraser
House, was researching healing ways at Petford when I met him in 1992.
People within the Laceweb typically do
not see themselves as in any way political. They are healers and enablers of
others’ healing. Those within the Laceweb who do take the macro view of the
Laceweb, typically see any wider transformative potential of the Movement as
possibly happening in a few hundred years time. Some fully recognize the
considerable potential of the Laceweb as a long-term political change agent,
and that this potential lies in the possibility of producing change rooted in
healing everyday behavior and action. Some are holistically strategic from the
micro to the macro. They persist.
Throughout parts of the Region Laceweb
linking operates on a ‘need-to-know’ basis. Many of the people involved want to
keep a very low profile. Put bluntly, some healers are wanted dead by
Governments in the areas they live in. As stated, healing may be the ultimate
subversive act. Someone else revealing a Laceweb person’s details to another
person without that person’s permission would mean that the link with the
betrayer would be severed permanently. This limited knowing of who is involved
is not a weakness. It is a strength. It is isomorphic with neural networks
where only four adjacent connections are typically activated as things fly
along the neural pathways. No one can find out the ‘member list’ in order to
undermine the movement. The list does not exist. No one knows more than a few
of the others involved.
Many Laceweb people are riddled with
dysfunction and traumatized. Fraser House, Fraser House Outreach and Laceweb
have demonstrated that the traumatized do have immense potential, and can act
well in self and mutual help. Other Laceweb people from extremely remote places
may be ‘really together’ people. Their integrity, articulateness, profound
caring and wisdom may be far and away from any notions of ‘rudimentary’. For example, a number of a
small group of women from a remote Aboriginal community attending the Small
Island Coastal and Estuarine People Gathering in 1994 had university degrees
and one had completed her Masters in community development. They had ‘Talent’
with a capital ‘T’ in First World terms. They engaged in loving wisdom in
action grounded in a 30,000 plus tradition of co-existing well with all life on
Earth.
Laceweb nurturing is freely given;
healing and wellbeing ways are past on freely. Healing and wellbeing ways are
not turned into commodities to be appropriated, bought, packaged and sold. Ways
do not arrive as ‘owned by somebody’ or labeled as nouns. They arrive as
micro-experiences to be freely shared, experienced, embodied and passed on to
others freely. ‘Healing ways’ may arrive as accounts of micro-experiences -
little bits of behavior. Rumors may be carried within stories, and stories may
be carried within rumors. Typically, the original ‘source’ of a rumor does not
arrive with the rumor and is undiscoverable, and that this is the case, is of
little account. The rumor may, and typically does, cross ethnic and cultural
boundaries. It may arrive with little of other people’s ‘culture’ attached. Any
remnants of ‘culture’ that are attached may, and typically are, removed in the
local adapting and testing. Rumors may be modified and changed both in their
testing and in their passing on. Rumors may have a malleable life of their own
and may return to their source unrecognizable and exquisitely relevant and
enriched for the same, and or differing needs. Rumors may travel with values
attached or embedded. Values may be enriched along the way. Some action values
may be loving, caring, nurturing, being humane, being well, playing, dancing,
singing, music making, drumming, celebrating, peacehealing, as well as
respecting and celebrating diversity (Yeomans 1992; Yeomans 1992). The rumors values networking may be
both morphous (having form) and amorphous (without form) in some respects,
contexts, times and places. Recall that Neville believed that changing values
is a potent way to change culture. For example, in 1994 the rumors values
network took tangible and palpable form as cultural locality at the Small
Island Coastal and Estuarine People Gathering Celebration in Far North
Queensland. During this Gathering, morphous networking through both amorphous
and morphous healing storytelling abounded.
The German word ‘schien’ is apropos -
as in ‘appearance’ (Pelz 1974, p. 88-89, 115). Some sparkle may attract ‘like
people’ who like what they see, hear and feel. Appearance may reveal, as Jesus
did with parables and metaphors. Those unlike will not like, and for them,
appearances may deceive rather than reveal, so that the rumor, ideas and action
may be not noticed, or dismissed as irrelevant or moronic. As the Bible writer
Mark wrote (Chapter 4, Verse 9-10):
‘And
Jesus concluded, ‘Listen then if you have ears!’ When Jesus was alone, some of
those who had heard him came to him and asked him to explain the parables.’ Jesus said to these that they had been given
the secrets. Others on the outside would hear the parables and look at them and
not see, and listen and not hear.
Jesus spoke of becoming ‘fishers of
men’. In today’s terms he was talking about networking with resonant people -
on worker’s trains, or on Tikopia’s mountain pathways, or in Fraser House or in
dispersed urban and remote area networking.
The Laceweb movement has created
public spaces for itself by spreading in rural and remote regions where space
for healing possibilities may be readily available. Typically, the Laceweb way
is to go out of one’s way not to
attract attention to one’s self. That the Laceweb is difficult to perceive is a
blessing. Those who are resonant with the Laceweb tend to be able to readily
perceive it. Warriors may be looking directly at the Laceweb and not see it.
The Laceweb appears to have a
considerable number of participants. However, there is only a small number at
any one location and people typically only know a few links between these small
groups. Neville said that rumor has it that the Laceweb linking has reached
natural nurturers within over half of the Indigenous groups in the SE Asia
Oceania Australasia Region and that around half of the World’s Indigenous
peoples are in the Region, that is, the Laceweb has spread to having links
within a quarter of the Worlds Indigenous peoples.
The Laceweb is informal throughout; it
is neither top-down nor bottom up - rather, it’s a flat local and laterally
linked functional matrixing or networking. Large segments may have no sense of
being in any way in a ‘social movement’ or ‘structure’. To reiterate prior
comments on denominalizing, Laceweb is more ‘energy in action’ than ‘thing’;
like the slogan says, ‘The best things in life are not things.’ It is
‘networking’ rather than ‘network’.
The Laceweb has both individual and
consensual collective decision making among local people at the local level,
and/or actions emerge out of individual and shared energy – where what to do
emerges as shared understanding and mutual commitment to action rather than
formal or even informal decision processes. A person who can read the group
mood may say for example, ‘So we all gather at sunrise and erect a footbridge
at the narrows tomorrow.’ If when he or she gets there no one else turns up,
the mood was misread. If the bridge is already under way that person did read
the mood. The person who reads the mood of the community regularly emerges as a
special person.
The Laceweb has no leaders, or rather,
everyone involved is a leader. Typically, there is no social distance between
active people at the local level. People from one locality tend to only know up
to four sequential links in the non-local networking with increasing social
distance between the more remote links. Beyond that, social distance is total -
they just don’t know others in the Laceweb networking at all. No one is a ‘member’ and there is no
leadership of the Movement processing. While local people may take the lead in
healing action, they are not leaders ‘over’ anyone.
The Laceweb focuses on taking action
to heal local needs and consensually validating what works. What works may
informally become local ‘policy’, defined as, ‘that which works’. What works
may be passed on as ‘rumor’ for others to check. There is little focus on grand
theory or macro ‘aims’. The Laceweb follows the continuous prolonged action
research model and naturalistic enquiry. Any theory that does emerge comes from
action that works. Action is prompted/guided by local wisdom about ‘what is
missing in our well-being’ and received rumors about what has worked for
others. The Laceweb way is ‘action’ not ‘talk about action’. It is ‘experience’
rather than ‘talking about experience’. Stories tell of action that worked or
possibilities for action, not ideas and theories. Receiving rumors as stories
may be profoundly healing (Gordon 1978).
The Laceweb is spreading intentionally
in rural and remote places - away from mainstream negating energies. From deep
within it’s own Zen-like logic, the Laceweb’s weakness is it’s strength.
‘Inefficiency’ is a mainstream ‘quantitative’ concept that has little
relevance. ‘Inefficiency’ may be very efficient from a different
viewpoint. For example, Fraser House jobs being done by those who could not
do them was extremely inefficient in terms of job completion. However,
experience is the best teacher and the process was very efficient at
transforming patients and that was the central focus. Seeming contradictions
typically come from perceiving from the single logical level. The Laceweb is
both simple and complex and operates at a number of logical levels (Bateson 1973). From Laceweb’s multiple
perspectives, seeming contradictions and paradoxes may disappear.
Rowan Ireland has written a paper
titled, ‘Sitting on Trains’. It is placed in the shantytowns on the outskirts
of Săo Paulo in Brazil (Ireland 1998). These were ‘home’ to a social
movement that Ireland had been researching in the late eighties. Central to that social movement’s aims were
improving their local habitat. Ireland writes of his returning to investigate
the social movement ten years later. The first part of his article paints a
very gloomy picture. ‘I had lost sight of my social movement. I would find
myself recording only happenings of chaos, breakdown and anomic
disintegration’. He describes conditions as ‘pathetic’. The destitute were so
concerned with sheer survival that there was no energy for any ‘social
movement’. In contrast to ongoing academic writing of how social movements
operate, Ireland describes his ‘movement’ as, ‘a nightmare story.’
During this revisit to his old
research place Ireland had been regularly traveling backwards and forwards by
train along the 55 kilometers between the out-lying shantytowns and Săo Paulo.
While so traveling he had been engrossed in his academic reflections as to what
could have killed the social movement he had been studying. Then there is this
delightful moment on the train where Ireland suddenly looks up and sees his
social movement. He is surrounded by it. Instead of it being dead as he
thought, it is very much alive and well in this public space of the peasants’
train. Like Big Group at Fraser House that train was cultural locality
concentrate. This is resonant with Neville’s use of ‘public place and space’ in
Fraser House. Ireland had been blind to what was surrounding him. Now before
him he suddenly sees a profusion of zest and community, avid conversations,
discussion circles and debates, orators talking on all manner of subjects, the
repartee of shoulder-to-shoulder hecklers and the belly laughs of the crowd as
audience. There were also poets, musicians, jugglers and other buskers -
beggars’ banquets and a thriving paupers’ market extending even to
coals-roasted peanuts from the kerosene tin – Neville’s cultural healing
action. What Ireland describes has resonance with SE Asia Oceania Australasia
Indigenous people’s use of sociomedicine in everyday contexts. Here on the
train, alive and well, Ireland finds what he calls ongoing ‘invention’ and
‘structuration’ - change potential bubbling within everyday socio-cultural
life. For Ireland it was his social movement, but in a different form. Perhaps
this form had existed all along and he like other theorists just hadn’t seen
it. Among the human energy on the train all manner of happenings and ideas were
being passed on as stories and rumors - fragments of subjective experience were
being melded for the possibilities of enriching life.
