It’s a hoarfrost kind of day here on Bowen Island, kind of cold out and the ground is covered in snow, frost and ice. Sitting in The Snug Cafe having lunch when a weekend visitor comes in saying the he blew out his shoes hiking and all he has is flip flops. Nothing’s open. He’s a size 11.
The six of us in the cafe were about to post on Facebook and the forum and make some calls when Will, the cook here, heads to the back and comes out with his pair of spare shoes. Fits perfectly. Stranger will bring them back tomorrow when he leaves.
We call these moments “only on Bowen”.
Early morning crossing for Howe Sound. It’s below freezing, with a strong windchill coming from a Squamish wind. Fresh snow on the mountains, clear sky, dawn coming. Last night we had a little earthquake, 4.8 magnitude. It smacked the house and for a moment I thought it was my teenage son coming up the stairs.
The year is ending, all is well with that. And although it is in reality an arbitrary boundary – the solstice is a better marker of turning – I nevertheless find myself deepening into reflective mood at this time of year.
I will put aside this year of theory. It was a year in which I discovered the praxis if complexity both at home on my home island and in my work. It was a rich year of learning and opening and now it is back to a deepened practice in so many ways.
Happy new year to you all. May the dawn come, shaking you a little and clearing you out with a cold northerly wind.
In the last year of applying Cynefin theory to my practice I’v e made a few conclusions about things. One of these is that what Dave Snowdon calls “pattern entrainment” is probably our achilles heel as a species. Pattern entrainment is the idea that once our brains learn something, it is very difficult to break that knowledge. And while we may be able to change our knowledge of facts fairly easily – such as admitting a mistake of a factual nature “you’re right, there is no 7:30 ferry after all!” – changing the way we make sense of facts is surprisingly hard.
It’s like water flowing into a whirlpool. The water coming into to the whirlpool is entrained into the pattern, and finds it impossible to escape.
For example, with the recent spate of massacres around the world, the social sphere has been full of people seeking answers. And the kind of answers people are seeking are firmly rooted in an entrained set of patterns of how we make sense of and solve many problems in the world: linear causality.
A belief that there is a clear set of steps that solves things like gun violence or war assumes a kind of order that isn’t there. Dave Snowden points out that our ability as humans to see in retrospect how something came to be leads us to believe that if we just get the steps right going forward, then we can prevent future bad things from happening. All we need to do is put the right things in order and follow the plan.
This act of “retrospective coherence” fools us into believing that we know what to do, and because decision makers in the complex space of social problems rely on retrospective coherence to understand how we got to where we are, this particular assumption – that problems have a linear causality – has infected discourse, policy making and politics. In short, research and investigations show the chains of causes and effects. Policy recommendations often advocate solving problems the same way we make sense of them. And we can’t.
This is becoming quite dangerous now. A tendency and romance of simple and well ordered solutions has resulted in Donald Trump getting away with identifying Muslims and Islam as the sole cause of terrorism. This is an easy sell to people who have been made to feel afraid and convinced that all problems are solved with simple solutions. It is true that you can solve all problems with a simple solution – just kill everyone – but this is not an option in a humane and sustainable society. This is, however, the logical end point of a simplified, linear solution being brought to complex problems: it creates psychotic societies.
This is showing up everywhere. I am at the early stages of working with a client who is a service provider. The funders of her programs are starting to want to to see evidence that her work (and their money) is ‘shifting the needle’ on the large scale social problems she is addressing. Both the funder and the service providers are suffering at the moment from the idea that a well designed set of interventions will address the root causes of poverty and vulnerability in communities. This is impossible of course as these are effects that are the emergent properties of, among other things, an economic systems that is designed to create inequality. The service providers cannot change the system, and everyone is frustrated.
To really eliminate poverty, we need to change the economic system, because it is that of attractors and constraints that gives rise to the transactions and social relationships that create the emergence of poor communities and people. What the service providers are doing well is effectively addressing the effects of an economic system founded on inequality, and while vulnerability may be increasing, in many local places, service providers are making a real difference in economic security for individuals and families. It is only when we confuse this local act with systemic change that the problems appear. We do good work, but in the big picture nothing changes.
