Some of Ben Roberts' favorite quotes from Community, by Peter Block

Some of Ben Roberts' favorite quotes from Community, by Peter Block

Part of "DandDTrans," a "community of inquiry and action" regarding the role that dialogue and deliberation can play in addressing the mega-crises of our time

Couldn’t load preview

The file may have been moved or deleted, or is temporarily unavailable.

https://paper-hackpad-attachments.dropboxusercontent.com/hackpad.com_O7mT4ycEko8_p.22256_1416484929380_great%20transition%20image.png?fit=max&w=882

Image courtesy of www.NewStories.org

Couldn’t load preview

The file may have been moved or deleted, or is temporarily unavailable.

https://paper-hackpad-attachments.dropboxusercontent.com/hackpad.com_bOzHXyLuoYQ_p.22256_1420053911791_undefined?fit=max&w=882

Here are a bunch of my favorite passages from Block’s Community: the Structure of Belonging, which has inspired me and informs much of my hosting work, including what I am seeking to accomplish in DandDTrans.

Invitation as a Way of Being

Invitation is not only a step in bringing people together, it is also a fundamental way of being in community. It manifests the willingness to live in a collaborative way. This means that a future can be created without having to force it or sell it or barter for it. When we believe that barter or subtle coercion is necessary, we are operating out of a context of scarcity and self-interest, the core currencies of the economist. Barter or coercion seems necessary when we have little faith in citizens’ desire and capacity to operate out of idealism. The choice for idealism or cynicism is a spiritual stance about the nature of human beings. Cynicism gets justified by naming itself “reality.”

A commitment to invitation as a core strategy is betting on a world not dependent on barter and incentives. It is a choice for idealism and determines the context within which people show up. For all the agony of a volunteer effort, you are rewarded by being in the room with people who are up to something larger than their immediate self-interest. You are constantly in the room with people who want to be there, even if their numbers are few. The concern we have about the turnout is simply an expression of our own doubts about the possibility that given a free choice, people will choose to create a future distinct from the past. p.117

The Radical Aspect of Invitation

If the essence of community is to create structures for belonging, then we are constantly inviting people who are strangers to us, and one another, into the circle. An invitation is the antidote to our projection onto those we think are the problem. We take back our projection by extending ourselves to strangers. We make the invitation, in the face of our own isolation, having been waiting to be invited, wanting others to take the first step, wanting others to reach out to us, to acknowledge us and give us the gold star that never came at the right moment. This will never happen, so we are obligated to take the first step.

Invitation may seem simple and straightforward, but it is not. Especially for introverts like me. I have never attended a party without wondering if I had the right night, and have never given a party without believing no one would come. (p.116)

Advice

Create an Advice-Free Zone. We need to tell people not to be helpful. Trying to be helpful and giving advice are really ways to control others. Advice is a conversation stopper. In community building, we want to substitute curiosity for advice. No call to action. No asking what they are going to do about it. Do not tell people how you handled the same concern in the past. Do not ask questions that have advice hidden in them, such as “Have you ever thought of talking to the person directly?”

Often citizens will ask for advice. The request for advice is how we surrender our sovereignty. If we give in to this request, we have, in this small instance, affirmed their servitude, their belief that they do not have the capacity to create the world from their own resources; and more important, we have supported their escape from their own freedom.

Advice also weakens relatedness, even if people ask for it. Urge citizens to ask one another instead, “Why does that mean so much to you?” When they answer, ask the same question again, “And why does that mean so much to you?” The goal is to replace advice with curiosity. The future hinges on this issue. Advice, recommendations, and obvious actions are exactly what increase the likelihood that tomorrow will be just like yesterday. (p.109)

Sidebar quote on p.109:

One of the basic elements of the relationship between oppressor and oppressed is prescription. Every prescription represents the imposition of one individual’s choice upon another, transforming the consciousness of the person prescribed to into one that conforms with the prescriber’s consciousness.

Paolo Freire, The Pedagogy

of the Oppressed

Leadership

In communal transformation, leadership is about intention,

convening, valuing relatedness, and presenting choices. It is not

a personality characteristic or a matter of style, and therefore it requires

nothing more than what all of us already have.