What had prevented Ireland seeing all
of this immediately? New forms of social
movements were emerging in Latin America and they were not where theorists were
looking. These movements were not taking the familiar form, and hence they had
gone un-noticed by social theorists. In introducing these ‘behavior on trains’
insights, Ireland refers to Evers’ writings on new social movements in Latin
America (Evers 1985). Evers suggests that the ‘innovative
capacity of these new social movements appears less in their political
potential than in their ability to create and experiment with different forms
of social relations in everyday life’. Ireland writes that ‘the astonishing
sociability of Brazilians appears to flourish just when it is assumed dead on
the mean streets’. From Evers - ‘By creating spaces for the experience of more collective social relations, of a
less market-oriented consciousness, of less alienated expressions of culture
and of different basic values and assumptions, these movements represent a constant
injection of an alien element within the social body of peripheral capitalism
(my italics) (Evers, 1985). This resonates with Neville’s 1971 paper on Mental
Health and Social Change where he spoke that in times of social transition, ‘an
epidemic of experimental organizations develop. Many die away but those most
functionally attuned to future trends survive and grow’ (Yeomans 1971a; Yeomans 1971b). Like the new Latin American
movements, the Laceweb’s transformatory potential is at the psycho-socio-cultural
level. To paraphrase and adapt Ireland, the Laceweb focuses on healing socio-cultural
and socio-psychic patterns of everyday social relations penetrating the
microstructure of local communities.
A similarity with the Latin American
New Social Movements is that for many, the Laceweb appears ‘weak, implausible,
fragmented, disorganized, discontinuous, crippled, and contradictory.’ That it
may appear this way to mainstream people is a strength. The movement may be
ignored as inconsequential by those who may otherwise seek to harm. Laceweb
people tend to immediately sense people who want to come in and ‘rectify’ the
supposed weaknesses. There is little scope for intrusion by elements who may
seek to transform the Laceweb towards mainstream ways. Typically, any attempt
to do this is rejected by Laceweb people. If outsiders do manage to transform
bits of the Laceweb, it typically relates to only a very small part of the
network, and the other parts of the Laceweb sever working ties with this
transformed part. Put simply, that part ceases to be Laceweb.
Like Ireland, Evers also seeks to
identify aspects of new social movements in Latin America. He suggests firstly, that “political power’
as a central category of social science is too limiting a conception for the
understanding of new social movements.’ Rather, ‘their potential is mainly not
one of power, but of renewing socio-cultural and socio-psychic patterns of
everyday social relations penetrating the micro-structure of society’. To
express it in different words, ‘the transformatory potential within new social
movements is not political, but socio-cultural’. All this again resonates with
Neville’s frameworks as well as Fraser House and its outreach. It is also
resonant with ancient indigenous sociomedicine for social cohesion.
Evers identifies this shift from
preoccupation with ‘power’ in the Latin American context. ‘It is my impression
that the ‘new’ element within new social movements consists precisely in
creating bits of social practice in which power is not central; and that we
will not come to understand this potential as long as we look upon it from the
viewpoint of power apriori.’ New
social movements are evolving relations other than ‘power relations’ and
‘market relations’. The dominant culture has the base of it’s power embedded in
modes of perception and orientations, as well as beliefs and values that are
generally operating below awareness on the socio-cultural and socio-physical
level of everyday life (Kuhn 1962; Kuhn 1996).
The new social movements are a significant danger to dominant systems,
says Evers, precisely because of their potential to undermine this very base.
The new social movements tend to put into question the ‘unconscious automatism
of obedience’ within mainstream at the socio-cultural and psycho-socio-physical
levels.
While this ‘danger’ to mainstream
could be in the long term, it is this potential to produce change, ‘rooted in
the everyday practice and in the corresponding basic orientations at the very
foundations of dominant society’, which may prove to be the source of the most
profound change potential of these new movements. They may turn out to be more
political in their consequences than movements in direct political
confrontation with the dominant system.
Evers commented that, ‘the question of
re-appropriating of society from the State has become thinkable. Neville
created a structure and processes so that re-appropriating society from the
State was actionable. In Fraser House Neville was reappropriating Society from
the State in a State hospital. To quote Evers again, all in Fraser House,
rather than having the State internalized, they are ‘generating and
experiencing states (experiences) of their own making’. A central theme in all
of Neville’s work was re-appropriating society from the State. Rather than
having the State ‘run’ their lives, local Laceweb people are start taking back
their own lives. Instead of having the never questioned State internalized,
they are generating and experiencing states (experiences) of their own making.
Evers’ comment that the ‘new’ within
these movements is also archaic very much applies to the Laceweb. It is reported that very old Indigenous
people often say that some Laceweb happening is ‘the old way’ (conversation with
Yeomans, N., Nov 1992)
During the years 1993
through to 1998 when I started this Thesis my understanding was that the main
reason Neville was evolving networks in Far North Queensland and the Darwin Top
End in Australia was to keep away from dominant interests that may seek to
undermine and subvert the social action he and others were engaged in. I found
Neville’s paper, ‘Mental Health and Social Change’ (Yeomans 1971a; Yeomans
1971b) in his archives in
October 1998. It is a scribbled half page note and hand sketched diagram
written back in 1971. It discusses the nature of epochal transitions. It
revealed that Neville had specifically chosen Far North Queensland because of
its strategic locality on the Globe as a place to start transitions towards a
Global transition. Still I did not take this seriously and immediately turned
the page to the next item. I sensed that it was more to do with being ‘away
from mainstream’. I did not realize at the time that this was a crucial
document specifying Neville’s core framework. In this, ‘Mental Health and
Social Change’ file note Neville clearly specifies epochal transitions. It is
an example of how my pre-judging mind limited my seeing. Neville wrote:
‘The take off point for the next cultural
synthesis, (ed. point D in Diagram 1 below) typically occurs in a marginal culture.
Such a culture suffers dedifferentiation of its loyalty and value system to the
previous civilization. It develops a relatively anarchical value orientation
system. Its social institutions dedifferentiate and power slips away from them.
This power moves into lower level, newer, smaller and more radical systems
within the society. Uncertainty increases and with it rumor. Also an epidemic
of experimental organizations develop. Many die away but those most
functionally attuned to future trends survive and grow.’
Diagram 1 The Growth Curve of any System
In saying, ‘Its social
institutions dedifferentiate…’ Neville is talking about a shift away from
dynamic differentiated adaptive far-from-equilibrium states to non-adaptive
sameness. With the words, ‘those most functionally attuned to future trends
survive and grow’ Neville was hinting at his aspirations. In the same 1971
document Neville went on to talk about the strategic significance of Far North
Queensland as a marginal place to explore Global transitions:
‘Australia exemplifies
many of these widespread change phenomena. It is in a geographically and
historically unique marginal position. Geographically Asian, it is historically
Western. Its history is also of a peripheral lesser status. Initially a convict
settlement, it still remains at a great distance from the core of Western
Civilization. Culturally it is often considered equivalent to being the
peasants of the West. It is considered to have no real culture, a marked
inferiority complex, and little clear identity. It can thus be considered
equally unimportant to both East and West and having little to contribute.
BUT - it is also the only
continent not at war with itself. It is one of the most affluent nations on earth.
Situated at the junction of the great civilizations of East and West it can
borrow the best of both. Of all nations it has the least to lose and most to
gain by creating a new synthesis (Yeomans 1971a; Yeomans
1971b).’
Neville wanted the Far North as a
linking place for evolving networks throughout the SE Asia Oceania Australasia
Region.
Back in 1993 Neville told me to remind
him to get me a paper that he had written back in 1974 called, ‘On Global
Reform – International Normative Model Areas’. Neville later told me he could
not locate the document. It was not until two months after Neville’s death that
I found this paper (Yeomans 1974). This is one of, if not the most
significant papers Neville wrote. Once I read it I suddenly knew of the
strategic significance of the, ‘Mental Health and Social Change’ paper
mentioned above that I had spotted in the archives in October 1998. As stated,
at the time I first read this other paper in 1998 it held no special import in
terms of specifying the place to commence Global epochal change. I saw it only
as identifying a place to minimize interference from mainstream.
In that ‘On Global Reform’ paper
Neville wrote about his involvement in the New State Movement and its potential
relevance for his ideas. At one level this paper was written for the Australian
Humanitarian Law Committee and as a paper submitted on humanitarian law for his
law degree (Yeomans 1974). At a far higher level, I suspect
that this paper is the Key Laceweb document. It specifies Neville’s
Epochal Quest and his big picture long-term framework for achieving epochal
change. In this paper, in talking about one model of Global Governance being
put forth by people described as ‘normative realists’ (and Neville recognized
downsides of their position), he wrote:
‘The global transition
model of the normative realists has emphasized a credible transition strategy
in the move towards a more peaceful and just world. However it is necessary to
make such a strategy both meaningful and feasible to persons and groups, and to
underpin that world level analysis with relevant application to individual
communities. An attempt will be made to do this in an Australian context by presuming
the creation of an Inma in North Queensland.
Recall that Neville
structured Fraser House to be a ‘transitional community’. For Neville, that
earlier exploring of the nature and behaviors of transitional communities was
towards the later evolving of ‘Global transitional models’. Notice Neville’s
linking of macro and micro in the above quote – using the principal, ‘Think
Globally. Act Locally’:
1.
A World level analysis
2.
A global transition model
3.
A credible transition strategy
4.
A strategy both meaningful and feasible to persons and groups,
5.
Underpin that World level analysis with relevant application to
individual communities
Notice that Neville uses
the expression, ‘presuming the creation of an Inma in North Queensland’.
