5 things we learnt about the future

Can civil society be a place for alternative anarchy?

Through the relational foresight process, participants developed three scenarios that give us useful insight to civil society's concerns and ideas for the future.

The first scenario explored personal identity and social division through the building of a new infrastructure of belonging and community through the development of the Civil Contingencies Volunteer Corps (CCVC). This was sparked by concerns of isolation, fear, and anger, and the hope of inter-community action.

The second scenario explored spiritual purpose and belonging through the development of infrastructure for social repair and lifelong learning through the overhaul of the curriculum, including a module to spend 2 months alone in a cave. This was inspired by concerns of inflexibility and denial, and hopes of belonging, resilience, and restoration.

The third scenario explored the redistribution and transfer of power through the creation of new systems of care and skills sharing for meaning making, with the development of the Intergenerational Neighbourhood Practise of Nonviolent Communication. This was informed by concerns of rising xenophobia, scarcity, and climate anxiety and the hopes of developing new systems of care in which people are not marginalised that is informed by indigenous practises.

Below, we explore 5 things we've learned from these scenarios.

1 Navigating uncertainty

The increasing number of overlapping crises happening all over the world are leading to more and more uncertainty within civil society. As the challenges pile on, there are growing feelings of denial, blame, anger, alienation, and fear. Deep down these represent a need for belonging and recognition, and civil society is navigating this by envisioning futures in which there is more self-organisation between and amongst people. This self-organisation is a response to the inability of a central government to meet people's needs and extend care.

envisioning futures in which there is more self-organisation between and amongst people

2 What is the role of civil society?

In attempting to navigate these crises and uncertainties, this raises new questions about the role of civil society. One idea explored was civil society as "alternative anarchists", and the dilemma this might lead to: should civil society be radical enough to create social change but not so radical as to tear society apart. As highlighted especially by the COVID-19 pandemic, civil society often has to bridge the gaps of the state. What then becomes the relationship of civil society to incumbent power? Should it exist to support the failures of the state within the status quo, or should it challenge the function of the state to create better alternatives? What's the best balance?

should civil society be radical enough to create social change but not so radical as to tear society apart

3 Towards equilibrium

Civil society is thinking about how to create futures that exist within equilibrium; that are neither utopias or dystopias. This means being concerned with the interconnectedness and intricacies of reality, whereas in utopias and dystopias, you risk losing some of those intricacies. The relational foresight process meant participants could engage in imaginative and expansive thinking while still being pragmatic and rooted in reality. This space for depth meant they could think through intricacies and contradictions, without flattening reality towards a dystopia or utopia.

4 Risks of new harms

The depth with which participants were able to explore their ideas allowed them to consider the potential risks of new harms being caused by their scenarios. As self-organisation becomes the norm in the futures they imagined, it risks co-optation and takeover by a central governing body, potentially leading to stifling uniformity. Another concern was the possibility that as people increasingly self-organise around shared interests, commitments, and energies, new tensions and inequalities form within and between groups. For example, as the Civil Contingencies Volunteer Corps becomes more established within society, might this lead to it becoming a formal organisation with a centrally organised structure that repositions itself as a citizen-surveillance army that enforces new boundaries of citizenship. Since self-organisation would mean there is no unilateral control over who instigates change, could this lead to the removal of people power that sparked its organic, spontaneous formation in the first place?

5 People-centred responses to climate anxiety

One group of participants explored futures specifically concerned with climate change. Rather than exploring various technology-oriented responses to climate crises, they were interested in developing infrastructure to materially support and care for one another. This infrastructure could be physical and emotional — new communal spaces to build social connections across boundaries. This also included creating more opportunities to divest from existing systems that maintain violence, such as borders, and instead creating groups to welcome and help climate refugees.

creating more opportunities to divest from existing systems that maintain violence

The relational foresight process allowed participants space to consider and articulate concerns and other thoughts that are often uncomfortable and unspoken. Taking seriously the ideas they raised could help civil society, funders, and policymakers implement new practises that offer new ways of being in the world and relating to one another.

Previous
Previous

How to use the Civil Society Foresight report

Next
Next

Foresight in action