You are here:

I-03-02 Civic intelligence and the security of the homeland / John Kesler, Carole Schwinn, & David Schwinn (pp. 95-106)

Original Full-Text: I-03-02-KeslerSchwinn-Homeland 95-106

Civic intelligence and the

security of the homeland

John Kesler with Carole and David Schwinn1

"We lie in the lap of an immense intelligence. But that intelligence is

dormant and its communications are broken, inarticulate and faint

until it possesses the local community as its medium." John Dewey

When we were told by our nation's leaders after the tragic events of 9/11 that our job as citizen fighters of terrorism was to carry on with our normal day-to-day activities, the message conveyed was that it is the government's job to take care of us in times of crisis at home and abroad. Those who took comfort in those words, assuming that the government did, indeed, have the intelligence, integrity, capacity and range of options available to address any looming threats to our security, soon learned that the government's intelligence was flawed, its integrity questionable, its capacity severely limited, and that the primary and preferred means of intervention were military incursions abroad and restraints on civil liberties at home.

The effectiveness of these approaches has proven to be far less than promised by their vocal advocates and, by nearly all accounts, the security of the homeland is no better, if not worse, than it was prior to the fateful events of 2001. If further proof was required, the horrific experiences of those impacted by hurricanes Rita and Katrina provided haunting, visual evidence that depending on some far away, larger than life, complex bureaucracy for our safety is pure folly. While the larger bureaucracy's role in national security will not, should not and cannot be diminished, truth be told, none of us will be secure until the human capacity for addressing the critical challenges of our time is deeply embedded in our communities and organizations, and at all levels of society.

The term that perhaps best describes the human capacity that is required in these times is civic intelligence. Originally defined by Doug Schuler of Evergreen State University2 as “the ability of groups and organizations and, ideally, society as a whole to conceive and implement effective, equitable, and sustainable approaches to shared problems,” the term implies that there is a developmental process through which this higher order mode of perceiving and functioning on behalf of the common good can evolve. Surely the deliberative democracy, co-intelligence, and a wide variety of other community building initiatives, including the safe, healthy, sustainable, resilient and other movements, aim to develop this human capacity. A plethora of communal and conversational methodologies including multiple forms of dialogue and forums for participation including circles, world café, citizen juries and others are being used extensively for precisely this purpose. This paper suggests that the effectiveness of all of these efforts and initiatives could be enhanced by an understanding of civic intelligence as a developmental process that can be influenced through highly skilled integral dialogue and facilitation.

Five Levels of Civic Intelligence

Describing civic intelligence as a human capacity to be developed puts it in a category of other intelligences, including those described by Howard Gardner, as well as other intelligences more recently proposed including Emotional Intelligence and Cultural Intelligence. Like most of these other intelligences, each major emergent developmental level of civic intelligence reflects its own characteristic motivations, framing and capacity. Each successively higher level of emergent capacity and competence transcends and includes lower levels.

The five levels of civic intelligence awareness discussed here represent the range of development of what could be called “personal” as opposed to pre-personal and trans-personal. The personal range reflects the relational core energy of interfacing with others in a spirit of reciprocity. Since relational reciprocity dynamics between the individual and others is the foundation of civility, this range of reciprocity dynamics is also referred to as the civil range.

CI LEVEL	MOTIVATION	FRAMING	CAPACITY
Level C+1 Member/Social Order	Physical wants and needs; respect for power	Fundamentalist outlook, derived from higher spiritual truths or cultural imperatives. There is one truth and it should be enforced. Non-believers are infidels.	Capacity for functioning freely and responsibly within clear and well-enforced civil rules. Lashing out at nonbelievers is justifiable behavior.
Level C+2 Individual/ Recognize Peer	Drive to achieve one’s own self interest; respect for fairness	Self-centered perspective, but able to see one’s self in the other, to recognize a peer.	Capacity for negotiating one’s self-interests based on rules of transactional fairness. Unilateralism is justified in service to one’s own ends.
Level C+3 Citizen/Culture Centric	Preservation of society in order to protect rights of self and others; respect for cultural values	Community-centered perspective, able to recognize needs of one’s own community	Capacity for mutually beneficial exchange, based on a framework of shared values and symbols. Relative denigration of other cultures is justified.
Level C+4 Individuation/ World Centric	Working toward global human rights and democracy; respect for universal human rights	Global vision and sensibilities	Can see the relevance of other human perspectives. Exploitation of nature, non-human life, and the less-developed world is justified.
Level C+5 Integral/Life World Centric	Goal of flourishing: health and life-affirming functioning of the whole; respect for all life	Deep identification with all life and the planet	Capacity to affirm all life and understand the interrelations among all living and nonliving entities

Figure 1: Matrix of Civic Intelligence Awareness Levels

Civic Intelligence Awareness Level One

Civic intelligence awareness level one (C+1) is deeply imbedded in physical wants and needs. Its ethic is still power to a great extent, but at least there is a first experience of a strong sense of interfacing civilly with others and with a collective. That is the essence of civility, which deepens and develops in pro-

found ways through all higher civil levels of development. At C+1 there is a sense of a recognition of the importance of civil, life-affirming rules that apply to all, at least within a given group or culture. This is an important first step in civic intelligence, and is attainable (if not fully integrated) by a typical six or seven year old child. Yet frequently, public discourse falls below this level, which may be significantly below the mean developmental center of gravity of the people who comprise the group or community.