Neville would regularly presume that something already existed and start
inviting people to be a part of it. This is resonant with what Milton Erickson
would do in therapy – he would have them acquire new competences and then put
people in their imagination in a future world where they experience using these
competences well, and let them experience that world. Bandler and Grinder
called this, ‘future pacing’ (Bandler 1975; Grinder, De
Lozier et al. 1977; Bandler, Grinder et al. 1979; Dilts, Grinder et al. 1980;
Bandler, Grinder et al. 1982; Bandler 1984; Bandler and Gordon 1985). Neville would so presume Inma that it did ‘exist’, people never
knew the extent of it. One person in Byron Bay that I talked to when gathering
people of artistry to attend the Small Island Gathering, called this Laceweb
‘future pacing’, ‘using smoke and mirrors’. It is the schein – ‘the appearance
that reveals and deceives’ (Pelz 1974). Neville actualized Inma from a potent articulated virtual
reality repeated passionately. Neville continued:
‘It is submitted that
….consciousness-raising,….would occur firstly among the most disadvantaged of
the area, including the Aborigines. Thus human relations groups on a
live-in basis could assist both the growth of solidarity and personal freedom
of expression amongst such persons.
In initial experiences along this line
the release of fear and resentment against whites has led to a level of
understanding and mutual trust both within the aboriginal members and between
them and white members (Yeomans 1974).’
In the last paragraph, the ‘initial
experiences’ Neville was referring to was the Human Relations Workshops in
Armidale and Grafton in 1971-73 (University
of New England, Dept. of University Extension et al. 1971). In saying,
‘the growth of solidarity and personal freedom of
expression amongst such persons’ Neville was referring to the experience of
participants in those workshops. Neville spoke of people regaining their voice
and forging inter-community cooperating networking.
Neville further links the
Inma framework to a tightly specified place with the following:
‘Turning to the ethics and ideology of Inma people; it is
axiomatic that for a life-style and value mutation to occur in an area such
territory needs to be in a unique combined global, continental, federated state
and local marginality. Globally it needs to be be junctional between East and
West (Parkinson
1963) at least
geographically and in historical potentiality. At the same time at all levels
it needs to be sufficiently distant from the centers of culture and power to be
unnoticed, unimportant and autonomous.’
The words ‘unnoticed, unimportant and
autonomous’ are apt descriptors of the Laceweb networking. Recall that in 1963 when Neville traveled the World
speaking to Indigenous peoples about the best place in the World to begin
evolving a normative model area, the constant feedback was that Far North
Australia was the most appropriate. Neville told me many times that Far North
Queensland and the Darwin Top End was the most strategic place in the World to
locate Inma. To reiterate, initially I kept thinking he meant the best place
for least interference. While ‘least interference’ was important, he was really
meaning the best place to start a Global Transition. Neville told me that
action would be best above a line between Rockhampton on the East Coast of
Australia, and Broome on the West Coast. In 1997 Terry Widders pointed out that
the Asia Oceania Australasia region contains around 75% of the global
Indigenous population (approximately 180 of 250 million). In the same vane, it
contains 75% of the World's Indigenous peoples (Widders 1997). The Australia Top End was a marginal
locality adjacent the marginal edge of SE Asia Oceania.
Further in the ‘On Global Reform’ monograph Neville wrote
the following about 'utopography':
‘At the same time 'utopography' provides models, which normative
realists can experiment with as transitional strategies. These can be
implemented in naturally occurring model areas providing Inmas for evaluation
and support by global theorists and researchers. (Yeomans
1974).’
Notice the expression, ‘naturally occurring model areas’
– resonant with Keyline. These places already existed ‘naturally’ and he could
support nature.
Laceweb action is always locals taking action to meet
local needs. Within the Laceweb, ‘Utopia’ is not an abstract ideal or an
impossible dream. Action is continually evolving an every-widening pool of
‘ways that work’. These are passed on and consensually validated by action of
other locals. Local utopias are being experientially and inter-subjectively
constructed as everyday lived experience. Action carries possibilities in
peacehealing towards evolving varied utopias that respect and celebrate their
individual and respective diversities. This allows possibilities for a Global
epoch based on humane caring for all in the natural and social life world. The
Laceweb is in no way promoting a common social utopia (More 1901).
Neville had been reading the writings of Richard Falk of
Princeton University in USA and other normative realists who were connected to
the World Order Model Project, called ‘WOMP’ for short. Falk quotes Robert Heilbroner's incisive chastisement of utopian thought
in commenting upon someone’s utopian writing:
'Like
all utopias, it is a joy to contemplate. Alas, like all utopias it contains not
a word as to how we are to go from where we are to where we are supposed to be (Falk
1975, p. 347).’
In
stark contrast, Neville
wrote about Inma being a place to explore various utopias, and where
local aspiring utopias can respect and celebrate other aspiring utopias. Neville evolved practical action towards multiple utopias
where every aspect may be tested by the locals in respective local contexts.
What worked may be repeated by locals in local contexts.
Neville’s monograph then proceeds to
outline his 200-year transition process. Neville writes of adapting one of the
World Order Models Project’s (WOMP) models toward what he described as a ‘more
problem-solving and value priority functionalism’. Neville drew upon Richard
Falk’s book, ‘A Study of Future World’s (Falk 1975) and
Falk’s Journal article, ‘Law and National Security: The Case for
Normative Realism (Falk 1974)’. Neville adapts Falk’s model using
Falk’s T1, (‘T’ for ‘transition’) V1 (‘V’ for ‘Values’) frameworks though
Neville gives new meanings to the Vn values and specifies the Tn transition
phases slightly differently. Neville describes what he saw as a possible 200
year transition process in the following terms (Yeomans 1974). The follow segment places Neville’s
early paragraphs in context:
‘This design involves the conceiving
of a three-stage transition process (T1-T3) (ed. Where T1 T2 and T3 signify
three transition processes):
Tl = Consciousness-raising in national
Arenas
T2 = Mobilization in Transnational
Arenas
T3 = Transformation in Global Arenas’
‘The new system is based on the
performance criteria (V1 - V4) of peacefulness, economic equity, social and
political dignity and ecological balance (ed. Where V1, V2, V3, and V4 are
values).
Falk’s transition phases were:
T1 = Consciousness raising in Domestic
Arena
T2 = Mobilization in Transnational and
Regional Arenas
T3 = Transformation in Global Arena,
and
T4 = Consciousness Phase 2 Personal
Social Arenas
Falk’s values were:
V1 = War Prevention
V2 = Economic and Social Wellbeing
V3 = Human dignity, and
V4 = Ecological Quality
Note that Neville has Consciousness
raising in Personal Social Arenas happening first – not last. Neville’s model
starts with grassroots consciousness raising.
As hinted at in the prior section
comparing Laceweb with Latin American movements, with Laceweb, social action
focuses on transforming evolving at the psychosocial and psycho-emotional
levels. Neville was setting up processes for ‘economic equity’ and political
dignity’ not through economic or political power-focused pressure, rather,
through gentle transforming at the psychosocial and psycho-emotional levels.
The economic and the political transforming would be preceded by peacefulness
and ecological balancing and transforming action in the widest sense. Neville
went on to describe proposed political frameworks:
‘The political organs have tripartite
representation:
1.
peoples,
2.
Non-government
Organizations, and
3.
governments.’
Notice the bottom up ordering.
‘Surely one would here add a fourth
representation of individuals by global voting. The global transition model of
the normative realists has emphasized a credible transition strategy in the
move towards a more peaceful and just world. However it is necessary to make
such a strategy both meaningful and feasible to persons and groups, and to
underpin that world level analysis with relevant application to individual
communities.’
‘An attempt will be made to do this in
an Australian context by presuming the creation of an Inma in North
Queensland.’
‘It is submitted that T1 consciousness-raising, [Tl (C -
R)] would occur firstly among the most disadvantaged of the area, including the
Aborigines. The next step could be focusing their activities on the Inma. This
would be accompanied by widespread T1 activities in the Inma, conducted largely
by those trained by previous groups. Aborigines from all over Australia and
overseas visitors would be involved as has begun. Over a number of years the
Indigenous population of the Inma would be increasingly involved, both black
and white. Co-existing with later T1 activity is a relatively brief
consciousness raising program with the more reformist humanitarian members of
the national community, i.e. largely based on self-selected members of the
helping and caring professions plus equivalent other volunteers. However their
consciousness raising is mainly aimed at realizing the supportive and
protective role they can play nationally, in guaranteeing the survival of the
Inma beyond their own lifetimes, rather than trying to persuade them actually
to join it by migration.’
In the years following 1974 when he
wrote this paper Neville followed through with the above social action. Neville
implemented his networking firstly in the Queensland Top End and in the early
Nineties extended this to the Darwin Top End. I can see that in 1986 when I
first met him I slotted into the sentence:
‘Co-existing with later T1 activity is a
relatively brief consciousness raising program with the more reformist
humanitarian members of the national community, i.e. largely based on
self-selected members of the helping and caring professions’.
I was one of those. In writing,
‘rather than trying to persuade them actually to join it by migration’, Neville
actively encouraged me not to shift North. He said I was most valuable as a
distant resource person. In supporting the Laceweb Homepage and doing this
research perhaps I may contribute to, ‘guaranteeing the survival of the Inma
beyond their own lifetimes.’
Recall the Inma poem at the
commencement of this Thesis. In speaking of the INMA:
‘It
believes in an ingathering and a nexus,
of human persons values, feelings, ideas and actions.
Inma
believes in the creativity of this
gathering together and this connexion of per-
sons and values,
It
believes that these values are spiritual,
moral and ethical, as well as humane, beauti-
ful, loving and happy.’
Note the merging and interweaving – first the
ingathering, then the nexus, and it’s a nexus of human
persons values, feelings, ideas and actions. He refers to the creative
potential and the self-organizing connexity, and that the natural nurturers are
homo amans – the loving, spiritual, moral, ethical, humane, beautiful, happy
lovers of the region. The poem is saturate with Cultural Keyline Way.
Neville continues with the T2 level:
‘T2 has two subunits:
T2 (a) commences with the mobilization
of extra-Inma supporters nationally.
T2 (b) moves to the mobilization of transnationals who
have completed T1 consciousness raising in their own continents. That mobilization
is of two fundamentally distinct types:
T2 (b)(i) mobilization of those who
will come to live in, visit, or work in, the Inma.
T2 (b)(ii) mobilization of those who will guarantee
cogent normative, moral and economic support combined with national and
international political protection for its survival.’
