Community

Concept

Etymology of Community

Bernard Lietaer [1] suggested:

The origin of the word "community" comes from the Latin munus, which means the gift, and cum, which means together, among each other. So community literally means to give among each other. Therefore I define my community as a group of people who welcome and honor my gifts, and from whom I can reasonably expect to receive gifts in return.

Kris Roose looked to his schooltime Latin dictionaries, and discovered:

The origin of words as common, community, communication, munition, municipality is munis, a (defence) wall. The verb munire (still used in French) means "to provide the building blocks of that wall". Munition originally meant the weapons used on that wall. A com-munity is the group behind the same munis, and a municipality is the organization or government of that community. Munia are the public duties and office on those defence buildings. Communication is the interaction between the people behind the defence wall. Communist is a member of a commune, a French social and political community. During the French Revolution it was the name of the government of Paris from 1789 until 1795.

The etymology is very suggestive: a community shares a higher level of intimacy and vulnerability, protected by a wall against more primitive (aggressive, military) interactions.

Munus, meaning gift, can't be the etymological origin of community, because the root of munus is muner- (plural munera, hence re-muner-ation), and these letters usually don't disappear in natural etymology.

Critique

"The anthropologist Vered Amit (2002) has reviewed ‘the trouble with community’ as a theoretical concept. Amit argues that the term’s strong emotional resonance makes it an ideal choice in public rhetoric, even though its empirical referent is seldom specified, or indeed specifiable. Amit cautions that expressions of community always ‘require sceptical investigation rather than providing a ready-made social unit upon which to hang analysis’ (2002: 14). Relying on emotionally charged, bounded notions such as community (or diaspora, nation, ethnic group, etc) is unwise, she adds, for there are numerous sets of social relations that cannot be brought under these banners. Such sets include neighbours, co-workers and leisure partners – people who many nevertheless share ‘a sense of contextual fellowship’ that can be ‘partial, ephemeral, specific to and dependent on particular contexts and activities’ (Rapport and Amit 2002: 5). Countering the often heard idea that community remains a valid term because it is a notion dear to millions of people around the world, Amit urges us not to conflate cultural categories with actual social groups." (http://johnpostill.co.uk/articles/postill_localising_net.pdf)

Book

Book: Peter Block. Community.

"His new book proposes to convert isolated, hopeless neighbourhoods into dynamic, self-directed communities." [2]

Summary

Dave Pollard:

"Block starts with a series of theses about what's wrong with modern neighbourhoods and with our ways of trying to better them:

• Every community is different, and things that work in one don't necessarily work in others.

• We try to solve problems through individual persuasion and action, instead of collectively.

• When cities start to decay, too often those with money, energy and ideas flee to suburban or exurban areas instead of staying to deal with the problems.

• The cult of leadership lets citizens off the hook and breeds dependency and entitlement.

• Engagement of citizens is negative: "Many citizens get engaged in community only when they are angry".

• Social service organizations are stigmatized as inefficient, compassion is marginalized, and the only news reported is crime and scandal.

• The preoccupation of those working with the challenges of cities is on coping with fear and finding fault.

In this worldview, he says:

We are a community of problems to be solved. Those who can best articulate the problems and the solutions dominate the conversation. The future is defined by the interplay of self-interests, dependent on the accountability of leaders, and controlled by a small number of wealthy and powerful people, we categorize as "they". Community action is aimed at eliminating the sources of fear. We aim at a set of needs and deficiencies. To eliminate fear and respond to neediness, we try harder at what we've been doing all along, what isn't working. We lock down neighbourhoods, build more prisons, reduce tolerance to zero. We call for better programs, more expertise, more funding, better leadership, stronger consequences, and more protection.

Block's framework for genuinely improving communities has six components:

1. The engagement and convening of a broad cross-section of the community to explore issues and ideas collectively.

2. The creation of small groups within larger groups as the basis for exploratory conversations focused on possibilities, not problems.

3. A focus on questions that open rather than rushing to answers, that encourage learning and exploration rather than giving and getting advice.

4. The creation of several types of conversation:

• Conversations of invitation: invitations that declare the possibility of collective resolution and action, frame the choice to attend or not, describe the hurdle and expectation of participants, stress appreciation for those who choose to attend, and are delivered personally.

• Conversations of possibility: surfacing/exploring the crossroads that each participant is at that gives him or her passion about the subject

• Conversations of ownership: surfacing/exploring what actions each participant is prepared to commit to

• Conversations of dissent: surfacing/exploring doubts, reservations, and reasons for lack of commitment

• Conversations of appreciation: surfacing/exploring the value, learning and connection each participant has received from others

5. The creation of an atmosphere of hospitality, welcoming strangers.

6. The creation of physical and social space that supports belonging.

After describing how this framework has worked in several communities, including his own (Cincinnati, which he describes as "like most of our urban centers, like New Orleans without the flood"), Block concludes with a list of pressing urban issues and intractable problems the methodology could be applied to.

If you notice a lot of similarities between this methodology and Open Space, you're not alone -- Block acknowledges Open Space as one of the techniques that he draws on.

What I liked most about the book was the diagnosis of what hasn't worked. These failed approaches are almost instantly recognizable to anyone who has ever worked on an urban renewal or community improvement project." (http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2008/07/01.html#a2186)