Civilly inspired rules of C+1 are the most concrete manifestations of our higher, caring and life-affirming commonalities, even as they are rigid and not sufficient for complex higher level functioning. Yet these civil rules, which we all tend to learn in kindergarten - including cleaning up after ourselves; not telling lies; not taking things that don't belong to us; learning to share and to play with others - establish a strong foundation for further growth and higher civilization. People at a C+1 framing awareness or a cultural tradition with a center of gravity on this level are not prepared for full scale democratic freedom and concomitant responsibilities, but they can learn to function freely and responsibly within clear and well enforced civil rules.

People with a moral and cultural center of gravity at C+1 typically have a simplistic and fundamentalist outlook, whether that fundamentalism is derived from higher spiritual truths or lower culturally emergent imperatives. The concept of separation of church and state, for example, is out of the question at this level of awareness. It makes no sense. There is one higher truth, and it should be enforced. Those who are not believers are infidels (i.e. infidels, not to be trusted), that is, inherently less truly human than those in the group. In addition to receiving respect, there is a strong need at this level to have voice, to share and, if possible, to enforce one's vision of truth and meaning on others.

There is ample justification within this C+1 worldview to lash out against those who would disrespect the faith (fidelis), and fail to give dominant voice to those in the faith. The primary justification of Osama Bin Laden's sponsorship of terrorism against the West, for example, comes from C+1 dogmatic beliefs and moral motivations, which are force and violence, although the action-logic of these terrorists comes from a pre-civil level of awareness.

Many countries in the developed world show little wisdom in avoiding violence emanating out of C+1 awareness or below, either within their own borders or globally. They inadvertently spawn what they are seeking to eliminate in this regard due to a lack of appreciation of the nurturing requirements of full spectrum developmental well being. An ironic result of America's frequent tendency of not recognizing countries that do not live up to its expectations, for example, is to reinforce and even increase the pathological nature of those the US most opposes. Perhaps, the best way to weaken the pathological tendencies of a paranoid dictatorship in North Korea or extreme religious fundamentalists in Iran is to engage them rather than isolate them, although firmness is necessarily the bottom line.

An amazing transforming effect can take place when people who feel they receive little respect and are allowed no voice are given such respect and an opportunity to really be listened to, together with the freedom to be responsible for their own lives, livelihoods and communities. Wherever possible the developed world should promote life-affirming respect, voice, freedom and empowerment for all people. As we create conditions for democracy, democratic capacities ultimately begin to emerge that are developmentally appropriate and unique to each setting over long periods of time, if properly nurtured. This is quite different from imposing existing democratic practices and institutions of the West on developing countries or expecting democratic capacities to emerge in the short term. In any case, those groups and countries at C+1 or below that lash out at others due to their own limitations of empathy and reciprocity must often be restrained with force or threat of force rather than reason or dialogue.

Civic Intelligence Awareness Level Two

The second level, C+2, typically arises in the developed world at the eight to twelve year old age range. It is deeply self-centered and motivated by the more sophisticated drive to achieve one's own interests. Anyone in Western culture who has teenagers in their family knows all about this phenomenon. One's more highly developed sense of self can be directed outward for the first time to see one's self in another person, to recognize a peer. This is a critical step in personal accountability in society, and contains the seeds of achieving global caring awareness for all people. C+2 civil reasoning provides that if another person who is a peer has a certain opportunity; I should have that opportunity and visa versa. It generates a capacity for basic reciprocity where we negotiate according to rules of transactional fairness and in the framework of existing law and regulations for one's own self-interest. The logic of C+2 perspectives is supportive of the most basic civic framework in a constitutional democracy: I will be responsible to respect your rights, because I want and expect you to respect mine.

Civic Intelligence Awareness Level Three

In terms of civil awareness, C+3 establishes even deeper interiority and enables one to identify with diverse communities and broader cultures under a framework of shared values and symbols. The logic of this ethic yields a higher iteration of the 3R's: I should respect my own right to be responsible. One who transcends and includes C+2, the 3R's of living in a society grounded in rights, is also responsible to preserve the communitarian caring solidarity that makes the exercise of those rights sustainable, to have a commitment to the common good. It is critical to appreciate that a mentality and a form of society grounded solely in individuality, self interest and rights, is a society that will not long survive.

