Major philosophical chasms occur in societies during periods of significant transition. Modernization of unsophisticated regions brings forth resistance from those who feel their way of life is under siege. Fear of losing normalcy, the familiarity with the everyday and with every person, brings people into a defensive mode to fight the forces that would alter the status quo. This creates a conundrum: everyone wants improvement, but few want change.
Making things better is relative: that which elevates one may actually lower another. A faster tool may make one person twice as productive but render the second person unemployed. A better education may lead to young people leaving home to seek their fortunes in larger markets resulting in parents missing their children. The defenders of anti-change movements will eventually erect a shield to protect the destruction of their “culture”.
As most agree, many aspects of culture are worthy of esteem and should be preserved. On the other hand, just because a trait is historical and common does make it a good thing. Culture is not in and of itself good or bad; it is a noun that can accept adjectives like wonderful and horrible. When we first think of culture, we include charming customs, art, music, dance, shared history and beliefs, social norms, etc. But, look more closely at what some “cultures” actually have practiced throughout history:
- Cannibalism
- Piracy
- Genital mutilation
- Slavery
- Foot binding
- And other terrible things
Less extreme, but very detrimental to the progress and prosperity of any society:
- Criminal and antisocial behavior
- Corruption and dishonesty
- Thievery
- Distrust of everyone
- Vigilante justice
Some favorable traits have flip sides with overwhelming negatives, such as:
- Kind and gentle societies are often passive, which can lead to outside and internal control and abuse
- Societies that are tolerant of people’s differences and lifestyles might also be tolerant of criminal and antisocial behavior
So, if one wishes to improve the quality of life within the community, such as education, healthcare, infrastructure, transportation, communications, governance, etc., how does one gain local support? Many would say they want the improvement but don’t change anything – clearly an impossible contradiction. Perhaps a good beginning would be to identify the elements of the culture that are really important to the population. In this way, one would have finite lists that can be called positive and negative culture. General terms like “culture” could be set aside in favor of working with the specifics (maximizing the positive and minimizing the negative) to shape proposed changes.
Once the community is generally united in their recognition of the real situation, an overall vision of the desired results needs to be formulated, and the specific goals must be established. These goals must then inform an executable improvement plan. Because there are so many areas being addressed, the whole endeavor may seem overwhelming.
“How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.”
Any acceptable plan will include multiple and separate components and/or phases.
The situation in Vieques is somewhere in between the modern and sophisticated worlds of the West and the third world. Many do not have a global view, or at least not accurate ones. Most are not experienced in contemporary business practices or technology. A sizable number do not work and are dependent on government subsistence. The average educational level is very low. The question, therefore, is: “How does a population design their future while few in the community even know or understand what the present state of the art is in the real world?” Or to put it in other terms: “How do I write an app for Twitter when I have neither an account nor a clue what Twitter does?” The answer is: “With a lot of help from our friends and trusted consultants.”