James Arvanitakis, PhD - CiteSeerX

On forgiveness, hope and community: Or the fine line step between authentic and fractured communities James Arvanitakis, PhD Centre for Cultural Research, University of Western Sydney [email protected] Introduction: an unforgiving landscape In 1999, the province of Bougainville, Papua New Guinea (PNG) was slowly emerging from a 10-year civil war. It was a war that not only pitted the indigenous population against the PNG Defence Force that was supported by both the PNG and Australian governments, but also saw intra community fighting. Neighbours and friends turned on each other as a once united community had fractured. The trigger for the conflict was, according to McIntosh (1990), a dispute over the land associated with the Bougainville Copper Ltd (BCL) mine based at Panguna. This dispute over land was not simply about who shared the wealth, but was one that challenged the very core of Bougainville society. This is because, historically, the people of Bougainville considered their lands to be commons with the concept of individual land ownership alien (ibid). The land is not only fundamental for material needs such as food and housing, but as identity and spiritual connections. Following a prospecting licence granted to the Australian based mining company CRA by the Australian colonial government, the land was effectively seized and the commons were enclosed. Physical displacement followed along with a dislocation of the community bonds. In other words, the establishment of the mine altered the very fabric of the society. In the process of establishing the mine, CRA cleared and poisoned 220 hectares of the forests surrounding Panguna. As was standard practice, the remains from the clear felling were discarded directly into the local river network along with a billion tonnes of toxic and untreated waste. This left a trail of environmental devastation approximately 35 kilometres long. The river network became obstructed with tailings and eventually overflowed, turning once vibrant flat lands into contaminated swamps as fish and animal species disappeared (McIntosh 1990). The consequences were not only environmental but also social. The first round of mining forcibly displaced some 800 people with another 1,400 losing their fishing

James Arvanitakis - DRAFT

1

rights. A second wave of human displacement followed the abovementioned environmental destruction. The fracturing of the community happened in stages. From the time the mined opened, a majority of the population opposed its existence. The resistance grew when the extent of the project and the environmental damage became evident. To make their voices heard, the indigenous population began undertaking various acts of non-violent direct action, protests, petitions, lobbying and attempts to negotiate with both CRA and the PNG government. Acts of protests escalated over a 20-year period that failed to achieve any improvement in the local conditions. In the late 1980s the indigenous population forcibly closed the copper mine, which, at the time, was the world’s most profitable. The PNG government with the support of Australia responded to the closure by establishing a local militia, sending in riot police, and eventually the military. The original aim of the military intervention was to re-open the copper mine (Sharp 1997). As the conflict escalated, the local population formed different factions with the eventual emergence of the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) as the dominant armed militia, which took control of the island from the PNG government. As the conflict expanded the BRA employed more militant tactics focusing on secession from PNG with the national government moved aggressively to stop the revolt, even resorting to the deployment of mercenaries. The PNG and Australian governments adopted a military strategy with two broad aims: to isolate Bougainville through a military blockade and, secondly, to re-capture control of the island. The blockade lasted over ten years and effectively sealed off Bougainville from the outside world depriving the population of medicines, fuel and humanitarian aid. Descriptions of the conflict are harrowing which resulted in widespread deaths and increasingly brutal human rights abuses perpetrated both sides (Regan 1998). The conflict claimed more than 10,000 with an estimated 60,000 people being displaced. I arrived at Bougainville in 1999 as part of a re-building project. The aim was to work with local communities to re-establish a financial system that had collapsed during the conflict with the long-term goal of encouraging economic development.


2

While the project focussed on the financial infrastructure, the implications of the work were much broader. As part of the project, ex-combatants from the different sides of the conflict began to work together to build a system that would rebuild their islandnation. This re-building process relied on two core elements: hope and forgiveness. In this paper I aim to discuss these two necessary ingredients that assist communities from moving beyond conflict and the lessons we can all learn.

On forgiveness In a 2004 paper published in the Journal of Southern Philosophy, titled ‘Forgiveness and Community’ (vol. 42, Supplement), Kelly Oliver draws on the work of both Hegel and Kristeva to outline four types of forgiveness: Hegelian, sovereign, psychoanalytic and social. It is within this fourth type of forgiveness, social forgiveness, which Oliver discusses the notion of a ‘heroic particularity’, where particular desires of the individual are redeemed and meaning is created. Moreover, in the process of asking for forgiveness, we hold ourselves responsible for both our actions as well as our desires. Forgiveness, then, moves in both the realms of the conscious and unconscious. Oliver’s argument is that forgiveness exists as meaning rather than referring to absolution or even exoneration. That is, meaning is created in the very act or process of forgiveness. Forgiveness here is a social dynamic that enables both sovereignty and agency to emerge. In the process, a sense of forgiveness constitutes the subject as “both individual and belonging to a community” (Oliver 2004: 1) as the subject simultaneously acknowledges the individual as sovereign while connected with others. One dimension of the meaning created, according to Oliver, is that forgiveness acknowledges both our unique and shared humanity. The point here is that to forgive, is to see the other as someone we can relate to as well as accepting difference. To succeed, forgiveness is also a reciprocated process. Like a handshake or a greeting, it must be instigated and returned. Such a process makes us vulnerable, as we are never sure if our desire for forgiveness will be returned (Diprose 2003). This process of asking for or accepting forgiveness, constructs two further meanings. The