‘By T3, the effects of T1 and T2 have
largely transformed the Inma, which is now a matured multipurpose world order
model. Its guidance and governance will be non-territorial in the sense that it
extends from areal to global. Politically it is territorial, economically it is
largely continental; in the humanitarian or integral sense it is continental
for Aborigines and partly so in other fields, but it is largely global.’
‘T3 for the Inma is then nearing completion, while its
ex-members who have returned to their own continents are moving these regions
towards the closure of T1, the peak of T2 and the beginning of a global T3.
This is perhaps 50-100 years away. By the time of the peak of global T3
humanitarian consensus provides the integral base for development of a World
nation-state of balanced integrality and polity. World phase completion could
perhaps be 200 years away (Yeomans
1974).’
As far as I can determine T1
consciousness raising is evolving in the Far North Queensland Inma, with links
across Northern Australia and the Darwin Top End. T1 consciousness raising is
occurring among marginalized people across the SE Asia Australasia Oceania
Region. East Timorese, West Papuans, Bougainvillians and other visitors to Inma
have been arriving from countries in the Region (Laceweb-Homepage 1998;
Laceweb-Homepage 2001).
To quote the Inma poem:
‘Inma
believes that persons may come
and go as they wish, but also
it believes that the values will stay and
fertilize its area, and
it believes the nexus will cover the globe.’
Small
beginnings have been made in T2a and T2b(i). Laceweb is about 30 years into the
200 plus years considered by Neville.
While Neville envisaged a ‘World
nation-state’ he was not advocating a ‘World Government’. He always spoke of
‘Global Governance’ with Global Governance of Global issues, like, Global
warming, the seas, large river systems, and Global peacekeeping. Regional
issues would be covered by Regional governance and local issues by local
governance.
Having set out his transition process,
Neville proceeded in his monograph to give a glimpse
of his macro thinking about longer-term generative action for evolving
possibilities towards humane law and caring governance in the Inma.
‘As to the legal system in
the Inma (ed. International Normative Model Area), it seems clear that on a
multicultural basis, a minoritarian constitution is necessary. By giving
specific representation to different racial, ethnic and other groups it has an
equalizing effect.
Again the question of a
dual constitution must be considered. Principles of humanity and those of
utility could be separated. The constitution would build on the steps taken by
India, Pakistan and Burma (Smith 1964, p.173). The initial step of creating humanitarian 'directive principles
of state policy' as a separate Part of the Indian Constitution are of great
significance (Coper 1969, p. 1.).’
In Neville mentioning the separation
of the principles, ‘humanity’ and ‘utility’, recall that in Big Group, humane
supporters spontaneously sat on his left and utilitarian/administrative
supporters sat spontaneously on his right. Neville also wrote about leaders
having either of these orientations. Neville’s paper continues:
‘Being 'fundamental to the
governance of the country' (The Constitution of India
1949) they embody the objects
and aspirations of the state and guide its law-making activity. Constitutional
Human Rights are another area of consideration, and like all laws in a
multicultural community will require wider conceptualization in social context.
Again, choice-of-law criteria require a broad basis of experience in different
legal systems (Chin 1971, p. 96.).
In this regard the
experience of LawAsia is unique. Formed in 1966, by 1969 it had about 1300
individual lawyer members from about 20 countries in the Asian and Pacific
region (Wooten 1969, p. 19).
A consultative committee
of this body could be invaluable, in the legal structuring of the Inma.
Ultimately LawAsia might assist in the development of a humane multicultural
court. The circuit concept of domestic law could be internationalized to
provide an international pool of judges. Such persons from cultures or
countries represented by ethnic inhabitants in the area could be invited to
become visiting members of the court, and active at least on cases involving
their own ethnic issues. This would be rather like the use of a national judge
of each party concerned, in the International Court of Justice (I.C.J.) (Smith 1964, p. 173).’
This was Neville exploring
the notions he had embodied in ‘Inma’ as acronym. It would be international,
interpersonal and intercultural. It was Normative –
focused on the community based exploring and evolving of norms; and it would be
a model area for the rest of the World in how diversity and co-existence
can be respected and celebrated in ongoing peace and unity. Neville was also
exploring ideas towards evolving the SE Asia Oceania Australasia Region legal
processes as envisaged in his Global Local Realplay that he created in 1988
referred to above. This Realplay is Appendix 18. This is exemplified by the
following quote from the ‘On Global Reform’ paper:
‘Again ex-judges of the
I.C.J. (ed., International Court of Justice), known for their particular humane
and global values such as is Tanaka J. of Japan (Schubert and Danelski
1969, p. 139) could be employed in Full
Court cases. Likewise judges of specialized skill, or suitable academics such
as Professor Hahm of Korea (Schubert and Danelski
1969, Chap. 2) could be used as visiting
judges if they were so willing. Past members of the International Law
Commission could also be approached. Certainly, if one were to pursue the
obedience of international humanitarian norms, especially in relations between
Inma and the South Queensland, Australia or Papua-New Guinea governments, the
use of a multicultural court would be advisable. Thus may a 'domestic' court
convert ideals of humanity and of justice into normative realism (Falk 1964).’
Neville knew that Richard
Falk was and still is, very active in the World Order Model Project (WOMP) (Falk 1974; Falk 1975;
Falk 1991). Neville told me in the
late Nineties that various commentators on the World Order Model Project, in
discussing various models of global governance in the late Eighties, had
observed that the least attractive model for World Governance was a
model based on a weak United Nations subservient to one or two super-powers,
and all of these subservient to a global capitalism that answers to no-one.
That model is the one that has emerged as the current World Order! Neville was
to my knowledge not connected to WOMP, though Neville followed their output
closely. To reiterate, Neville did not believe in World Government. He was
interested in World Governance and all governance bodies would be based on Neville’s
four values. In Falk’s
book, ‘A Study of Future World’s (Falk 1975) he describes four models of World
Government among over 30 World Order Models.
In continuing Neville’s
discussion of law and Inma Neville wrote:
‘LawAsia might assist
greatly in the development of such a multijural court even to nomination and
selection of members. There is yet a further opportunity if the multijural
court came into existence. Such an institution could offer a service to all
types of disputants, individual, corporate or state in the Asia, Pacific and
Australian region. Unlike the International Court of Justice it would not be
shackled to inter-state disputes only, and could itself become a valuable model
for study and evaluation.’
Neville by this time had
been reading extensively in humanitarian law and international law. Recall that
he became a barrister in the early Seventies.
Neville supported getting humanitarian law added to the law course at the
University of NSW. While talking up these ideas widely in North Queensland
outlining a 200 year strategy, he well knew what he was energizing and explore
could take 300 to 500 years.
It can be
noted that in his, ‘On Global Reform – International Normative Model Areas’,
Neville had not specified in detail the processes he envisaged taking place in
any of the three transition phases. He had given an over-view and then went on
to specify possible legal and governance models that may be applicable at some
time way in the future. It was not until November 2002 that I realized that a
set of documents that Neville and I worked on for nearly a year in 1999 when he
was in constant chronic pain, was this piece missing from his, ‘On Global
Reform’ monograph. Neville called the documents, ‘the Extegrity documentation’ (Yeomans
1999). These
documents set out a comprehensive Laceweb process for the reconstituting of a
decimated society such as East Timor or Bougainville. The name ‘Extegrity’
embodies the notion, ‘extensive integrity’.
The documents were inspired by a European Commission document relating
to social reconstruction following societal collapse through war (Directorate-General
1A External Relations : Europe and the New Independent States - Common Foreign
and Security Policy and External Missions and Democatisation 1998). Typical of First World documents,
the European Commission document places Government, Law and people as the order
of priority. True to Neville’s Way, he turned the European Community document
on its head. The Extegrity Document is Appendix 28.
The sequence
for action embodied in the Extegrity Document is as follows:
First comes
enabling self-help and mutual-help towards psychosocial wellbeing.
Second comes
the re-connecting with local lore rather than law. Living their lore raises
possibilities for the local-culture-sensible emergence of norms, rules,
obligations and local law - during their co-reconstituting of community while
sharing in therapeutic Community Healing Action in evolving cultural locality
as per Figures 1 and 3 in Chapter Seven.
Third comes
local democratic governance by local communities as exemplified by the Fraser
House patients’ committee based governance. From this local governance may
emerge regional and national governance consistent with Neville’s four-fold
representation mentioned above. From this may emerge law.
At each of
the three levels - people’s wellbeing, lore and governance – the Extegrity
Document sets out social action which reframes the European Community document
to being Laceweb Cultural Keyline Way. Neville described the Extegrity Documentation
as an isomorphic (of matching form) reversed, reframe of the European Community
documents. We even matched the fonts and font sizes. A feature of both the
European documentation and the Extegrity documentation is a preference for
partnerships in action between previously conflicted people. It was this and
the ‘completeness’ of the European Community document that attracted Neville (Directorate-General
1A External Relations : Europe and the New Independent States - Common Foreign
and Security Policy and External Missions and Democatisation 1998). The Extegrity Documentation
was sent to various Global governance bodies and circulated widely among
Indigenous communities in the Region.
The UN
process in East Timor implemented the First World model of ‘nation’. It used
the First World Model of nation building as per the model in the above European
Union Document. It was top down. A national government was elected and a
criminal justice system backed by law and police was established. On 4 December
2002 Dili was sacked by students and others angry with the police. Radio
reports stated that detained students received the identical sadistic treatment
used by the Indonesian militia and military – trauma as a means of social
control. The new East Timorese Police had been trained in ‘police methods’ by
the UN.
Richard Falk
whom Neville followed in evolving his models (Falk 1975), and Saul Mendlovitz have both
written articles about World Order Transitions to a more humane epoch (Falk 1991,
p. 550 - 564; Mendlovitz 1991, p. 565 - 571).
Similarly to Neville, Falk writes
about World Order Transitions commencing with the common folk as the go about
their everyday lives.
‘What seems available is a coherent
awareness of normative vectors: the aggregate implications of the new
tendencies that seek a non-violent, democratized, ecologically prudent,
spiritually fulfilling, and joyous destiny for the species and the planet
earth.’
