Fw: Goodwill and community by Etienne Wenger

[Artur Ferreira da Silva]

[I think this can be of interest to many of you - Artur]

In defense of goodwill  a community perspective
An open letter to President Bush



March 2, 2003


Dear Mister President,

I am a European immigrant. I have lived in this country for more than
twenty years and have vested my heart and hopes here. I have written
extensively on the importance of community in a knowledge economy. As our
country debates the merits and the risks of going to war, I am concerned
that you are framing the questions within too narrow a context.

I do understand that a credible threat of force may be necessary in
pressing for resolution in serious crises. I also recognize that some of
our allies, in particular those that our Secretary of Defense derisively
calls the “old Europe,” do not have a very good record of unified action
when it comes to applying this kind of pressure. They have often counted on
us for the defense of strong will.

After all, it is easy to forget that even Gandhi’s non-violent approach was
buttressed by the looming threat of violence. The British knew very well
that a bloodbath would occur if they harmed him. But the greatness of
Gandhi’s lesson is that looming violence was his rear guard. His frontline
weapon was always goodwill. It was the goodwill Gandhi engendered that the
British most feared.

We can learn from Gandhi that strong will and goodwill are not
incompatible. It is not a matter of giving one up for the other. It is a
matter of which serves the other. Gandhi’s victory also shows that goodwill
is not a moral nicety. It is a source of immense social strength and
cohesion. In fact, it is the very foundation of our communities and
families, and even of our civic, economic and political systems.

For us, generating goodwill does not mean trying to please everybody. It
means being seen as a genuine partner, an engaged, responsive participant
in a world community.

Because it cements community, widespread goodwill toward our nation is what
rogue governments have most to fear when we insist on holding them to
higher standards. On the brink of war today, let us remember the power of
goodwill. Without it, we will lose this war, even with a military victory.

No doubt, Saddam Hussein must find some gleeful comfort in the recent
expressions of anti-Americanism, in the streets of Europe, in Turkey, in
Seoul. We are powerful and he fears our might, but generating the
international goodwill he also dreads does not seem to be our forte. We
seem to be tripping over the complexities of world community building.

I do not believe that resentment for our power and wealth is the cause of
the rise in anti-Americanism. On the contrary, my sense is that most people
would like to admire us. They would like to believe that our power and
wealth are a force for good in this world. They remember World War II and
the Marshall plan. They would like a hero in these troubled times. They
would like to like us, if we let them.

When I went back to Europe shortly after September 11, I was amazed at the
spontaneous expressions of sympathy I encountered everywhere. Even when we
were fighting in Afghanistan, people generally understood and respected
what we were trying to do.

It seems to me that much of this goodwill has now gone to waste.

On a recent visit to Europe, I was taken aback to hear that a number of
people seemed more concerned with our apparent arrogance and unilateralism
than with Iraq. They were no friends of Saddam Hussein. But if people are
afraid of destabilizing nations because Danger = Foolishness X Power, then
the very magnitude of our power does not leave much room for even the
appearance of adventurism.

Mister President, not having access to intelligence beyond that made public
in the media, I do not understand your apparent obstinate rush towards war.
I also know that much of the world shares my puzzlement. And puzzlement of
this kind arouses suspicion. Whether or not such suspicion is justified is
not the point. Whether or not you care about what the rest of the world
feels, thinks, or wants, the fact remains that there is a growing
perception that you do not careand by extension that we do not.

The goodwill of the world toward us is at risk. And to me, more than war
itself, this is a risk we cannot afford.

If people suspect that we use our wealth and might for ourselves, by
ourselves, we will lose their goodwill. Then they will indeed resent our
wealth and might.

When a nation’s army is one among peers, the nation may claim that its
military force is there to defend its interests. But when we are so
powerful that no nation, not even a coalition of nations, can stand up to
us, we are no longer allowed to claim that our military forces are there
merely to defend our interests. For better or for worse, we have become the
army of the world.

Many police departments today are practicing “community policing.” They
have discovered that the goodwill of the community is crucial to their
ability to fight crime. If a police force is perceived as serving the
community, then no one resents the power of police officers who carry guns.
On the contrary, the community appreciates the risks they take in enforcing
its norms. But if citizens, rightly or wrongly, become suspicious that
their police force is just out for itself, that it is not subject to the
authority of elected officials and to the rule of law, then goodwill dies.
The exclusive claim of the police to the legal use of force is resented and
its work in the community becomes problematic.

Of course, if we decide to go to war on our own terms, many nations will be
sure to align themselves with us. Some people may claim a diplomatic
victory. But are we so naïve as to believe that we have generated goodwill?
Who would not side with the school bully if he happens to be the son of the
richest family in town, who organizes poolside parties where anyone who is
anyone must be invited? In their hearts, submissive onlookers will still
secretly cheer every blow he gets. Let us not delude ourselves, especially
if we are pressuring governments to act against popular opinion. No matter
the outcome of the conflict, we will have lost the trust of many.