3

first is a sense of reciprocated desire to interact beyond a single set of deeds. Such a relationship also establishes the foundations of an authentic community. In contrast, without forgiveness, we are never released from the consequences of such deeds. This, according to Arednt, means our capacity to act is limited by a single endeavour that confines our actions (1959: 213). Without the ability to forgive, we deny the humanity of others, as well as their subjectivity and agency. Forgiveness then, highlights a complex interplay between a shared humanity, unique individuality, sovereignty and agency. To ask for and accept forgives is a process that allows us to acknowledge to offer a ‘hand of friendship’ (Diprose 2003). This is not, according to Diprose, an act of friendship in the common conceptualisation, but a desire to live together in peace and harmony. It is not an invitation to dinner but a desire to embrace a shared humanity of irreducible difference. It is this sense of forgiveness that was present in the abovementioned workshops. It was this sense of acknowledging the actions perpetrated by others and oneself, but also the sense of shared humanity, with a desire to move beyond such deeds. To be effective, such a desire must also be shared with a belief that the agency we are promoting means a better world is possible through our actions. Such a vision is defined by a sense of ‘hope’.

On hope Hope is underscored by a belief that a better world is possible, and exists on both a personal and societal level. Lingis (2002) argues that hope involves a vision that is outside oneself. In secular societies, hope is faith without certainties. Importantly, hope is not passive: hope emerges in our actions not sitting around and waiting for a better world to emerge. As such, hope emerges in struggles for justice and political activity (Zournazi 2002). In ‘decent’ societies, we witness a surplus and abundant distribution of hope. According to Hage, …key to a decent society is above all this capacity to distribute… opportunities for self-realisation, which are none other than what we have been calling societal hope” (2003: 16).


4

Hope, like forgiveness for that matter, does not diminish when openly distributed, but actually expands and becomes abundant (Hage 2001). As a result, hope is also created through reciprocated interactions. In the absence of hope, such a vision of a shared and better world quickly diminishes. For Zournazi (2002) a lack of hope leads to a focus on individualism and competition. This is a “negative hope” which creates a sense of uncertainty, insecurity and competition, as we feel threatened that hope is limited and will be consumed by others. Here hope is not reciprocated but withheld: breaking the potential cycle of shared desire. To make this point, Taussig argues that in a commodified world hope slowly “masquerades as envy” as it is overtaken by commodity fetishism and materialism (2002: 63). When a community becomes focused on competing rather than imagining that a better world is possible, Taussig believes hope is displaced, changed or even undone and becomes something else – possibly resentment and greed. In Bougainville, the establishment of the mine and the displacement of the population meant that the underlying sense was one of survival. The abundance of food and land commons where replaced by a single commodity: cash. This came in the form of payment for labouring in the mines as well as limited royalties to the ‘land owners’. In such an environment, competition for the increasingly limited resources replaced the sense of shared hope. The re-establishment of hope underscored the interaction of the ex-combatants in the various workshops undertaken as part of the project. This was not something that was created by the workshops, but is what made the workshops possible. The participants managed to forgive and overcome past injustices because of hope: or this belief that a better world was possible through their very actions. This promoted a sense of agency, identity and desire for an authentic community. It is to this sense of community I turn to next.


5

On community The concept of community is something that crosses all political divides: conservative, reactionary, progressive and radical groups all invoke the concept of community. For example, Thomas Friedman (2005) argues that through economic globalisation and the free market we are seeing the formation of a ‘global community’. Those who oppose the ‘free market’ also summon community arguing such policies undermine local communities (Goodman and James 2007). Programs managed by both government and non-government agencies embrace promoting community as a key ‘ingredient’ that will lead to harmony. Jeremy Brent (2004) argues that community is something that is invoked when social problems emerge. In this way, Bauman argues our craving for community is “like a roof under which we shelter in heavy rain, like a fireplace which we warm our hands on a frosty day” (2001: 1). Despite such a longing for the stability and warmth of community, we need to see it as a double-edged sword; it can produce cooperation and mutuality, but can also be divisive and create conflict. In Australia, for example, the population pulled together to raise funds and assist victims for bushfires that ravaged some of the south-eastern forests of Victoria. In contrast, community was also evoked as an excuse to attack ‘outsiders’ during race riots in the picturesque beach of Cronulla in 2004. Theoretically, there are two broad conceptions about community formation which I have detailed elsewhere (see Arvanitakis 2007). The first revolves around ‘recognition’ and the concept that there exist ‘natural communities’ based on the concept that we form communities with those we ‘recognise’ as being ‘like us’ (Oliver 2001). This is the dominant conceptualisation of community and defines community through ideas of natural formation, relying on shared identity arising out of mutual beliefs, understandings and practices – all seen to create a stable sense of identity (Taylor 1994). Various theorists have criticised this position, noting that this concept of natural communities formed around people ‘like us’ because this can be exclusionary (see for example Diprose 2003). Key here is what ‘like us’ means: those with the same religion, colour skin, eye colour or language? The alternative perspective is that community only forms through a sense of both difference and desire: that is, you have to ‘want’ to form a community with someone


