<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><BR>
In a message dated 3/2/04 9:31:02 AM, lisaheft@pacbell.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE CITE STYLE="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px" TYPE="CITE"></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2">This fine gentleman of faith and skill and humility reported at our workshop that the Open Space worked marvelously. <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><BR>
<BR>
Lisa,<BR>
<BR>
This is probably not a popular question but what does it mean for OS to "work marvelously"? My Senex Self is growling along the lines of--working marvelously?? What are the criteria? What are the real results on the ground? Are there any changes in the decisions and the decision-makers, the one's who decide who lives or dies in many areas of the world? Is the surrounding region more prosperous, peaceful or what? Do people have truly better lives or is the OS just an oasis in an otherwise bleak landscape, a temporary refuge from the desperate scenes of their lives? <BR>
<BR>
I'm wondering about Haiti where John Engle has labored mightily to bring some sanity and hope to one of the most intractable, poverty-stricken regions of the world. I presume there were many OS's there. Now, he has had to leave in the face of the complete collapse of any sort of order other than that which grows out of the barrel of a gun.<BR>
<BR>
I guess what I am wondering about is can OS make lasting change in un-free societies? Is that a reasonable expectation or are we fooling ourselves and our clients? Or, equally valuable, does it open the door for change but often nobody really ends up walking through because they value their lives, health, etc., in the face of anti-freedom violence. <BR>
<BR>
I'm struggling with the whole concept of making or enabling change in the world. Is force the only way for un-free people to become free? It would seem like it because I can't think of a transition from dictatorship or other non-democratic government, especially a repressive one, that hasn't been preceded by violence and force. (I guess the collapse of the Soviet Empire was relatively non-violent, although not entirely so). Or, in which the people didn't slip into abject poverty and degradation first (there was a lot of violence in South Africa before it emerged in a negotiated way from white rule). <BR>
<BR>
And is OS really most useful for already-open societies to find out how to work together better to resolve the inevitable collisions of interests and that is its real claim to effectiveness? Is that where we should be focusing our efforts (and it probably already is where most of the OS work is occurring.)<BR>
<BR>
Man without answers.<BR>
<BR>
Paul Everett</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"></FONT></HTML>
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist@listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:
<p>
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html