For strategy, and especially for non-profits and service organizations trying to bring about a better world, this is an achilles heel. If you and your funders both evaluate your work on the basis of macro indicators that are the result of a myriad of interacting causes at a myriad of scales, you will be shown to be ineffective. And yet the myth persists that we can simply choose actions with limited resources, prioritize a set of steps and achieve “a poverty free community.” The failure to reach this goal is dispiriting to all involved, and it doesn’t have to be.
Non-profits and funders need to address the pattern entrainment that creeps into policy making and program design. We need to understand the proper role of a linear causality analysis and begin to take a more sophisticated, multi-pronged and complexity based approach to social problems. Seeking single answers to complex problems reveals much about the pattern entrainment and confirmation biases of people. It does very little to actually change these dynamics, and as a result, we can find ourselves stuck in a whirlpool, trying more and more things and getting further and further away from the world we’re wanting to create.
My kids approaching the Vimy Monument
I’ve been holidaying in Europe with the family this month – England, France and soon to Estonia. I haven’t been blogging, just soaking things up and relaxing.
But today the kids and I went to Vimy Ridge and it kind of keeps with the theme of some of the reconciliation posts I made here last month.
It is said that Vimy Ridge was the event that defined the young Nation of Canada, which was only 50 years old when 100,000 of it’s men, women and children (yes many many soldiers were under age) assembled on the slopes of Vimy Ridge and launched the first battle in the Arras Offensive in April 1917, a battle that would lead to the stalemate being broken and the eventual victory for the Allied forces a year and a half later.
Almost 3600 Canadians were killed and another 7000 or so wounded that morning. That is nothing compared to the losses of 150,000 French and Moroccan forces that tried to take and hold the ridge in the years prior to 1917. But for Canada, that was and still is, the greatest single loss of life in a day of military action.
Much is made of Vimy, especially these days when Canada’s military role has now fully evolved from peacekeeper to combat again. Vimy is often evoked to draw on Canadian sentiment to gather support for our military campaigns overseas. As we approach the 100th anniversary of that battle, I expect the sentiment to be further reinforced, especially by politicians.
But here is the thing. You simply have to visit Vimy to really understand this: if Vimy defined the kind of nation we are then it is a nuanced and complicated thing. For our greatest ever battle was not celebrated by a triumphalist monument declaring our greatness (in fact a staue stomping a German helmet was rejected in the design), but rather a huge sombre memorial to the costs of war, and the responsibilities of peace. There is simply nothing to celebrate at Vimy Ridge. If you were to read into what Canada is by attending that site you will see the kind of country Canada is: brutal and unrelenting in its pursuit of a military (or colonial) objective, but capable of deep reflection almost immediately afterward. Perhaps it was because Vimy was not a final victory, but simply a small part of a much much larger effort that the commemoration there is as sombre and reflective as it is. Or perhaps it was just an acknowledgement that war is a steaming pile of horror often for unclear objectives or far distant motives of power and politics divorced from the sacrifice that actual soldiers suffer. Our current government parrots this same pattern, championing new military actions, while ignoring the needs of veterans who return from these wars physically and emotionally scarred for life.
The monument itself consists of a number of important figures with names like Sympathy of the Canadians for the Helpless, The Spirit of Sacrifice, The Breaking of the Sword, Canada Bereft and The Mourning Parents. Inscribed on the eastern side of the monument are the names of Canadian soldiers whose remains were never found. The monument itself stands at the site of the objective of the battle and for several hundred meters to the west, the ground is still chewed up with craters and trenches, off limits because there is still unexploded ordinance in there, along with the bones of hundreds of human beings, blown to pieces in the battle. It is a place alive with suffering, terror and death. There is nothing beautiful about it, except perhaps for the birdsong, or the flock of sheep that graze the craters or the pines trees that lean upward towards the ridge top, appearing out of the corner of ones eye like some many soldiers charging for the top.
It is a place that is deeply moving and powerful and it does say something about the kind of country we can choose to be. For I wonder if we have ever really enacted the spirit of Vimy Ridge. Of course we are a country that is a small player in the military world, but when we fight we are ruthless. But we are also a country whose defining battle resulted in a reflection on our care for the helpless, on the practice of sacrifice, on the breaking of swords, on the deep mourning of what has happened in the name of Canada, and of the care for those who have lost children. In this way, Vimy says something about our national need to reflect and reconcile our actions with a morality that is lost in violence. I wonder if we have actually done that. I wonder if we can see this as an invitation to practice these principles in an ongoing way. I wonder if in the spirit of Vimy Ridge, if we are living up to the ideals that are emblazoned in that massive marble statue on top of a lonely escarpment in Pas-de-Calais.