This means we can stop looking for leadership as though it were scarce

or lost, or it had to be trained into us by experts. If our traditional form of

leadership has been studied for so long, written about with such admiration,

defined by so many, worshipped by so few, and the cause of so much

disappointment, maybe doing more of all that is not productive. The search

for great leadership is a prime example of how we too often take something

that does not work and try harder at it.

I have written elsewhere about reconstructing leader as social architect.

Not leader as special person, but leader as a citizen willing to do those

things that have the capacity to initiate something new in the world. In

this way, leader belongs right up there with cook, carpenter, artist, and

landscape designer. It is a capacity that can be learned by all of us, with a

small amount of teaching and an agreement to practice. The ultimate do-it-

yourself movement. (pp.85-6)

The Ownership Conversation

P. 127-8 on Ownership, which ties into “being the change:"

Accountability is the willingness to acknowledge that we have participated in

creating, through commission or omission, the conditions that we wish to see

changed. Without this capacity to see ourselves as cause, our efforts become

either coercive or wishfully dependent on the transformation of others.

Community will be created the moment we decide to act as creators of

what it can become. This is the stance of ownership, which is available to

us every moment on every issue, even world peace, the overdependence

on fossil fuel consumption, and the fact that our teenagers are slightly

self-centered.

This requires us to believe in the possibility that this organization, this

neighborhood, this community is mine or ours to create. This will occur

when we are willing to answer the essential question, “How have I contributed

to creating the current reality?” Confusion, blame, and waiting

for someone else to change are defenses against ownership and personal

power. This core question, when answered, is central to how the community

is transformed.

A subtle denial of ownership is innocence and indifference. The future

is denied with the response, “It doesn’t matter to me—whatever you want

to do is fine.” This is always a lie and just a polite way of avoiding a difficult

conversation around ownership.

People best create that which they own, and cocreation is the bedrock

of accountability. The ownership conversation most directly deals with the

belief that each of us, perhaps even from the moment of birth, is cause,

not effect. The leadership task is to find a way to use this conversation to

confront people with their freedom.

The Distinctions for the Conversation for Ownership

Ownership is the decision to become the author of our own experience. It is the choice to decide on our own what value and meaning will occur when we show up. It is the stance that each of us is creating the world, even the one we have inherited.

The key distinction for the conversation is between ownership and blame (a form of entitlement).

We have to realize that each time people enter a room, they walk in with ambivalence, wondering whether this is the right place to be. This is because their default mindset is that someone else owns the room, the meeting, and the purpose that convened the meeting.

Every conventional gathering begins with the unspoken belief that whoever called the meeting has something in mind for us. We are inundated with the world trying to sell us something, so much so that we cannot imagine that this time will be different. This is why so much talk is about others not in the room.

The leader/convener has to act to change this, in a sense to renegotiate the social contract. We want to shift to the belief that this world, including this gathering, is ours to construct together. The intent is to move the social contract from parenting to partnership. Renegotiating the social contract for this room is a metaphoric example of how our social contract with the community can also be renegotiated.

Dissent

And pp.132-134 on Dissent:

The dissent conversation begins by allowing people the space to say no. It

rests on the belief that if we cannot say no, then our yes has no meaning.

Each of us needs the chance to express our doubts and reservations,

without having to justify them or to move quickly into problem solving. “No”

is the beginning of the conversation for commitment. This is critical: that

dissent is followed by the other conversations. To create space for dissent

is not to leave it hanging there, but to move on to the other conversations

of possibility, ownership, and gifts…

Doubt and “no” are symbolic expressions of people finding their space

and role in the future. It is when we fully understand what people do not

want that choice becomes possible. Dissent in this way is life giving, or life

affirming. It is the refusal to live the life someone else has in mind for us. As

an individual, it is the moment when we acknowledge that we are not the

children our parents, guardians, teachers had in mind. We have disappointed

others and for too long internalized that disappointment. The moment we say

no to the expectations of others about who they wish us to be, the moment

we declare, “I am not that person,” our adulthood begins. Just because it

took 30 or 40 years, this is no time to get picky…

Distinctions for the Conversation for Dissent

There is a vital difference between authentic dissent and inauthentic dissent,

which we can call false refusal. Inauthentic forms of dissent are denial,

rebellion, and resignation…

Rebellion… lives in reaction to the world. On the

surface, rebellion claims to be against monarchy, dominion, or oppression.