‘At the core, then, of the struggles
to establish a more peaceful world is the whole question of governance. As
indicated earlier, this question relates to all levels of social organization
starting with the inner lives of individuals and in their family relations
between parent and child and men and women. The models for public oppression
get their start in reserved or private space. Similarly, the positive models of
popular governance (ample participation, consent, respect for law, fairness)
can be initiated in even the most oppressive circumstances if we do it behind
closed doors.’
‘By establishing popular governance at
home, at work, in church, and social gatherings, among friends, there is a
widening zone of autonomy created.
The above has resonance with Neville’s
thinking.
In Mendlovitz’ss article, ‘Struggles
for a Just World Peace: A Transition Strategy’ he sketches out many processes
that may be used to move towards a just World Peace. They tend to be
prescriptive and would have the inherent issue of how do you get ‘buy-in’ and
ownership by others.
Examples:
·
Establish
peace and justice agendas
·
Acceptance
of a global mode of conduct for multinational corporations
·
Initiating
an annual process of five percent reductions in defense budgets
In contrast, Neville’s
processes always entail that nothing starts unless locals want to do it, and do
do it.
To reiterate, water through a
whirlpool both goes around the whirlpool, and is the whirlpool. Both the
process and structure of whirlpools are naturally self-organizing. In
whirlpools, as in many aspects of nature, structure and process are merged.
Laceweb structure/process is of the same form. Laceweb has a dynamic structure.
This structure is not fixed/static - rather it is constantly morphing, as in
forming/reforming. Process constitutes the structure for the process. Put
another way, Laceweb linking constitutes the linking network through linking.
Like the vortex of the whirlpool or water down the plughole, Laceweb ‘energy as
processes’ is the structure. It is highly self-organizing without central or
hierarchical organizers.
Jantsch notes in his book, ‘The Self
Organizing Universe (Jantsch 1980)’:
"In a nonequilibrium world of
self-realizing, self-balancing systems, process and structure become
complementary aspects of the same overall order of process, or evolution. As
interacting processes define temporary structures - comparable to standing wave
patterns in physics - so structures define new processes, which in turn give
rise to new temporary structures. Where process carries the momentum of
energy unfoldment, structure permits the focusing and acting out of energy.’
‘When it is perturbed, or disrupted in
some way, then the parts have a tendency to come back together in new ways, and
form new patterns - within the whole - in a more
complex, interactive form’
Prigogine and Stengers in their book,
‘Order out of Chaos’ (Prigogine and Stengers 1984) write:
‘The more
complex a system is, the more unstable it is because it requires more flux of
energy to maintain it. Because of the movement and exchange of energy, when it
breaks down, it is likely to reorganize and reestablish itself at a higher or
more complex level. When it is perturbed, or disrupted in some way, then the
parts have a tendency to come back together in new ways and form new patterns
within the whole in a more complex, interactive form. Therefore, the reason
that the system achieves coherence is because it is so unstable.’
I have characterized the Laceweb as
very weak, tentative and unstable. These very aspects are a source of
coherence. In Jantsch's words, as applied to social systems: ‘Process (or
function) and structure, deterministic and stochastic features, necessity and
chance (or free will), become complementary aspects in the self-organizing
dynamics of ‘order through fluctuation’ which may also be graphically depicted
as a nonequilibrium system ‘stumbling forward’ and crossing by its own force
the ridges separating ‘valleys’ of global stability (Jantsch and Waddington 1976, p.
39).’ Note his use of Ridge and Valley.
Energy flow may engender fluctuations
in people’s lives. If small, the Laceweb network absorbs these fluctuations and
the structural integrity of the Laceweb is not perturbed. If fluctuations reach
a critical size, they may perturb the network. The speed and frequency of
novelty may suddenly increase. There may be an increase in the number of novel
interactions within the network. Elements of the network may make new
connections with new ways of being and acting. The parts of the network may
reorganize into a new whole. The network, as system may emerge into a ‘higher’
order. An example was my working with Neville at Yungaburra with the three Down
To Earth people in 1994 and the associated Small Island Gathering in 1993/4 as
discussed earlier in Chapter Nine.
At the same time, while linking is the
glue that constitutes the network and maintains it, the more intricate the
linking, the more potential for fluctuations and perturbations there is, and
the more unstable it may become. Increased instability may lead to increased
coherence and vice versa. This instability provides the space, place, and
mood-potential for ongoing transforming. The dissipating of energy creates
possibilities for sudden re-orderings. The more complex/coherent the system,
the greater the next level of complexity. Each transformation increases the
likelihood of another one. Each new mode is even more integrated and connected
than the one before, requiring a greater flow of energy for maintenance and is
therefore more unstable. Flexibility generates flexibility. Increased order
comes from increased perturbation. The greater the instability and mobility,
other things being equal, the greater the potential for interactions with
others. Our lay understanding mirrors this. Examples: crises may alert us to
opportunity, chaos may trigger creative action, necessity is the mother of
invention, stress may force new ways. Curious confusion may be a fertile state
for insight.
Six Aboriginal Communities in Central
Australia as well as a number of Aboriginal and Islander Communities on Cape
York in Far North Queensland are evolving psychosocial healing action with
Aboriginal’s Geoff and Norma Guest whom Neville supported with co-learning
exchanges till Neville’s death A copy of the Cape York Proposals is Appendix
34. Rob Buschken (who Neville was training in the Cairns Inma Therapeutic
Community House) and other Laceweb people are involved. This healing action is
for addressing petrol sniffing and other addictive behaviors, as well as other
dysfunction. It is also for creating therapeutic communities as alternatives to
criminal and psychiatric incarceration. Rob Buschken was one of my
interviewees. As well as Rob Buschken’s psycho-therapy experience he is now an
EEG biofeedback neurotherapy practitioner and the clinical and technical
consultant, as well as the only training consultant for Australia, and the
Australia-Asia representative of EEG Spectrum, the World’s largest EEG
biofeedback organization. Geoff and Norma have had trainings both in Australia
and the USA in EEG biofeedback. Geoff gets excellent results with youth
demonstrating Tourettes Syndrome, ADHD, addictions, and behavioral dysfunction.
Geoff combines NLP (learnt from Neville), Aboriginal sociomedicine, work with
wild horses, diet, storytelling, therapeutic hypnosis, bush knowings, cultural
healing, and vocational and environmental experience in enabling youth to
change (Petford Working Group 1998; Petford
Working Group 1998; Petford Working Group 2000; Petford Working Group 2001). During the past 23 years Geoff and
Norma have had over 2,500 youth pass through their therapeutic community. For
over fifteen years Geoff funded his therapeutic community from working a
substantial tin mine. Geoff has been awarded the Order of Australia medal and
the Centennial Medal for his services to youth.
Neville interacted in a co-mentoring
role with a Torres Strait Islander woman called Mareja Bin Juda. Like the two
others mentioned previously, Mareja experienced around 150 hours of observing
Neville in one-on-one psycho-therapy and group and family-friend psychotherapy (Yeomans
1990). Like the sharings Neville had
with the two women mentioned previously, Neville described his exchanges with
Mareja, co-learning. Mareja energized the Akame Functional Matrix. Recall also
that ‘Aka’ is Torres Strait Islander word for Grandmother. Akame, as a micro
functional matrix energy, enabling self-help and mutual-help among Torres
Strait Islander and Aboriginal youth at risk of self-harm. Voluntarily with
other natural nurturer women, Mareja has been taking groups of youths for day
visits and short campouts to the same Black Mountain Road Rainforest site in
Kuranda on the Atherton Tablelands we used during the fortnight of Laceweb
activities mentioned above. This beautiful rainforest site on the Barron River
had been acquired by Neville as part of his dream to have a series of Inma
residential therapeutic community places in the Far North East Coast. He
acquired another site in tall timber country near the rainforest ridge at
Paluma, North of Townsville as part of the same dream. These were possible
special Inma places for the SE Asia Oceania Australasia Region.
Neville at times interacted with
mainstream. Examples are Fraser House, being Director of Community Mental
Health and running the first Community Mental Health Center in Paddington.
Neville reached out to business people in the early Seventies. He reached out
to politically oriented people in the New State Movement.
In the late Eighties when I was
consulting in organizational change I was approached by a Federal Government
Department about creating paradigm shift and cultural and climate change in
their senior executive members. Neville and I wrote on one page what he
described as a ‘global-local realplay’ as a resource for senior executive
change. The Realplay is included as Appendix 18. When the Department decided to
use American consultants they were not shown the Hypothetical Realplay and it
has never been used. However, it does give the feel for Neville’s application
of Cultural Keyline principles and his thinking about possible futures and
Global and Regional governance.
The Federal Government Department of
Local Government people were very interested in Neville’s Rapid Creek Project
(Appendix 27) and Brian Howe, the Deputy Prime Minister under Paul Keating
asked his Head of Department to have a meeting with me on the Project. They
were especially interested in processes supporting government inter-sector and
community cooperating. Neville said that grassroots action was a higher
priority at the time and suggested that I do not pursue Government involvement.
Similarly, some Laceweb
praxis has engaged in cooperative action with State and Local Government. For
example, resonant with the Rapid Creek Project in Darwin, Mareja Bin Juda also
worked closely with the Queensland State Government and the Cairns City council
as well as the local Aboriginal and Islander Community of the suburb of Manoora
in Cairns in a large scale whole community urban renewal project. Mareja
enabled many in the Manoora Aboriginal and Islander Community to engage in
mutual help in doing voluntary safety audits of streets and footpaths, lighting
and other potential hazards. Mareja, with community and Project backing created
a process whereby each family could decide how they wanted the money allotted
in upgrading their public housing property. Some wanted carports. Others opted
for covered verandahs for breezeways and outdoor shade. Others wanted palms and
other garden shrubs. Prior to this Project, one large housing complex in
Manoora was virtually without any greenery and extremely hot in the tropical
summer and a place of civil disobedience.
Photo 44. The housing
complex after supported community self-help action –
This complex was turned
into a beautiful ‘resort’ like atmosphere with many large palms and tropical
plants, shade areas and lawns with sprinkler systems. The Project supplied the
trees, plants and equipment to dig holes and move earth. The local residents
supplied the voluntary labor to plant the greenery. Along with the habitat, the
sociocultural tone of the place was turned around completely in 12 months with
the crime rates significantly lower.
