On Governance

Eric Schwennesen

Taking a look at the ultramodern world we are busily making -- or remaking --, it is easy to see the precipitate rush towards Government: bigger, better, faster than ever before. Our behavior reflects frenzy, that all-out swirl of activity at any cost that has made disturbed ant nests a much-admired model for group action. 

In fact there is almost too much resemblance, provoking the usual backlash of experts who argue that we actually more closely resemble emerging grasshoppers, a flock of grackles, an infestation of fleas, or (insert your own pest species here). How rarely do we recognize effective group behavior of our own species! This, despite millennia of trials both figurative and literal, -isms of every stripe, and chaos and avoidable misery. Surely some of those trials have yielded promise?

Well, some have. And they're not new; and in fact the human genome seems to recognize them in subliminal ways which our modern disturbed-ant model seeks to drown out with frantic urgency. 

Most longtime residents of the Southwest arrived here as the result of a conscious decision by our forebears or ourselves, to leave behind the -- yes, ant-colony-like --chaos of civilization, to take on existence at a more basic level, on a smaller scale. And all during that time we have been witnesses to living examples of forms of social governance that have answered the need very effectively. 

"Tribalism", for example, usually used as an epithet in the modern World of Ant-Like Behavior, broadly encompasses a form of social discipline based on knowing each other, often being related to each other, and joining together for purpose. Upon close inspection it's hard to see what's derogatory about that. It's also hard to come up with a better idea.

I've spent decades in forgotten corners of the globe, and it has been a constant, pleasant surprise to find people everywhere managing their affairs largely as they have always done: by relying on the wisdom of elders to choose a member of their group to be the one responsible for important decisions. This has always been done without fanfare or argument; the choosing is usually done without the prior knowledge of the chosen, and not subject to refusal. Rather, it is viewed as a signal proof of responsibility; the elders in their wisdom make the choice. 

Being named as one delegated to carry the responsibility for the tribe/clan/group is invariably met with a low groan by the chosen one. It is not meant to be a compliment; no accolades or rewards are given except that in times of duress, neighbors might lend a hand with planting or harvesting. It is in fact a burden given to the one chosen for being best able to bear it; and generally the responsibility lasts a lifetime. 

Modern life has begun to intrude in some cases. In rural West Africa, Asia and the Americas there have been recent efforts to establish a voting process by all community members, the "hep" First-World's "solution" to impose "fairness". Not surprisingly this has also led to agitation and campaigning to select some favorite candidate, revealing a new interpretation of the role of the "winner", thereby distorting both the purpose and the effectiveness of the nominee...and suddenly we see ourselves in the era of modern politics, bearing no resemblance to its original purpose or results.

Eric Schwennesen is a commercial beef rancher in the Mogollon Rim country. He grew up in Belgium, cowboyed in Nevada, and helped Navajos and many African peoples with rangeland conflicts for over 35 years. He recently published "The Field Journals: Adventures in Pastoralism" about his experiences.