Is there room for outrage in ICA?

By Jonathan Dudding

In 2012, an advisor to the UK Government recommended that the Accident and Emergency Department of our local hospital should run a more limited service, and that the maternity wards should be closed completely. In response a campaign was launched by a local doctor. It immediately attracted the attention of a large number of local residents, the local government and the three local Members of Parliament. The campaign also established links with similar campaigns in other parts of the country. It lobbied, mobilised people and arranged demonstrations. Despite that and the major concerns raised during the consultation period, the recommendation went forward to the Minister of Health virtually unchanged and was accepted. The next stage for the campaign was, along with the local government body, to challenge the decision on legal grounds on the basis that the Minister had acted outside his powers. The case was won and our hospital saved!  

In all of this, there was not a facilitator in sight. While there were times when someone paying more attention to process would have helped, essentially the campaign and its ultimate success were due to the passion and commitment of the people involved. They were fuelled by a sense of outrage that a well-respected, effective local institution was under threat for reasons which had nothing to do with the institution itself, but much more to do with a wider political agenda addressing issues in the UK’s National Health Service.  

This is a relatively small (but not insignificant) example of a growing phenomena of movements and campaigns focused on a particular cause or concern which affects large numbers of people and offers a vehicle for protest and change. In his book Networks of Outrage and Hope , Manuel Castells highlights the degree of spontaneity and discomfort in these movements which attracts, unites (often via social media), deepens resolve and gives everyone involved a personal stake in the outcome.

Many of Castells’ examples are relatively short-lived (the focus being on making the change rather than sustaining the movement) and show differing outcomes. On the one hand, governments have been overthrown in Tunisia, Egypt and Iceland as a result of public uprising, but on the other hand the differences made by the Spanish Indignadas and the Occupy movement are less clear. While the movements certainly captured the imagination, challenged politicians and reflected the anger and frustration at the financial system and politicians’ role, there seem to have been few changes with long term significance.

So if outrage is such a powerful motivator and mobiliser, how might we integrate it into our own network, the Institute of Cultural Affairs? In our efforts to bring about change, we draw on over 50 years of global experience to demonstrate and enable cultures of participation. We offer profound values, wisdom and effective tools to support and enable change and transformation among individuals, groups, communities, organisations and societies. But is this enough? If we want to be social pioneers at the “cutting edge” of social innovation and change, should we only play the role of the catalyst and detached facilitator? Do we need to reflect more the outrage and frustration felt (both by us and by others) about the injustice meted out to people whose voices are not heard, who daily suffer from the effects of decisions made for them but without them, whose opinions are not listened to or respected, or simply at the amount of time and energy wasted by unproductive projects, meetings and conversations?

What would it mean to not only reflect but also harness the motivation and commitment that outrage brings? Such ability would enable us to mobilise much larger numbers of people to our cause, strengthen our influence and bring about change on a wider scale. Equally, our organisational skills would contribute to the sustainability of any campaign or movement, so that rather than disbanding after one victory over injustice, the movement could sustain itself to ensure the early victory is maintained or refocus to address the next injustice.

Thoughts, anyone? 

Jonathan Dudding is a member of ICA:UK

The successful Lewisham Hospital campaign attracted all ages and challenged the issue with a range of different action. (Photo: www.mirror.co.uk)