The subject of
this article: scapegoating.The purpose: to assist in
rearranging the
structure of group against group,
“us” against “them.”The goal: to implore every
member of the
membership (and nonmember
shoppers) of HWFC to join the
effort to reform the
Co-op as a fully functioning
cooperative.
Let me begin by
defining the word “cooperative” as
defined
by the Oxford American Dictionary,
cooperative: of cooperation.The meaning of cooperation
is: willing to
cooperate.The definition of cooperate
is: to work in a helpful way with
another or others.The definitions are so
simple, yet the
reality of a cooperative as a
paradigm is highly complicated.
Now I will
define scapegoating by defining
the term
scapegoat: a person who is made to
bear punishment that should
rightly fall on
others.There are many forms of
punishment: to be publicly
humiliated, insulted, or to be
threatened are a few.
Accountability
on the other hand means obliged to
give a
reckoning or explanation for one’s
actions.Accountability calls for
truth.Truth guides the process
which leads to accountability,
seeking the
truth should not be hindered or
blocked.For if someone is accused
wrongly, the truth will inevitably
release
them from that which they are
accused.But accusations should not
fly unleashed in an open forum
because that
would be a form of punishment
(humiliation) which is
unjustified.
I have seen a
number of people pigeonholed as
scapegoats for
HWFC, as opposed to being held
accountable.For example: at the
November 19th meeting
which was
facilitated by the Save the Co-op
Committee, the people on the panel
and others
were verbally accosted and the
response from a large number of
people in the
audience was clapping.There is a paradox,
in cheering on blaming and finger
pointing in the name of condemning
blaming
and finger pointing (this is
called projective identification).
It is only too
easy to say that the problems are
caused by
this person or that person,
instead of taking responsibility
for the problems
of the group which exist outside
of the individuals involved, as if
the
problems only exist on an
intrapersonal level.The scapegoat becomes the
source of anxiety, distracting the
attention
from the true cause of anxiety.The
conflict may be made visible
through this individual(s), but
that person(s)
should not be held responsible for
the full weight of the load.The responsibility belongs
to every single
person involved with HWFC, every
staff person, every member, even
every shopper
regardless of membership. The
reason: the problems affect HWFC,
therefore
everyone is affected by the
problems, so in essence, everyone
is a part of the
problems and must be a part of the
solutions.
The problems
must be acknowledged and discussed
to be solved.To be the person to raise a
voice of
contention is quiet a burden
because it is often that person
who becomes the
scapegoat.And yet, that person(s) is
the vehicle for change.Without that
person(s), problems often fester.Resentments, anxiety,
conflict and anger are symptoms of
an unhealthy
situation that is being neglected.This
type of group dynamics leads to
task ineffectiveness, rigid role
differentiation and destructive
scapegoating.I believe that this has
been the case with HWFC for a
number of
years.Conflict has existed for a
very
long time, it has just recently
come to the surface (often via the
very people
that become persecuted,
scapegoated).
As
a co-op, with a large membership,
factions
form in the face of conflict.There is a
situation of bipolar positions.
-Bipolar
position fades only when members
(of the whole
group) accept their “groupness”
and when the group accepts the
importance of
its individual members.Hence, the group
gains its solidarity as
individuality is legitimated and
individuality is
established when the primacy of
the group is affirmed.*
-Through these
factions, the problems of the
group at large
are acted out.Each faction acting as a
unit, a small collective in which
individuals are enabled to
vocalize and dramatize
the conflict underlying the group
as a whole.*
-The temptation
is to concentrate on one side or
the other
of this tension and thereby lose
the perspective that joins the two
and exposes
the meaning in the paradox.*
Most people
withdraw from conflict.Self-protection outweighs
the need to protect
the group as a whole when the
primacy of the group is not
affirmed.Still others take the risk
of being involved,
leaving those people with a
problem which belongs to the
whole.The problems which are
being identified or
expressed by a small minority may
be unsolvable by so few.Unless more people of
neutral positions are
willing to roll up their sleeves
and dig in, the conflict can rip
apart the
very fabric of the group.
When people
withdraw from conflict they feel
disconnected
(being and feeling connected is an
important aspect of being a member
of HWFC)
and they also feel powerless.Disowning
one’s right to express one’s
thoughts and feelings results in
internalized
excessive negative feelings.It is
difficult to speak in public,
especially when a person’s feeling
are strong and
the atmosphere is tense, but it is
the people that have remained
silent that I
fear (and the ones that left the
room after the vote had passed).They are the ones that are
desperately needed
to protect the very existence of
the Co-op, without their voices, I
am afraid
that the preservation of the Co-op
is at stake.
-The power lies
in the collective.*
When conflict
happens it is essential that the
remaining
members, which are in actuality
the majority, come into the
circle, join hands
with both sides creating a bridge
between the factioned groups.It is the bulk of the
membership which is
neutral and will in effect
neutralize the animosity, calm the
tempers, assist
in keeping the focus on issues
rather than individuals
(scapegoats), and
maintain rationality.
Consider the
consequences, if you have been
absent or
silent.You may lose something that
is a
valuable asset to yourself, your
family and this community.Unless we all contribute to
rescuing and
recovery of the Co-op, we may
watch its demise.
*Taken from
Groups in Context, a New
Perspective, by
Jonathon Gillette and Marion
Mccollom.