C+3 generates the capacity for mutually beneficial reciprocity and building strong families, groups, and communities which are not, however, highly diverse. It reflects a higher range of what is called conventional moral awareness, which enables one to appreciate one's own culture and societal values, but to the relative denigration of others outside the culture. The deeply hierarchical typical American high school which brutalizes those at the bottom of the cultural hierarchy, to the point where a Columbine tragedy can occur, reflects classic low functioning C+3 dynamics. Only a minority of people in any early 21st century culture have developed a level of civil, moral and interpersonal awareness above C+3. This is a serious challenge because the complex demands of global 21st century realities actually require C+4 and C+5 capacities. It should be an explicit goal of high schools to develop C+4 cognitive and civil capacities, while higher education should aspire to C+5 development.

Civic Intelligence Awareness Level Four

C+4 is, by definition, global in its vision and sensibilities. A C+4 perspective results in the highest iteration of the 3R's: I am responsible to recognize all people's right to respect, which puts into perspective a balanced understanding of the liberal rights orientation of C+2 and the communitarian orientation of responsibility and community of C+3. It is the first level of awareness which takes seriously the deep seated need of all people to be respected, and instinctively works toward global human rights and democracy. Civil capacities do not evolve at the same rate as cognitive capacities. It is all too common for people to develop C+4 cognitive capacities that are stressed by contemporary higher educational systems in the developed world. These individuals have a transcultural vision of the world, but still function at lower levels of civic intelligence, which translates into, “the world is my oyster to exploit at will.”

The classic stance of the modern outlook has been a combination of a cognitive level equivalent to C+4 combined with a civil and action logic line of development at around C+2. This is still a primary theme of developed societies, the cultural legacy of modernism, which is often disguised under the veneer of high sounding phrases such as saving the world for or spreading democracy. In addition, C+4 awareness does not tend to extend to appreciation of the importance of non-human life beyond its role in being of service to humanity's needs. This is an attitude which may not be adequate to preserve sustainable ecologies (even as it is humanity that needs the sustaining) and is not sensitive to the suffering of non-human life.

Civic Intelligence Awareness Level Five

Just as C+4 senses the importance of giving respect to all people, C+5 is the first level of awareness which experiences a deep appreciation of the importance of giving everyone voice. Hence, C+5 is the first level of civic intelligence which deeply recognizes the need of people at every level to have an opportunity to have the voice they so desperately want and need. The voice of every level of development within each of us and among all people is important. The health and life-affirming functioning of the whole interrelated and integrated spectrum of awareness is a C+5 goal. It is with this highest and integrative perspective that we can see for the first time how explosive the global situation is where people and cultures are not given both respect and voice. In this regard there is an important C+5 movement called compassionate listening, where people listen to others patiently, particularly those who have undergone great suffering. Bearing witness and knowing that someone is listening turns out to be more important to many people than material aid that could be provided or vengeance that might be asserted against a perpetrator of heinous acts.

C+5 is governed by the golden rule of reciprocity expressed in its most profound sense: I will treat you in all your uniqueness and particular context as I would like to be treated in all my uniqueness and particular context. In its most mature expression, C+5 manifests what could be called the green rule, that is, a deep respect and concern for and even a deep identification with all life and the planet.

Figure 2: All Quadrant/All Level Framework

Even as C+4 negotiates the balance of agency and communion, of individuality and the communal, of freedoms and responsibilities, C+5 also balances the tendency to be progressive versus conserving what exists, the pull of transformation versus the embrace of what one already values and has worked well.

In short, C+5 level awareness is integral. In this context, integral refers to the capacity to view reality through a whole, comprehensive, all quadrant/all level or AQAL lens or framework (See Figure 2), as suggested by Ken Wilber and other theorists. At this level individuals are able to honor perspectives from all quadrants and at all levels. Ultimately, C+5 integral civil conversation is embracing of all perspectives, is more discriminating, and yields higher quality results than the levels below it. For in-depth exploration of the AQAL model, visit the Integral Institute at www.integralinstitute.org.

Need For Integral Dialogue And Facilitation

Currently, mature C+5 integral capacities are reflected in relatively few adults. It is important to note that one's civil functioning including related cognitive, moral and interpersonal capacities (summarized here as civil), and expected actual decisions and behavior (i.e. action logic) are typically at least a level or two below one's cognitive line of development. Thus, perhaps 40 percent of adults in the West have C+4 cognitive development or higher, but most of those will reflect civic intelligence lines of development at C+2 or C+3.

Most adults in the developed world, however, have the capacity to grow civilly rather rapidly because the civil level can move up to its corresponding cognitive capacity relatively quickly with proper exposure and practice, and with institutional and process attractors.

