The Stelle Dynamic

 

 

 

We are presently caught up in a kind of turmoil that we have not experienced since the days of 1974-75, when some 165 adults left, or the days of 1970, when some 35 adults left. This time there are 18 adults who have either left or announced they are going to leave.

 

This recurring dynamic must come to be understood. It always has similar characteristics. People leaving is the most painful one. Another one is the tendency toward polarization and factionalism. There are a lot of open letters. All the old doubts and fears sur­face in intensified fashion: “Why aren’t we growing? What’s wrong with us? What can we do differently? What can we change that will unlock the growth and prosperity that seem to elude us?” People struggle, using everything within them to maintain their balance as they try to discern what is best for Stelle. Most get pulled into the dynamic deeper than they thought would ever be necessary during this incarnation.

 

For those of you who may be going through this for the first time (and hopefully the last), and as a reminder to those of us who have been through this before, this time is better. A small consolation perhaps, but true. People leaving do not have the same bitterness toward Stelle that has existed before. People staying are more supportive of those leaving than was the case before. The educa­tional programs and thus the atmosphere surrounding the children are generally peaceful rather than one of the focuses of dissatisfaction. People. are still talking with one another instead of crossing the street to avoid one another. The list could go on and on. The dynamic is still not good, but it is better!

 

Even though we may be involved in the outworkings of this dynamic, the challenge for all of us is to transcend it and to gain some better understanding of its cause or causes.

 

What is the dynamic? Is it the historical one between the Katholis and. the Pfrees, the Apollonians and the Dionysians, or the practical and the idealists? I don’t think so—even though most of us are probably more one than the other, and this may certainly contribute to the dynamic. I believe the Stelle dynamic is the conflict between the legislative branch and the executive branch  of our organization.

 

After all these years, what helped me begin to see it came one night at the Mart Board meeting that had been called to discuss the possible causes for the loss of goods from the Mart. The Mart Board had announced early closing of the Mart each day to try to get a handle on one possible cause of the problem, and then had called a meeting of the membership to discuss the alternative causes and solutions. The dynamic surfaced at that meeting. Some of us asked questions of clarification to try to better understand the problem. Some of us expressed concern over the daily closing of the Mart. Many of us offered many different alternatives. There seemed to be no way to synthesize the concerns and ideas expressed. The only decision reached as I recall was to keep the Mart open and take an opinion poll of the membership. The Mart Board was trying to perform its responsibilities; the membership was doing the same. But a definite direction was not set.

 

This same dynamic seems to exist in some form at every meeting we have in Stelle. The Sepes’ and Roehms’ proposal ended the same way, for example. Most everyone is in favor of donating labor, but the majority did not want a specific agreement with an executive body to coordinate it.

 

Powerlessness of the People

 

What are the effects of this dynamic? I believe it fosters a sense of powerlessness in all of us. Some of us experience it to greater or lesser degrees than others due to past conditioning, or experiences, or even, our present role in the community.

 

Where powerlessness is present, fear prevails. It manifests itself in many different ways. When we feel powerless, we tend to dig in our heels and resist any effort to do something. Resentment builds. We want to keep our options open. We tend to want to bring low those persons who appear to act with power.

 

The executive branch asks for fewer formal votes and, lacking com­munity’ consensus, tries to get things accomplished with support from individuals who feel they can cooperate. The legislative branch develops proposals that restrict the functioning of the Trustees, or the Membership Committee, or Richard, or anyone perceived as having power. Both branches are expressing a certain kind of power, a need to do something, no matter what, but it does not come from our deepest center.

 

We are afraid to delegate power to someone or some organizational arm because then we, mistakenly, feel that we will have less power and the other party will have more. The amount of available power is seen as limited; a scarcity consciousness develops. We fail to see that true power is limitless; as we focus it to accomplish real goals, it becomes stronger; as we purposefully pool it with that of others, it expands; as we become more competent, more centered and more cooperative, we multiply our energies rather than divide them. A consciousness of abundance manifests. This kind of power is what love is.

 

Empower the People

 

I an a little reluctant to use the idea of empowering people—an idea that has become increasingly meaningful to me over the last several months—because at election time there seems to be a lot of manuvering to be a spokesperson for the people. Since I am so visible a part of the present dynamic, it may be too much to hope that the idea and this letter are not seen similarly. Regardless, I offer them.

 

The phrase, “Empower the People,” is different from, “Power to the People.” “Power to the People,” implies that the people do not already have power—while we know that just the opposite is true. According to the Ninth Lemurian Law:

 

The autonomy and sovereignty of this smallest “kingdom” (the home) is absolute, and all manmade laws derive from the agreement of many homes to surrender some part of their absolute sovereignty for a common purpose; but the sanctity of the home is inviolate in the absolute sense, and governments derive their powers from the granting of some of the prerogatives of the home/kingdom. The govern­ment that forgets that fact eventually falls. (Richard’s statement of 1-3-76)

 

To empower the people is to impart power, to enable our neighbors to experience and express their power constructively and positively, and ideally, limitlessly. Our task is to facilitate the development of “Bill’s no-limit people,” regardless of what role they serve in—whether in the executive or legislative branch. People who are empowered are free to work together to make Stelle happen.