The local community
decided what they wanted to do about a dark park in their area that was unsafe.
They decided that the tops of the trees be floodlit at night by hidden soft
green lights facing upwards. Now the whole park is like an enchanted forest at
night.
Photo
45. The Floodlit Garden
Strife in the park has dropped
markedly. In the process, disadvantaged Aboriginal and Islander people found
their voice. They gained group and community competencies and strengthened
family and friend support networks.
Each of the above examples may be seen
as exploring using the Laceweb Cultural Healing Ways to loosen up entrenched
ways in the dominant system. This would need to happen down the line as part of
a transition to a new World order.
During the month of June
in the years 1998-2002 there were a series of small gathering celebrations in
the Atherton Tablelands to celebrate the anniversary of the 1994 UN funded
Small Island Coastal Estuarine People Gathering Celebration. A pictorial summary of action at the
June-July 2001 Laceweb Gathering has been posted on the Internet (Un Inma 2001). In keeping with Neville’s T2 (b)(i)
consciousness raising in his 200 Year Model (Yeomans 1974) whereby transnationals who have
completed some T1 consciousness raising in their own continents come to live
in, visit, or work in, the Inma, the July 2001 Healing Sharing Gathering was
attended by survivors of torture and trauma - Bougainvillians and other Papua
New Guineans, West Papuans, East Timorese, as well as interculturals from
Brazil, Ireland, Finland and Australia. Women and children were the focus. West
Papuan and Bougainvillian attendees who were survivors of torture and trauma
found body approaches very effective in producing psycho-emotional shifts
towards wellbeing. The following photo shows some of the West Papuan and
Bougainvillian torture and Trauma survivors enjoying spontaneous dance with a
Brazilian Enabler (placed at the rear).
Photo 2 Spontaneous Dance as Change Process
Following the Gatherings, some
attendees visited with Aboriginals Geoff Guest and his partner Norma at Petford
Aboriginal Training Farm, 170 kilometers inland from Cairns.
Photo 3 Bougainville attendee at the July 2001 ‘Small Island
Gathering’ Anniversary Gathering. with Geoff
at Salem Farm
One of the visitors from Bougainville
had just completed his masters degree in community development. He was
returning to Bougainville charged with the responsibility for oversight of
community development in Bougainville.
As for Neville’s T2 mobilization in
Transnational areas, Terry Widders has written of wellbeing links now existing
among Indigenous and Small Minorities in the following places - Australia,
Bougainville, China, East Timor, India, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, Mongolia,
Myanmar, Pakistan, Sarawak, Southern Siberia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tibet,
Vietnam, and West Papua, and on small islands dotted right along the Asian and
SE Asian mainland (Widders 1997).
In August 2001, I was
invited by the South East
Asia and Pacific Regional Office of UNICEF to
participate in their Asia and Pacific Regional Experts Meeting on Psychosocial
Response in Emergencies. They had spotted the Laceweb Internet site in their
search to find trauma support energies in the Region (Laceweb Working Group 1997). They were particularly attracted to
the Indigenous self-help networks mentioned on the Laceweb homepage. The
meeting in large part had arisen from reports they were receiving that local
grassroots people were being upset by the lack of cultural respect shown them,
and the imposition of First World ways by First World Psychosocial Emergency Response
Aid Organizations following man-made and natural disasters. Following this
Expert Group Meeting, a Regional
Psychosocial Support Network was established (Devine
2001) and a Web
Site set up (SE Asia
Regional Psychosocial Response Network 2002). In response to requests to
provide further information about Laceweb Way, I along with Dihan Wijewickrama
and Andrew Cramb wrote the paper entitled, ‘Interfacing Alternative and Complementary Well-being Ways
For Local Wellness’ setting out some of the dysfunctional roll-out of First
world Aid and some of the differences between self help and service delivery (Spencer, Wijewickrama et al. 2002). Possible non-compromising ways of
linking with the Laceweb was mooted in this paper. A brief dialogue between Dr.
Elizabeth De Castro, a member of the SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response
Network and myself about my (and others) ‘Interfacing Alternative and
Complementary Well-being Ways For Local Wellness’ paper has been posted on the SE
Asia Regional Psychosocial Response Network’s Web Page (Spencer and De Castro 2002).
In June
2002, a UN-Inma Memorandum of Understanding was signed in Cairns by people of
Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander, East Timorese and Bougainvillian
backgrounds acknowledging ongoing partnership and mutual support towards
Laceweb action in and between their respective communities with further
outreach to West Papuans (SE Asia
Regional Psychosocial Response Network 2002; SE Asia Regional Psychosocial
Response Network 2002). This
intercultural action linking Indigenous and oppressed people in the Region is
consistent with Neville’s Extegrity aspirations (Yeomans
1999). Also signed
in recognizing Laceweb Way was the Unique Healing Treaty and the Young persons
Healing Learning Code included as Appendix 29 and 30 (Yeomans 1992; Yeomans
1992).
Paraphrasing Collingwood, ‘Knowing
yourself means knowing what you can do; and nobody knows what he can do until
he tries’ (Collingwood, 1946). Recall that I asked Neville what Cultural
Keyline was when I had already embodied it in action. My body was way ahead of
my cortex. When I asked Neville the question about Cultural Keyline, I had not
conceptualized it and I could not articulate it to myself, let alone to others.
In keeping with the comments about ideas being embodied, healing action
integrates identity as well as psycho-socio-physical being.
To further explicate
‘Cultural Keyline’, all of Neville’s diverse actions were inter-connected,
inter-related, inter-woven and inter-dependent. A weaving macro theme of
Neville’s action was fostering humane transitions towards a humane caring
Global epoch. A grounding frame is community based Indigenous sociomedicine for
social cohesion, and this in turn inspired Keyline and Cultural Keyline.
Central aspects of both of these is thinking and acting like a living system in
enabling natural and emergent capacities of self-organizing systems. Neville in
a very sustained way explored the potency of community for co-reconstituting
itself towards being well. Included in this exploring were Fraser House and
other forms of therapeutic community, community markets, self-help and
mutual-help networking, festivals, happenings, celebrations, events, and all of
the innovated structures and processes he evolved associated with these.
Explorings in family therapy and mediating was the precursor for peacehealing
between people and cultures in conflict. All of these were preparing for
evolving the Laceweb and an Inma - a model area for exploring new norms in the
proposed New State in the Queensland Top End – an area of approximately half a
million square kilometers, an area around one and a half times the area of
France. While the New State Movement has not resulted in a New State, Inma is
continuing to evolve in Far North Queensland with links across the Top of
Australia and links to the SE Asia Oceania Region. The patient and outpatient
governance at Fraser House was the precursor of the Extegrity Documentation – a
model for grassroots people centered re-constituting of societies decimated by
war (Yeomans 1999). And all of the community-based processes were towards people
taking back more of their culture – as in way of life - from government, as
expressed in Figures 1 and 3 in Chapter Seven in this research.
Through Indigenous Networking in the
SE Asia Oceania Australasia Region, with linkings to Indigenous and other
resonant networking and 100’s of consciousness raising inter/intracultural
normative model areas throughout the World has been evolving an extensive
consciousness raising discourse and sharing of understandings using Indigenous
research and action methodologies (Walls 1993; Smith 1999; Tebtebba
Foundation 2002) This discourse is about mutual help towards Indigenous
Peoples’ surviving Well with their culture and Way in their place, and towards
a humane caring epoch for peaceful co-existing for all peoples through respecting
diversity, the earth and all life forms. The large part of this discourse is
conducted in languages other than English. This humane futures discourse and
consciousness raising is already well developed and is addressing every
conceivable aspect of the social life World – macro and micro-economics, the
Global Commons, Global Warming, connexity, cultural locality, biodiversity,
lore, humanitarian law, holistic spiritual emotional and psychosocial
wellbeing, politics and Global Governance to name a few. Just as words fail as
a medium to express beautiful music that has to be heard, this consciousness
raising has to be relationally lived to attain a relational knowing of what is
happening. Laceweb has links to this discourse and consciousness raising. Samples
of discourse themes are in Figure 2.
·
Biodiversity
Conservation and Indigenous Peoples
·
Conflict
Resolving
Peace Building and Indigenous Peoples
·
Indigenous
Capacity Building
·
Indigenous
Cosmovision
·
Biopiracy
·
Mountain
women
·
Indigenous
Peoples and Climate Change
·
Indigenous
Peoples in the Web of Life
·
Indigenous
Peoples' Lobbying and Advocacy in the International Arena
·
International
Law and Indigenous Peoples
·
Indigenous
people and the International Court of Justice
·
Globalization
of Wellbeing
·
Caring
for the Air, Waters, River Systems and the Seas
·
Multilateral
Banks and Indigenous Peoples
·
Sustainable
Energy and Indigenous Peoples
·
The
Myth of Sustainable and Responsible Mining
·
Trade
Liberalization and Indigenous Peoples
Figure 2 A sample of Indigenous Peoples
Discourse Themes
This Indigenous discourse and
consciousness raising is leading the way on the future of life on Earth at the
very time when commentators in the so-called ‘First World’ script is that the
so-called ‘Fourth World’ is ‘backward’ and ‘in transition’ from the Stone Age.
Indigenous discourse and consciousness raising and associated prolonged action
research is being networked among Indigenous and other resonant peoples and has
some links to humane spots in Global Governance Agencies including UN
Indigenous Working Groups, and groups looking at the Role of the International
Court of Justice, and the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
2002). No other people have generated a UN Forum. Some
claim that similar holistic humane caring discourse and consciousness raising
is nowhere near as developed in the English speaking World. Laceweb networkings
are linked into this wider Indigenous discourse.