Too often it turns out to be a vote for monarchy, dominion, or patriarchy.

Rebellion is most often not a call for transformation or a new context, but

simply a complaint that others control the monarchy and not us. This is

why most revolutions fail—because nothing changes, only the name of

the monarch.

The community form of rebellion is protest. It is noble in tradition but

still often keeps us in perpetual reaction to the stances of others. There is

safety in building an identity on what we do not want. The extremists on

both sides of any issue are more wedded to their positions than to creating a

new possibility. That is why they make unfulfillable demands. The AM radio

band is populated with this non-conversation. Any time we act in reaction,

even to evil, we are giving power to what we are in reaction to.

I have heard John McKnight say that advisory groups speak quietly to

power, protestors scream at power, and neither chooses to reclaim or produce

power. The real problem with rebellion is that it is such fun. It avoids

taking responsibility, operates on the high ground, is fueled by righteousness,

gives legitimacy to blame, and is a delightful escape from the unbearable

burden of being accountable. It has much to recommend it.

God I love his dry sense of humor! Another key distinction::

Resignation is the ultimate act of powerlessness and a stance against possibility. It is a passive form of control. It is born of our cynicism and loss of faith. What we are resigning from is the future and what we are embracing is the past. None of us is strong enough to carry the dead weight of others’ resignation or even our own. Resignation ultimately alienates us and destroys community. It is the spiritual cause of isolation and not belonging. Beware of resignation, for it presents itself as if data and experience were on its side.

Possibility

The Distinctions for the Possibility Conversation

The challenge with possibility is it gets confused with goals, prediction,

and optimism. Possibility is not about what we plan to happen, or what we

think will happen, or whether things will get better. Goals, prediction, and

optimism don’t create anything; they just might make things a little better

and cheer us up in the process. Nor is possibility simply a dream. Dreaming

leaves us bystanders or observers of our lives. Possibility creates something

new. It is a declaration of a future that has the quality of being and aliveness

that we choose to live into. It is framed as a declaration of the world that I

want to inhabit. It is a statement of who I am that transcends our history,

our story, our usual demographics. The power is in the act of declaring.

The distinction between possibility and problem solving is worth dwelling

on for a moment. As I have said, surely too many times, we traditionally

start with problem solving and talk about goals, targets, resources, and how

to persuade others. Even the creation of a vision is part of the problem-solving

mentality. A vision is something we must wait for to realize and is

most often followed by an effort to make it concrete and practical. Even a

vision, which is a more imaginative form of problem solving, needs to be

postponed and replaced with possibility. The future is created through a

declaration of what is the possibility we stand for. Out of this declaration,

each time we enter a room, the possibility enters with us.

The communal possibility comes into being through individual public

declarations of possibility. Much the same as witnessing in religious gatherings.

Though every possibility begins as an individual declaration, it gains

power and impacts community when made public. The community possibility

is not the aggregation of individual possibilities. Nor is it a negotiation or

agreement on common possibility. The communal possibility is that space

or porous container where a collective exists for the realization of all the possibilities

of its members. This is the real meaning of a restorative community.

It is that place where all possibilities can come alive, and they come alive at

the moment they are announced.

• • •

The possibility conversation gives form to one way the gifts of those in the

margin get brought into the center. Each person’s possibility counts, especially

those whose voices are quieted or marginalized by the drumbeat of

retribution. In fact, what distinguishes those on the margin in communities

is they tragically live without real possibility. For many youth on the

margin, the future is narrow, perhaps death or prison. They have trouble

imagining a future distinct from the past or present. This is the real tragedy:

not only that life is difficult, but that it is a life that holds no possibility for

a different future.

Rebellion

Rebellion is more complex. It lives in reaction to the world. On the

surface, rebellion claims to be against monarchy, dominion, or oppression.

Too often it turns out to be a vote for monarchy, dominion, or patriarchy.

Rebellion is most often not a call for transformation or a new context, but

simply a complaint that others control the monarchy and not us. This is

why most revolutions fail—because nothing changes, only the name of

the monarch.