Needless to say, nearly all of the forums in which we engage individuals for purposes of motivating action in service to the common good are populated by people at a wide range of civil capacities or levels of civic intelligence awareness. The challenge is to work with the levels and perspectives of participants in such a way that opportunities are created for raising the group's center of gravity to higher levels of awareness and functioning.

These dialogic opportunities require mature C+5 facilitators who are able to take account of subtle energetic reciprocity that exists at every level of our beings - physical, emotional, mental and spiritual - as well as what might be called cognitive perspectives. In other words, the energetic field of any group is a unique combination of energetic interchange, conflict and reciprocity. It takes someone with mature integral capacities or above to consciously influence the energetic field and to integrally nourish it.

Such an integrally mature person brings balance and harmony by her very presence, and fosters healthy reciprocity at all energetic levels. By being extraordinarily influential in this regard, what she does will be substantially invisible because people with lower level awareness do not grasp what is happening. Over time, however, they tend to appreciate the achievement of better outcomes.

Mature facilitators often end up in charge because positive things just seem to happen when they are present. However, people will tend not to know how to value or recognize such a person, for she often will have done nothing skillful which is observable by others in the forum. This is why the integral leader is often behind the scenes or perceived as “following the flock.” A well-developed integral facilitator/leader will not care, and will be visible and use more recognizable strategies to the extent that it is helpful to stimulate more full spectrum integral civil conversation.

A trained integral facilitator is aware of frames of reference of the participants, together with their developmental levels of world view, behavior and conversation.

She has the ability to sense this, even though people are individually complex and unique.

She is able to engage people whatever their level and frame of reference, raise the median level of civil conversation, and facilitate a shared awareness and appreciation of all voices.

Ideally, she helps participants better connect with one another on the common ground of their shared humanity and within a caring integral field.

She might encourage consideration of the impact of a decision that has been made to the satisfaction of all community stakeholders on people beyond that community, wherever there might be a potential impact due to the decisions being made.

That is, she will encourage consideration of the voice and needs of non-human sentient beings and the broader ecologies of life.

A highly evolved integral facilitator will not only engage others, but will experience deep empathy and compassion for everyone participating in the forum. By her very presence she strengthens the integral field, which better endures conflict and contention, and creates the likelihood of creative and emergent approaches to addressing virtually any issue in a way that better meets everyone's needs.

As a practitioner, her mode of doing this is as much intuitive as rational. As she so engages she may create a space for conflict or non-civil expression, understanding that unmet needs on sub-civil levels need to be addressed. When unacknowledged power, discrimination and suppression are not addressed, all the civil conversation in the world is not going to fully and civilly stabilize a situation unless such issues are brought out into the open and addressed.

If people behave in sub-civil ways, such as using power and manipulation or other disruptive tactics, an integral facilitator creates a space for them to have an opportunity to participate, to be respected, heard and understood. She instinctively knows what she needs to do to connect and be effective. As such, a facilitator or leader with such awareness can actually be extremely tough if integral wisdom and compassion would so indicate.

A more mature integral perspective realizes that people are where they are developmentally, and attempts to address developmentally appropriate and legitimate needs and concerns of each person, group and culture. People must meet the needs of their own highest level of development to some significant extent before they can move on, and society should foster healthy translation within and among the full range of developmental levels. The goal is not to change people, but to sustain them in fulfilling themselves in terms of their own developmental level, exposing them to life-affirming principles and patterns and opportunities and higher level attractors for personal, cultural and institutional growth over time.

At first, perhaps the next decade or two, the greatest C+5 leadership will probably come from those who can serve in an integral advisory and facilitating capacity, helping to build bridges among people and institutions in every society and across the planet and integrally informing existing political parties and movements. Integrally informed civil conversation will be the life blood of an emergent integral politics.

Integral C+5 perspectives and capacities will enable all levels of civil conversation, culture and behavior to be honored, interconnected and integrated in life-affirming developmentally appropriate ways for the benefit of all levels of awareness within each person and within every society and across the world.

In the long run it will be important not only to train professional integral leaders/facilitators but to teach large numbers of people higher civil conversation and integral facilitation skills in all dimensions, sectors and levels of society.

As civil society and the private, non-profit and public sectors begin to institutionalize integral conversation, processes and forum structures, the foundation will be laid for profound and interconnected transformation through all sectors and quadrants.

Potentially, over the very long term, the human capacity required to address the critical challenges will become deeply embedded in our communities and organizations, and at all levels of society.

1 The authors are associated with Ingenius, a Michigan-based consulting organization focusing on an integral community building approach to increasing civic intelligence.

www.ingeniusonline.com

2 See Schuler's Civic Intelligence and the Public Sphere in this book or at www.oss.net/CIB.

COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE: Creating a Prosperous World at Peace

User login

Who's online