David Suzuki and Holly Dressel in
their book aptly tilted, ‘Good News for a Change – Hope for a Troubled Planet (Suzuki and Dressel 2002)’ provide copious examples of
individuals communities and networks with diverse backgrounds from all parts of
the World who are now taking action very resonant with Neville’s Ways on
diverse wellbeing matters. These examples embody the coexistence of
interconnectedness and interdependency in ecosystems – remove the
predators in the grasslands and the grass dies; fishermen killed birds that
were eating fish that the fisherman wanted and then these fish also started to
die out as the predator birds kept in check other creatures that decimated the
fish when the predator bird numbers dropped; government imposed plantings of a
mono-crop of super rice plus use of pesticides in Bali kills the fish and
edible water plants that the rice farmers rely on and gives the farmers
testicular cancer. When the local pests destroy the super rice despite the
massive use of pesticides the farms revert to their own sustainable practices.
Many of the people that Suzuki and Holly write about are Indigenous people and
people influenced by Indigenous Way and/or they are local people using local
knowings about how living systems work and are interconnected and
interdependent. Brief quotes highlighting aspects of the wellbeing actions
discussed by David Suzuki and Holly Dressel are in Appendix 31. These brief
quotes are a good summary of what I sense Neville meant by his term, ‘Cultural
Keyline’.
In the early
days of 2003, word filtered out that the Island of Tikopia had been hit on 29
December 2002 by a massive hurricane with winds reaching potentially as high as
380 kilometers per hour. Initial fears were that virtually everyone would have
been killed by flying debris and massive waves. Some days later the World
discovered that no one was hurt. The Tikopians had used their cultural locality
and local knowings about weather and their island. They all took refuge in deep
caves high in the mountains well out of harms way. While virtually all their
homes and other infrastructure had been devastated, their socio-cohesions ways
and mutual help had held them in strong spirits with a resolve to rebuild their
habitat together. Graham Sayers, a person who had spent several years
working among Solomon islanders wrote in a letter to the Editor of the
Australia Newspaper, that in his view, the Tikopians would not need outside
counselors. They could well look after themselves psycho-socially and
emotionally (Sayer 2003).
To conclude with Ireland again - how
did he suddenly see his social movement on that particular train trip between
Săo Paulo and the shantytowns when on so many other trips he had missed it
completely? Ireland refers in the title of his article to, ‘Invention’ and
‘Happening’. Wolff refers to the word ‘invention’ coming from invenire, to ‘come upon’, and suggests
‘catch’ as a synonym for ‘invention’ in his work, ‘Surrender and Catch’ (Wolff 1976). A synonym for ‘surrender’ in one of
the senses Wolff uses it is ‘total experience’ in ‘total involvement - being
‘undifferentiatedly and indistinguishably involved in the occasion and in
myself, my act, or state, my object or partner’. Wolff refers to Tolstoy’s
writing of the character Levin being with his beloved Kitty in Anna Karenina:
‘Then for the first time, he clearly
understood...that he was not simply close to her, but that he could not tell
where he ended and she began’.
Wolff uses this quote in making the
point that ‘in surrender as in love, differentiation between subject, act and
object disappear - an example of the suspension of even essential categories
among our received notions’. He is talking about realizing connexity. Notice
that subject, act and object is resonant with poet, poem writing and poem
discussed in the section on Dichter and Denken.
So how was it that Ireland did see his social movement on the
train? Perhaps Wolff’s notion of ‘surrender and catch’ is apropos. Both Ireland
and his fellow train travelers were all ‘inventing’ as in ‘coming upon’.
People exploring new forms of social movement processing could well explore
‘surrender and catch’. This has resonance with the notion ‘liminal’ experience
– the experience of being at the threshold
- from ‘limen’, the doorstep (Turner 1974.; Turner 1977). Resonant people interested in a move
to a more humane caring World may through surrender and catch come upon Laceweb
Way.
Typically in society,
answers to questions regarding ‘how to ‘fix’ what’s ‘wrong’ with the World’ are
readily generated. Any answer tends to be, according to Judge (Judge 1982), in ‘gladiatorial combat with other’s answers’. The Laceweb
social action being researched does not aim to fix, or aim to fix what’s wrong.
Recall that Neville never worked with the fixed or stuck bits. He worked
with the free energy at the fringes. The social action does not aim to generate
‘answers’ or ‘meta-answers’, which Judge suggests, ‘can, and may be dragged
back into the gladiatorial combat area’. Rather the social action’s aim is to
tentatively generate ways of attending to living systems, experiences, and
perspectives as well as enabling action supporting evolving of self-help and
mutual-help at another logical level (Bateson 1987) than the level of ‘gladiatorial combat between ideas’. Laceweb
ways are something very different to the typical ‘answer combats’. The logical level
researched has a humane ‘Web of Life’ framing to use Chief Seattle’s phrase (Capra 1997, p.35). Neville was exploring and enabling self-help and mutual-help of
self-organizing, novel, and emergent possibilities. Social action enabled by
Neville through others, involved and involves respecting, and celebrating
social, ethnic, and cultural diversity, rather than confronting or combating
present system ways. This social action is towards creating possibilities for
humane transition to a totally different epoch. This epoch may evolve to be one
embodying humane caring, respecting, relating between diverse cultures with
respectful linking with and enabling of the natural nurturers within diverse
cultures. These may support these and other cultures in their evolving of their
own distinct forms of humane caring culture. This embraces possibilities for
the emergence of multiple utopias respecting each other’s diversity.
To summarize and reiterate
I will return to Neville’s epochal quest and Cultural Keyline Way. What
do I mean when I say Neville connexitised. I mean that his action-researchings
were knowingly, pervasively and simultaneously interwoven, interconnected,
interdependent, and inter-related, and these together were connected to the
natural pre-existing connexity in contexts. As Neville went about evolving
Fraser House, Fraser House Outreach and the Laceweb he consistently and
persistently constituted, linked, and stacked contexts that were
intra/inter-personal, intra/inter-familial, intra/inter-community,
intra/inter-cultural and intra/inter-life-form, as well as been situated
intra/inter-locally, intra/inter-regionally, and involved intra/inter-lore,
intra/inter-law, and intra/inter-governance.
Not
all of these aspects were present in a given context. Neville would link
contexts and stack contexts so the naturally occurring connexity was further
connexitised. The connexitising energy flow and the emergent potential energy
of all this interaction is an integral aspect of the continually entangled and
enfolded Web of Life. An intrinsic property of the Web of Life is that it is
self-organizing and intra/inter-constituting. Neville, in connexity attending
to the web of life, made strategic and deft micro-interventions that energized
and amplified latent potential within entangled systems. A central theme of this research has been Neville’s use of
connexity as a mode of being and action and connexity being an inherent
property of both the social and natural life worlds.
In the open paragraph of
this research I intimated that the subject was expansive. I have reported
extensively on structures and process evolved by Neville and their linkages and
researched the evolving, the nature, and the
processes of the Laceweb social movement. To use a Keyline metaphor, I
have provided fertile ground for other research. I encourage resonant others to
pass this work on to similar people.
Recall that desert web that Neville used as inspiration for the name Laceweb. It still appears at certain times of the year - from minute spiders, blown upon wind on gossamer thread. It has an isomorphic (matching form) resonance with Neville’s dreamings of healing everything. As we have been exploring through this research, Neville’s dreamings were of an entirely new form of social movement with a new, though ancient, social-being together - an informal Laceweb of healers from among the most downtrodden and most disadvantaged marginal people of the world. Like the spider web, the Laceweb would appear out of nowhere. When you discover it, it would already have surrounded you. The Laceweb is the manifestation of a massive local co-operative endeavor. Yes, not carved in stone, rather - soft and pliably fitting the locale and made by locals to suit their needs. It is exquisitely beautiful and lovely. The play of light upon it in the morning sunlight is extra-ordinary. Like the desert web, the Laceweb extends way beyond the horizon. It is suspended in space with links to shifting things - no solid foundations here. It has no center and no part is ‘in charge’, and in that sense, no aspect is higher or lower than any other. It is not what it first seems. It is at the same time riddled with holes, whole and holy. It is merged within the surrounding ecosystem and lays low. In one sense it is delicate - in another it is very robust. Bits may be easily damaged. However, to remove it all would be well nigh impossible. Local action may repair local damage. It is very functional. It is what the locals need. And it does help sustain them. Yes, here before Neville’s eyes was the perfect metaphor for his dreaming.
There
seems to be a new spirituality going
around - or a philosophy - or is it an ethical
and moral movement, or a feeling?
Anyway, this Inma religion or whatever it
is - what does it believe in?
It
believes in the coming-together, the inflow of alternative human energy, from
all over the world.
It
believes in an ingathering and a nexus,
of human persons values, feelings, ideas and actions.
Inma
believes in the creativity of this
gathering together and this connexion of persons and values.
It
believes that these values are spiritual,
moral and ethical, as well as humane, beautiful, loving and happy.
Inma
believes that persons may come
and go as they wish, but also
it believes that the values will stay and
fertilize its area, and
it believes the nexus will cover the globe.
Inma
believes that Earth loves us and
that we love Earth.
It
believes that from the love and from
the creativity will come a new model for
the world of human future.
It
believes that we have started that
future - now.
I guess
that if you and I believe these things we are Inma.
Perhaps
somewhere there is an unimportant place caught
between East and West, North and South, Past and Future.
It is so
far behind that it can only go forward.
Its
indigenous people are so badly treated they
will risk anything for a better life.
Its white
overlords are so distant from the center of their
own culture that they don’t know where to go except to
Self Government.
It is
wealthy, industrial, consumer, under-populated
and chaotic.
It has
tropical coasts and islands.
It has cool mountains and tablelands.
It is
closer to Asian and Melanesian peoples
than its own capital city, and it often sees
itself as the end of the earth.
Yet the
desires of some of its citizens are:
to build
the first free territory guided by global humane laws
to
implement the UN covenants on Human Rights
to give
migrants, visitors and native born an equal say
to accept
ideas, people and music of living from all over
to welcome
and respect every interested person
to love
Planet Earth, and
to take a
next step towards a happier more beautiful more human community.
Maybe one
such place is called Northern Queensland, Australia.
But an
Aboriginal word meaning 'a coming together' is Inma.
Bandler,
L. C. and D. Gordon (1985). Know how : guided programs for inventing your
own best future. San Rafael, Calif., FuturePace.
Bandler, R. (1984). Magic in action.
Cupertino, Calif., Meta Publications.
Bandler, R., J. Grinder, et al.
(1982). Reframing : Neuro-linguistic Programming and the Transformation of
Meaning. Moab, Utah, Real People Press.