The community form of rebellion is protest. It is noble in tradition but

still often keeps us in perpetual reaction to the stances of others. There is

safety in building an identity on what we do not want. The extremists on

both sides of any issue are more wedded to their positions than to creating a

new possibility. That is why they make unfulfillable demands. The AM radio

band is populated with this non-conversation. Any time we act in reaction,

even to evil, we are giving power to what we are in reaction to.

I have heard John McKnight say that advisory groups speak quietly to

power, protestors scream at power, and neither chooses to reclaim or produce

power. The real problem with rebellion is that it is such fun. It avoids

taking responsibility, operates on the high ground, is fueled by righteousness,

gives legitimacy to blame, and is a delightful escape from the unbearable

burden of being accountable. It has much to recommend it. p.134

Action

If we are to value building social fabric and belonging as much as budgets,

timetables, and bricks and mortar, we need to consider action in a

broader way. For example:

Would a meeting be worthwhile if we simply strengthened our relationship?

Would a meeting be worthwhile if we learned something of value?

Suppose in a meeting we simply stated our requests of each other and what we were willing to offer each other. Would that justify our time together?

Or, in the gathering, what if we only discussed the gifts we wanted to bring to bear on the concern that brought us together. Would that be an outcome of value?

Saying yes to these questions opens and widens the spectrum of what

constitutes action, and this is the point. Relatedness, learning, requests, and

offers of gifts are outcomes as valuable as agreements and next steps.

It is not that we are gathering just for the sake of gathering. Or gathering

to get to know each other. We come together for an exchange of value

and to experience how relatedness, gifts, learning, and generosity are valuable

to community. When we name these as outcomes, it allows us to get

completion for the investment we made without having to leave with a list

for the future.

With this expanded notion of action, we can bring visioning, problem

solving, and clearly defined outcomes into the room––and in fact we need

them to sustain us. People will meet to learn and connect for only so long,

and then a task is needed. The task doesn’t have to be the main point of the

gathering, but it is an essential point. p.81

Questions Are More Transforming than Answers

We begin by realizing, at a basic level, that we need a new conversation. Some will say we are already having these conversations. Maybe, but even if ownership, dissent, gifts, commitment, and possibility are on the agenda, they are rarely pursued in a way that causes a real shift. We need to identify a way to hold these conversations so that the chance of creating something new increases, so that they have the quality of aliveness we seek.

The conversation is not so much about the future for the community, but is the future itself. A parallel way to think of this is to consider the meaning of a yoga practice. Anyone beginning yoga struggles with the postures and cannot help but feel inadequate, have doubts about their body, and think the purpose of the practice is the core strength and flexibility it produces, or not. We are told––and sometimes get––that even the way we breathe can be a pathway to a better life.

All this is true, but the larger insight, the meta-goal, is to realize that “how you do the mat is how you do your life.” That the practice of yoga itself is your life. Creating good postures, breathing, and flexibility are simply fringe benefits. It is your way of doing the practice itself that is the breakthrough, not some future moment in which a better state of being is accomplished. This way there is nothing to wait for, no future or objective measure of accomplishment to be attained.

The same with certain conversations. Holding them in a restorative context––one of possibility, generosity, and gifts, in relationship with others–– is as much the transformation as any place that those conversations might lead you. The right small group conversation releases aliveness and intention into the community. This creates the condition where the symptoms and fragmentation and breakdown can be healed. It is only within this context and communal aliveness that our skill at problem solving will make the difference.

The community does not shift by having any new conversation. Nothing will change if the new conversation is a discussion about better language, or if we work harder on analyzing or explaining the issue at hand. Studying, trying harder to understand, seeking better programs or tools––these have no power. They are only interesting. Without a conversation that has accountability built into it, we may build relatedness and the room may become gentler, but the community and how it constructs itself do not shift. (Community, p.102)

Questions with Little Power

The existing conversation is organized around a set of traditional questions that have little power to create an alternative future. These are the questions the world is constantly asking. It is understandable that we ask them, but they carry no power; and in the asking, each of these questions is an obstacle to addressing what has given rise to the question in the first place:

How do we get people to show up and be committed?

How do we get others to be more responsible?

How do we get people to come on board and to do the right thing?

How do we hold those people accountable?

How do we get others to buy in to our vision?

How do we get those people to change?