Genuine, heartfelt goodwill is something we cannot demand, buy, or
extortonly deserve.

If the entire world community decides that we need to go to war, it must be
through a true process of transparent consensus building, not through
arm-twisting. Then if it comes to us to do the dangerous work of
implementing the will of the world community, we may actually gain goodwill
through war. If our soldiers die, they will be mourned by the world
community and become heroes in the eyes of the world. But if we are
perceived as snubbing the world community, too many people will think
simply that those who live by the sword perish by the sword.

One may well ask whether a powerful nation such as ours really needs
goodwill? Given that genuine goodwill is hard to deserve, shouldn’t we
endeavor to become so powerful that we do not need it?

Yes, as the most powerful nation, we may think that we do not need to feel
accountable to the perception of the world community. But power without
goodwill is a path fraught with dangers. Let us learn from our enemies’
mistakes. Dictators like Saddam Hussein assert their power for themselves,
without seeking the goodwill of their people. They have had, therefore, to
resort to systemic fear to keep themselves in power. They have had to build
a secret police force to contain the enmity they engender. And once you go
down that path, there is no return. The process is almost impossible to
reverse. Over time, you need more power and more fear. Is this the path we
want to go down as a nation in our relationship with the rest of the world?

This is not an issue of self-interest versus altruism. Even our most
self-interested corporations realize that they need goodwill if they want
to succeed in today’s world. They know the immeasurable value of a trusted
brand. They may have economic power, even some political power, but they
know that raw power backfires in a world of economic choice and rapid
information flows. Selflessly or not, they spend a lot of resources to
secure goodwill.

We cannot afford to “lose our brand,” no matter where we stand on the
spectrum between self-interest and altruism. Whether we think the mission
of America is to prosper or to save the world, we need goodwill.

The price of losing goodwill is enormous, though often hidden. I was
talking with my cousin in Switzerland the other day and inviting her to
visit us in California. She said bluntly that she did not want to visit a
country that snubs and bullies the world community. OK, she is young and
not very rich. We will not miss the thousand dollars or so she would have
spent here. But we know how to multiply. What if people see a pair of
American Levi’s on a store shelf in Amsterdam and decide that no, they will
not help the bully grow bigger? What if the price of our rush to war is
that Sony outsells Dell in the PC market?

There is even worse. What if another event like September 11 happens, as is
predicted, and under polite condolences, most of the people of the world
say in their heart of hearts that we are getting what we deserve? What does
this do to our real ability to fight terrorism? We need the goodwill of the
entire world if we are to uproot terrorism. This is a different kind of
fight because raw might is not a definite advantage. There are too many
ways to undermine it, too many ways that it will reproduce that which it
seeks to eradicate. Military might and intelligence do matter, but they
require a foundation of goodwill. Only goodwill can engender the true,
widespread collaboration we so needa strong-willed, self-policing world
community, which values both the enforcement of its norms and the diversity
of its forms.

Mister President, this age of terrorism is also, paradoxically, the age of
goodwill.

This is a new world. And echoing the words of our Secretary of Defense, I
would call your administration’s approach the “old America”the superpower
of the last century, which only needs a clear enemy, righteousness, and
might. The age of such unilateral power is past. This is an age of
interdependence where our own interests do not stand alone. We cannot do
the good of the world against the will of the world, even if the good of
the world is what we claim to have in mind. Gone is the age of the
benevolent dictator. The complexity is too great. This is not the age of
control, it is the age of democracy, distributed knowledge, and dialogue.
It is not the age of safe boundaries, it is the age of
interconnectednessthe age of a networked world community.

And in such a connected world, we cannot be right by ourselves, no matter
how sure we are to be right.

This is especially important to understand when we have the means to fight
for what we think is right. Otherwise we undermine the very foundation of
the community in which our aspirations can be realized.

Paradoxically, in such a world, the more blatant power you have, the more
goodwill you need.

*  *  *
I cannot ask my government to pledge never to go to war. Who knows what
challenges we will face? But I will have this plea to my government, and in
particular to you, Mister President, whose position has such symbolic
significance in representing our nation to the world:
Invest in goodwill. Do not put goodwill at risk. Cultivate carefully, use
judiciously, and please do not squander the most precious asset that a
powerful nation like ours can possess in the new world order: the goodwill
of the world community.

Yours truly,


Etienne Wenger, Ph.D.
Author
Co-founder and executive director, CPsquare
North San Juan, California
Etienne at ewenger.com

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html