Yesterday I read Taiaiake Alfred’s provocative essay on reconciliation entitled: “Restitution is the real pathway to justice for indigenous peoples.” This will probably be a tough read for many people who are bought into the mainstream notions of reconciliation: that it’s about a state level response to specific actions without confronting a fundamental shift in the nature of the relationship The idea of restitution is a powerful one, and today I’ve been thinking about what that means and why it is exactly the kind of call that should drive home the practical expression of reconciliation. And I’ve been looking for hidden examples of where it is already occuring.
Today we are preparing to welcome our third Indigenous Focus cohort for the Leadership 2020 program. This is a program that was developed by community service agencies working in child and family services. The program ran our first cohort with leaders from this sector and they quickly recognized that they needed to train with their colleagues in the Ministry of Children and Family Services. So we have run 8 cohorts now, seven of which have been blended cohorts with folks in the community and the ministry training together Three of these cohorts have had an indigenous focus, which is to say that we are focused on the specific issues facing indigenous people and communities. Participants are from many different backgrounds, ethnicities and communities but they are all working with indigenous children and families.
So that’s the context for this post.
Today my colleague Wedlidi Speck told me a story that fits in with Taiaike’s ideas, that give a clue about indigenous forms of reconciliation and restitution. Back in the 19th century sometime, there was a massacre on the Central Coast. Bella Coola warriors came and killed many people from the Kwikwasut’inuxw tribe. In addition to killing many of the men, they took slaves to use and trade with other tribes. One of these slaves, Caribou Jack as he became known, was returned to the Kwikwasut’inuxw. When he was freed, he was provided with a Kwikwasut’inuxw canoe that had been stolen and he paddled safely down the coast back to the survivors, where he was taken in and cared for.
What stands out for me in this story was how the people that released him (said to be Tsimshian) returned him freely, but also provided him with his own possessions, in good condition, which he used to get safely home. There was no guilt in the story (and Taiaiake writes about why). But this was as much an act of restitution as anything. The word in Kwa’kwala used to designate this return is “u’mista,” a word later used to name the cultural centre in Alert Bay. The word is defined this way:
In earlier days, people were sometimes taken captive by raiding parties. When they returned to their homes, either through payment of ransom or by a raid, they were said to have u’mista. The return of our treasures from distant museums is a form of u’mista.
As a result of this restitution, it became possible for the tribes of the central and north coast to create agreements and relationships together. Real ones.
In the work we are doing with child and family services workers, we see this happening every day. The child welfare system is a fraught place for the practice of reconciliation. At its worst, the system perpetuates colonization, and it is often roundly criticized for the role it plays in continuing the policies that were started in the residential school system. And that is the story we often get, because criticizing the system and calling for its dismantlement gets a lot of airtime.
But there is a much different story that happens as well. When it works – and that is largely up to the individual workers that make it work – the system can help restore community and families such that children can return. The return of a child and the restitution of health and wellness to a family and a community is one practical expression of the kind of thing that Taiaiake is writing about here. And the fact that the people we are welcoming to Bowen Island this afternoon are right at the forefront of this work is humbling, whether they are working in family support, mental health, child protection, addictions and youth justice. To see indigenous and non-indigenous people working together to figure out ways of engaging with better practices, with major systemic shifts and with a strong heart of justice is powerful. It is an untold story of where restitution and reconciliation is happening every day. A society that steals children unconsciously is fundamentally unjust, and everyone of these workers who is coming to this learning actively works to address that injustice. It is not easy and making a mistake is dangerous. It is not work for the faint of heart, or for those lacking courage. But it is necessary and when it gets done well it is transformative
This is not perfect, but it has informed my views of reconciliation and helps me to see ways in which Taiaiake ‘s essay calls us to a deeper ground of engagement and personal involvement with the project of restitution in service of justice. It’s a deep honour to see these folks struggle with it and it puts and invitation out to others. How do you engage in the call for restitution? How can you support the work that others are doing and where can you personally do that work too, at whatever level?