How much will it cost and where do we get the money?

How do we negotiate for something better?

What new policy or legislation will move our interests forward?

Where is it working? Who has solved this elsewhere and how do we

import that knowledge?

How do we find and develop better leaders?

Why aren’t those people in the room?

If we answer these questions directly, from the context from which they are asked, we are supporting the mindset that an alternative future can be negotiated, mandated, engineered, and controlled into existence. They call us to try harder at what we have been doing. The hidden agenda in these questions is to maintain dominance and to be right. They urge us to raise standards, measure more closely, and return to basics, purportedly to create accountability. They are not really about returning to basics, they are about returning to what got us here. These questions have no power; they only carry force.

All these questions preserve innocence for the one asking. They imply that the one asking knows, and other people are a problem to be solved. These are each an expression of reliance on the use of force to make a difference in the world. They occur when we lose faith in our own power and the power of our community.

Questions that are designed to change other people are the wrong questions. Wrong, not because they don’t matter or are based on ill intent, but wrong because they reinforce the problem-solving model. They are questions that are the cause of the very thing we are trying to shift: the fragmented and retributive nature of our communities. The conversations about standards, measures, and the change needed in others destroy relatedness, and it is in this way that they work against belonging and community.

These questions are also a response to the wish to create a predictable future. We want desperately to take uncertainty out of the future. But when we take uncertainty out, it is no longer the future. It is the present projected forward. Nothing new can come from the desire for a predictable tomorrow. The only way to make tomorrow predictable is to make it just like today. In fact, what distinguishes the future is its unpredictability and mystery. (p.104-5)

Questions with Great Power

Questions that have the power to make a difference are ones that engage people in an intimate way, confront them with their freedom, and invite them to cocreate a future possibility.

Achieving accountability and commitment entails the use of questions through which, in the act of answering them, we become co-creators of the world. It does not matter what our answers to the questions are. The questions have an impact even if the response is to refuse to answer them. To state it more dramatically: Powerful questions are the ones that cause you to become an actor as soon as you answer them. You no longer have the luxury of being a spectator of whatever it is you are concerned about. Regardless of how you answer these questions, you are guilty. Guilty of having created this world. Not a pleasant thought, but the moment we accept the idea that we have created the world, we have the power to change it.

Powerful questions also express the reality that change, like life, is difficult and unpredictable. They open up the conversation––in contrast to questions that are, in a sense, answers in disguise. Answers in disguise narrow and control the dialogue, and thereby the future.

We can generalize what qualities define great questions, and this gives

us the capacity not just to remember a list but also to create powerful questions

of our own.

A great question has three qualities:

It is ambiguous. There is no attempt to try to precisely define what is meant by the question. This requires each person to bring their own, personal meaning into the room.

It is personal. All passion, commitment, and connection grow out of what is most personal. We need to create space for the personal.

It evokes anxiety. All that matters makes us anxious. It is our wish to escape from anxiety that steals our aliveness. If there is no edge to the question, there is no power.

Questions themselves are an art form worthy of a lifetime of study. They are what transform the hour. Here are some questions that have the capacity to open the space for a different future:

What is the commitment you hold that brought you into this room?

What is the price you or others pay for being here today?

How valuable do you plan for this effort to be?

What is the crossroads you face at this stage of the game?

What is the story you keep telling about the problems of this

community?

What are the gifts you hold that have not been brought fully into

the world?

What is your contribution to the very thing you complain about?

What is it about you or your team, group, or neighborhood that no

one knows?

These questions have the capacity to move something forward, and we will explore them––and others––in more depth in the coming chapters. By answering these kinds of questions, we become more accountable, more committed, more vulnerable; and when we voice our answers to one another, we grow more intimate and connected. pp. 105-7

Some of Ben Roberts' favorite quotes from Community, by Peter Block
Main Menu: Welcome | About | Intros | World Cafe | Bohm | Open Space | Resources | News | Calls | Help
Invitation as a Way of Being
The Radical Aspect of Invitation
Advice
Leadership
The Ownership Conversation
The Distinctions for the Conversation for Ownership
Dissent
Possibility
Rebellion
Action
Questions Are More Transforming than Answers
Questions with Little Power
Questions with Great Power

​​