Bandler, R., J. Grinder, et al.
(1979). Frogs into princes : neuro linguistic programming. Moab, Utah,
Real People Press.
Bandler, R. G., J. (1975). Patterns
of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton Erickson, MD., Cuppertino, California:
Meta Publications.
Bateson, G. (1973). Steps to an
Ecology of Mind : Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and
Epistemology. St. Alban's, Eng., Paladin.
Bateson, G. (1987). Steps to an
ecology of mind : collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and
epistemology. Northvale, N.J, Aronson.
Capra, F. (1997). The Web of Life -
A New Synthesis of Mind and Matter. London, Harper Collins.
Chin, K. (1971). "The Korean
Choice-of-Law Rules." Lawasia 2.
Clark, A. W. and N. T. Yeomans (1969).
Fraser House - Theory, Practice and Evaluation of a Therapeutic Community.
New York, Springer Pub Co.
Coper, M. (1969). "The Definition
of Law and the Directive Principles of the Indian Constitution." Jaipur
Law Journal 9.
Cutler, D. (1984). Networks. (The
Chronic Mental Patient - Five Years Later. J. A. Talbott. New York,
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Davis, S. M. and C. Meyer (1999). Blur
: the Speed of Change in the Connected Economy. Oxford, Capstone.
Devine, S. (2001). Asia and Pacific
Regional Experts Meeting on Psychosocial Response in Emergencies -1st Expert
Group Meeting Results. Bangkok, UNICEF.
Dilts, R., J. Grinder, et al. (1980). Neuro-Linguistic
Programming - Volume One - The Study of the Structure of Subjective Experience.
Cupertino, California, Meta
Publications.
Directorate-General 1A External
Relations : Europe and the New Independent States - Common Foreign and Security
Policy and External Missions and D. A.-M. R. H. R. a. Democatisation (1998).
European Initiative for Dermocracy and the Protection of Human Rights -
Guidelines for Applicants 1998. Brussels - Belgium, European Commission.
Evers, T., Ed. (1985). Identity:
The Hidden Side of New Social Movements in Latin America. New Social
Movements and the State in Latin America. Amsterdam, CEDLA Workshop Papers p
43-71.
Falk, R. A. (1964). The Role of
Domestic Courts in the International Order.
Falk, R. A. (1974). "Law and
National Security: The Case for Normative Realism." Utah Law Review
No. 1.
Falk, R. A. (1975). A Study of
Future Worlds. New Delhi, Orient Longman.
Falk, R. A. (1991). Openings for Peace
and Justice in a World of Danger and Struggle. The United Nations and a Just
World Order. R. A. Falk, S. S. Kim and S. H. Mendlovitz. Boulder, Colorado,
Westview Press Inc.
Gordon, D. C. (1978). Therapeutic
Metaphors : Helping Others Through the Looking Glass. Cupertino, Calif.,
Meta Publications.
Grinder, J., J. De Lozier, et al.
(1977). Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D.
Volume 2. Cupertino, California, Meta Publications.
Ireland, R. (1998). Globalised Săo
Paulo as Invention and Happening: Lessons on a Train. Imagined Places: The
Politics of Making Space. C. Houston, F. Kurasawa and A. Watson.
Melbourne:, La Trobe University.
Jantsch, E. (1980). The
Self-Organizing Universe. New York, Pergamon.
Jantsch, E. and C. Waddington (1976). Evolution
and Consciousness: Human Systems in Transition. .Reading, Mass,
Addison-Wesley.
Judge, A. (1982). Development through
Alternation Internet publication.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure
of scientific revolutions. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure
of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.
Laceweb Working Group (1997). The
Laceweb Homepage - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au.
Laceweb-Homepage (1998).
"Self-help Action Supporting Survivors of Torture and Trauma in SE Asia
Oceania and Australasia - A Plan of Small Generalisable Actions - http://www.laceweb.org.au/aose.htm."
Laceweb-Homepage (2001). Second SE
Asia Oceania Australasia Trauma Survivors Support Network Healing Sharing
Gatherings - July 2001 - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/indexA.htm.
Mares, P. (2001). East Timor:
Indonesia's Actions 'Genocide' Says Expert
- Internet Source - http://abc.net.au/ra/asiapac/programs/s354635.htm.
Mendlovitz, S. H. (1991). Struggles
for a Just World Peace - A Transition Strategy. The United Nations and a
Just World Order. R. A. Falk, S. S. Kim and S. H. Mendlovitz. Boulder,
Colorado, Westview Press Inc.
More, T. (1901). "Utopia -
Internet Source - http://www.d-holliday.com/tmore/utopia.htm."
Parkinson, C. N. (1963). 1963 East
and West. Unknown, Mentor Books.
Pascale, R. T., M. Millemann, et al.
(2000). Surfing the Edge of Chaos - The Laws of Nature and the New Laws of
Business. London, Texere Publishing.
Pelz, W. (1974). The Scope of
Understanding in Sociology : Towards a More Radical Reorientation in the Social
and Humanistic Sciences. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
(2002). Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Homepage - Internet Source - www.unhchr.ch/indigenous/forum.htm.
Petford Working Group (1998). Geoff
Guests Petford Aboriginal Training Farm - Internet Source - http://www.lceweb.org.au/ggl.htm.
Petford Working Group (1998). The
Healing Ways of Old Man Geoff Guest - Australian Aboriginal Elder - Internet
Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/ghw.htm.
Petford Working Group (2000). The
Healing Art of Storytelling - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/sty.htm.
Petford Working Group (2001). More of
the Healing Ways of Old Man - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/gah.htm.
Prigogine, I. and I. Stengers (1984). Order
out of Chaos. New York, Bantam.
Roberts, M. and T. Widders (1994).
Report on the Small Island Coastal and Estuarine People Gathering Celebration
for the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/rsig.htm.
Sayer, G. (2003). Counsellors Not
Needed on Tikopia, The Australian Newpaper - Letters to the Editors.
Schubert and Danelski (1969). Comparative
Judicial Behaviour. Unknown, Unknown.
SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response
Network (2002). SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response Network Homepage - FAQ _
Treaty - Internet Source www.psychosocialnetwork.org/faq_treaty.htm.
SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response
Network (2002). "SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response Network Homepage -
Internet Source - http://www.psychosocialnetwork.org."
SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response
Network (2002). SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response Network Homepage FAQ -
Memorandum - Internet Source www.psychosocialnetwork.org/faq_memo.htm.
Smith, D. (1964). The New Commonwealth
and its Constitutions.
Smith, D. (1964). The New
Commonwealth and its Constitutions.
Smith, L., Tuhiwai (1999). Decolonizing
Methodologies - Research and Indigenous Peoples. London, Zed Books Ltd.
Spencer, L. and E. P. De Castro
(2002). Discussion on the paper, 'Interfacing Alternative and Complementary
Well-being Ways For Local Wellness Intercultural Peacehealing' - Internet
Source http://www.psychosocialnetwork.org/PESNvol1no1.htm,
SE Asia Regional Psychosocial Response Network,.
Spencer, L., D. Wijewickrama, et al.
(2002). Interfacing Alternative and Complementary Well-being Ways For Local
Wellness - A paper prepared for the UNICEF Expert Study Group on Evolving
Psycho-social Emergency Response Networks for the SE Asia Oceania Region.
Internet Source - http://www.psychosocialnetwork.org/faq_interfacing.htm,
SE Asia Oceania Psychosocial Support Network.
Speth, J. (1996). The Observer.
London.
Suzuki, D. and H. Dressel (2002). Good
News for a Change - Hope for a Troubled Planet. Crowsnest, NSW Australia,
Allen and Unwin.
Tebtebba Foundation (2002). Tebtebba
Foundation Homepage.
The Constitution of India (1949). The
Constitution of India.
Turner, R. H. and L. M. Killian
(1972). Collective behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.
Turner, V. (1974.). Dramas, Fields,
and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society. Ithaca:, Cornell
University Press.
Turner, V. ( 1977). .Variations on a
theme of liminality. Secular Ritual. B. Myerhoff. Amsterdam:, Van
Gorcum.: p. 36-52.
Un Inma (2001). Support for Trauma
Survivors - Healing Sharing Gatherings - Report and Photo Gallery - Internet
Source - http:www.laceweb.org.au/indexA.htm.
University of New England, Dept. of
University Extension, et al. (1971). Aboriginal human relations newsletter.
Armidale, N.S.W., The Dept.
Walls, J. (1993). "UNDP First
Nations Speak Out - Internet Source http://nativenet.uthscsa.edu/archive/nl/9310/0015.html."
Widders, T. (1997). Letter to Down To
Earth - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/dam.htm.
Wolff, K. H. (1976). Surrender and
Catch - Experience and Inquiry Today. Boston
Studies in the Philosophy of Science. R. S. Cohen and Wartofsky. Boston, D.
Reidel Publishing.
Wooten, J. (1969).
"Lawasia." Lawasia 1.
Yeomans, N., T. Widders, et al.
(1993). Governments and the Facilitating of Community Grassroots Wellbeing
Action - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/gfg.htm.
Yeomans, N. T. (1971a). Mental Health
And Social Change. The Collected Papers of Dr. Neville Thomas Yeomans -
Mitchell Library Archive. Sydney: 295.
Yeomans, N. T. (1971b). Mental Health
and Social Change - http://www.laceweb.org.au/mhs.htm.
Collected Papers. Mitchell Library. Sydney: 295.
Yeomans, N. T. (1974). On Global
Reform and International Normative Model Areas (Inma) - Internet Source - http:www.laceweb.org.au/gri.htm.
Yeomans, N. T. (1990). An Example of
Inigenous Enabling - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/ena.htm.
Yeomans, N. T. (1992). Unique Healing
Treaty - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/up.htm.
Yeomans, N. T. (1992). The Young
Persons Healing Learning Code - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/uyp.htm.
Yeomans, N. T. (1999). Extegrity -
Guidelines for Joint Partner Proposal Application -Facilitation of Indigenous
and/or disadvantaged small minority Psycho-Cultural Healing, Humanitarian Law,
and Humane Democracy - Internet Source - http://www.laceweb.org.au/ext.htm..