 

However, the intent of this letter is not to focus on how we can empower individuals per se. There are many resources available for this, such as Radix, Success Training, the group-wide experiential training in management now underway, and the management seminars I still plan to organize. The “Power Thinking” article distributed recently will help with this also.

 

Here the intent is to focus more on the organizational dynamic. The executive branch has organization. (This is not to say that it cannot be improved, changed, reduced, or expanded. I am personally open to, and will support, efforts of the legislative branch to become as knowledgeable as possible of the different program areas and their problems and possibilities.)

 

The development of this viable organization has been one of my per­sonal goals for the last several years — because organizations empower people. The eminent management theorist Peter Drucker, in his book, Management—Tasks Responsibilities Practices, states that, “The purpose of an organization is to make the strengths of people productive and their weaknesses irrelevant.” More can get accomplished by an organization that works than by individual effort. Organization is essential to handle rapid growth.

 

The legislative branch in Stelle has never been organized in a way that works—so that people feel empowered. None of us come from an environment where pure democracy is what is. We have few models, if any, for what it might look like and work like.

 

If a person is the kind of individual who feels comfortable talking in front of a group and also understands the referendum process, he or she can impact our system. Without these skills, impact may seem too difficult to attempt.

 

In other words, for many of us having the referendum process may not seem like a privilege and freedom but more like an irrelevance—something like having a brand new car in the garage but not knowing how to drive!

 

Actually, that’s a problem with an obvious solution—take driving lessons, i.e., Break down the referendum process into simple steps and find a way to teach each step experientially—maybe even teach­ing public speaking skills—until each Stelle member feels fully capable of using the process, feels fully empowered to get any idea for group change presented to, discussed by, and voted on by the community.

 

Managers usually feel happy to find problems with obvious solutions. Strangely, seeing this solution has been hard for me. In fact it’s even been hard for me to accept the existence of the problem. In ’74-’75 I spent almost all of my time outside of work, as did many others, working to establish the referendum process in Stelle. I thought that it would solve the Stelle dynamic. I assumed that people would somehow automatically know how to use it. When that didn’t occur, I felt disappointed and frustrated—and expressed those feelings in various ways to the community. It’s been in only the last several months that I’ve understood the necessity for this next step (some form of “driving lessons”), and accepted personal responsibility for implementing it.

 

There are probably many pieces to this next empowering step. Many suggestions made in the community during the past year may be part of the “obvious” solution. For example:

 

1.     Restructure community meetings into small groups except when it’s time to share information to the whole group. Perhaps some combination of large and small groups would occur in the same evening. This would serve to break up the “we‑they” dynamic existing in many community meetings.

 

2.     Develop ground rules to guide discussions so that we are moved to reach some group conclusion, decision, or direction in a way that fosters respect for one another rather than conflict. I assume there are different methods available for this that we can adapt to our purposes if we seek them out.

 

3.     Develop a regular excess service program that uses our many individual strengths and channels them into the growth of our city. People are empowered by being directly involved in the creation of Stelle.

 

4.     Provide some consultation service that assists people to better understand how they can plug into Stelle. Many persons have not yet decided what their vocation is to be when they come here. Others see moving to Stelle as an opportunity to change their vocation. We can learn to assist people in analyzing their aptitudes and skills and find how their interests relate to Stelle’s purpose. (This idea was the main intention of Charles’ and my proposal on the Membership Committee a few months ago.) There need be no dichotomy between ones personal goals and Stelle’s goals. If a person senses a tension between the two, he needs to gain a better understanding of the situation so that he either changes his attitude toward the situation or changes the situation. This is probably especially true if a person feels he is sacrificing something by contributing to Stelle, or feels unable or unready to make a contribution to the creation of Stelle.

 

5.     Define more clearly the relationship between our legislative and executive branches. Greg’s and John’s paper offers several relevant factors to consider in this process.

 

6.     Share management skills and training with everyone interested so that every member becomes a manager of his or her activities in Stelle. Business consultants find many differences in the thinking and actions of persons who see themselves as employees and those who (sometimes using the same job as the “employees”) think of themselves as managing their job. These differences are specific and can be learned.

 

Conclusion

 

Sometimes life is like looking through a rear-view mirror; when a problem or life-lesson can begin to be seen, it is already behind us. In some ways I think this is beginning to be true of the Stelle dynamic. I believe that we are ready to move beyond this dynamic now. It’s my perception that many individuals have, over the last few months, quietly decided to make Stelle happen, and are doing something about it.

 

I also believe that the reason this Stelle dynamic has been so cen­tral to our past and to our present. is because its transformation is critical to our future. That which has been the source of so much difficulty is also the means by which we can actualize our true potential.

 

Thank you for reading one more paper.

 

 

Malcolm Carnahan

March 26, 1982

 

 

Return