6

and this may require hard work and understanding. Further, rather than seeking others ‘like us’, we want to be seen as individuals and appreciated as such. We want our difference acknowledge and, in the process, acknowledge the difference of others. Here community as something that is not neat and easily defined by a common feature, but something complicated (Diprose 2003). Consequently, community is formed both through this sense of difference and a desire to accept and be accepted (Brent 2004). This type of community is based on a sense of reciprocity: I want you to be part of my community and you want me to be part of yours, and so we work at establishing and maintaining it. In this way, and an ‘authentic’ community is composed of unique individuals who might not necessarily understand each other’s subjectivity but rather possess reciprocal desires to establish and maintain community. This conceptualisation of community is formed through the desire for alterity, subjectivity and agency between another and me: and alterity promoted not repressed. This promotes a heterogeneous community, as individuals are never reduced to uniform beings. This desire for a reciprocated exchange of both hope and forgiveness are essential in establishing and promoting this sense of community. Both hope and forgiveness promote agency and subjectivity, as well as a sense of solidarity. It is here that we find a sense of justice that is not limited by time or space, but rather, only our sense of desire.

Conclusion: On the search for an authentic community Bougainville is, unfortunately, only one of many societies that have emerged from conflict in the last decade. The yearning for peace and rebuilding is underscored by the interwoven desire for hope and forgiveness. It is here that we find the essence for an authentic community emerging. The project that I described above was part of a broader peace process that required ex-combatants to acknowledge the past but not be limited by the deeds committed. It is a peace process that continues and still relies on hope and forgiveness. For those of us working within community confronting challenges of racism, violence, exclusion and a lack of hope, there are a number of implications that we need to consider. The


7

first is that a community to overcome a fracturing relies on a sense of agency: meaning our actions can make a difference. Further, communities can be built that crosses location and time. In other words, both forgiveness and hope, and the desire for a reciprocated exchange of these, can be built and maintained across both close and distant social relations that are stripped of time and location. The deeds in the past on not forgotten but form part of the present and those affected are acknowledged even if they are no longer present. This takes us to the third implication: that community is not a stale notion that exists separate from our actions. Rather, community is a dynamic phenomenon that requires work and effort. Hope and forgiveness are two fundamental efforts to ensure that communities do not fracture. These are the lessons to learn within our own communities – even if unaffected by civil conflict. To ensure that communities remain authentic, viable and inclusive, we must ensure that we continue to strive for both hope and forgiveness.


8

References Arendt, H. (1959) The human condition, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. Arvanitakis, J. (2007) The cultural commons of home, VDM, Germany. Bauman, Z. (2001) Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World, Polity Press, Cambridge. Brent, J. (2004) “The desire for community: illusion, confusion and paradox”, Community Development Journal, vol.39, no.3, pp.213-223. Diprose, R. (2003) “Communities written in blood”, Cultural Studies Review, Vol.9, No.1, pp.35-50. Friedman, Thomas L. (2005) The world is flat, Farrar, Straus & Giroux, New York. Goodman, J. and James, P. (2007) Nationalism and global solidarities, Routledge, New York. Hage, G. (2001) “The Incredible Shrinking Society”, Weekend Review: Australian Financial Review, 7 September 2001, pp.4-5. Hage, G. (2003) Against Paranoid Nationalism: Searching for hope in a shrinking society, Pluto Press, Sydney. Lingis, A. (2002) “Murmurs of life”, in Zournazi, M. (ed.) Hope, Pluto Press, Annandale, pp. 22-41. McIntosh, A. (1990) “The Bougainville Crisis - A South Pacific Crofters' War”, Radical Scotland, Vol. 44, April/May 1990, Edinburgh, pp.18-22. Oliver, K. (2001) Witnessing – beyond recognition, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis and London. Oliver, K. (2004) “Forgiveness and Community”, Journal of Southern Philosophy, Vol. 42, Supplement, pp.1-15. Regan, A.J. (1998) “Towards Peace for Bougainville?” Asia-Pacific Magazine, Vol.9, No.10, pp.12-16. Sharp, N. (1997) Blood on Our Hands in Bougainville: Australia’s Role in PNG’s War, AID/WATCH, Sydney. Taussig, M. (2002) “Carnival of the senses”, in Zournazi, M. (ed.) Hope, Pluto Press, Annandale, pp.42-63. Taylor, C. (1994) “The politics of recognition”, in Gutmann, A. ed. Multiculturalism: examining the politics of recognition, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.


9

Zournazi, M. (2002) Hope, Pluto Press, Annandale.


10