At a surf break, when the line-up is crowded, and competition becomes heated for precious few waves, scenes of hostility are not uncommon. Violence and threat are the ugliest manifestations, but they do happen surprisingly often for something so chill and harmonious as surfing. Localism is the term for brutish behavior stemming from protective ownership of a spot.
I’ve been wondering lately about this in light of discussion of RTM, and questions of involvement vs. ownership. While I realize the functions of civic process are not the same as a recreational outlet, the principles of democracy, as it shakes out into empowerment, inclusiveness, integrity, enthusiasm, and individual rights do very much relate.
So the question arises, what is a newcomer entitled to when they show up at the beach for the first time looking to join the already established order? Must some kind of deference be shown and dues extracted for a place among the crowd? Or is a respectful person entitled to use shared resources that are beyond questions of ownership?
There does exist established protocol in crowds vying for waves. The norm is one-surfer-at-a time on a wave’s face, the surfer closest to the breaking peak gets the first shot. If they pass on the opportunity, precedence goes down the line. The cardinal rule is ‘do not snake’, meaning never cut in front of a rider already up and running.
In reality, it doesn’t often play out this way. Usually, when dozens or more are at a place where the action is confined to just a few meters, a throng paddles at once as the curl presents itself, and plenty of times established surfers will place themselves in the middle, flanked, protected, by other locals who block access to the action. The pattern repeats wave after wave all day long.
I can say I’ve seen plenty of scenes in the water where behavior is atrocious. Having said that, I’ve never felt as uneasy as having to vocalize unpopular opinion in a school board budget meeting, especially as it may have been taken as a threat to interests of teachers of my children. It felt like the ultimate rigged line-up, unwelcoming, even dangerous.
If you research localism, you’ll see that it’s a widespread problem, and much angst is in evidence by aficionados on all sides. Some communities have realized the destructiveness of the pattern and tried to initiate self monitoring, or mentoring, based on the universal code. Nonetheless, in many spots it’s still a might makes right kind of scenario.
I get the same outnumbered and futile feeling about representative town meeting. The rules seem capricious, the alphas dominate, and based on the vibe, I would not be expecting the in-crew to clean up their own act. On the beach the answer is relatively easy, even if frustrating- “move along, maybe another spot will be better”. With the stakes being democracy itself, and one’s residence, with all that entails, the solution is not as easy.
Life's a beach
I really like this thought piece and have been trying to think of other similar analogies – being new at a school, new to a board, or at a pick-up game of some sport. But you did it really well.
So, I’ll argue the opposite.
Someone new is inexperienced in the ways that have come before them. They don’t understand the traditions or history necessary to make informed decisions. They might cause delays due to inexperienced questions, or might send a group in a direction they didn’t anticipate.
Someone who has been around for years knows the local situation better than an outsider. They respect the social order, and know who in the room will back them up or shut them down. They know the habits of the institution.
A new surfer to a beach should, then, sit on that beach for a season or two, watching and learning, and not attempting to ride any waves. The first waves ridden should be with the support and encouragement of others who have come before and ridden those local waves for years.
Really, the new surfer should never have left their previous beach, where they had achieved the necessary status to participate. By leaving, they should have know that it would be a long wait before being able to participate once again in wave riding.
Even though the rules are posted, the surfer should know there are different rules for newcomers, regardless of prior experience or expertise.
This will maintain the traditions and order of a happy beach.
Social Contracts
You’ve made a compelling case for keeping the status quo. The benefits to the few who have invested time and energy are clear. They do what they do, and keep what they think is their’s by rights. What’s lost however is accessing the larger pool, bringing in new energies, opening to changes in the world that may not be factored from the insiders view.
When localism is nasty it doesn’t matter how experienced a surfer is, it’s all about who you know. I’ve seen this feeling of entitlement manifest in some pretty dumb behavior, like paddling straight back to the lineup after a ride, into oncoming action, rather than going around. Or, all too commonly, a flagrant disregard for the cardinal sin of surfing, dropping in on someone already up. Which means shutting a surfer down, or derailing them before they get a chance. I can tell you, when you’re a hundred yards from shore, and get snaked, and see that behavior condoned, unless you have a massive macho chip that needs dipping, it’s daunting to continue.
When the surfer’s code is followed, when its spirit prevails, things go pretty smoothly in the water. Which is amazing considering how chaotic and challenging a strong swell can be. Just by attentiveness, and an attitude of generosity, friendliness and patience, all kinds of human energies- beginners, hot dogs, old dogs– can be accommodated.
The code evolved from common sense. If you’ve had a turn… slip to the back, give another person a chance. If someone’s up and going in front of you…give them room to move, and let them finish unhassled. This stems from recognizing that to surf at all is a privilege, and the resource that makes it possible- the mighty ocean- may momentarily be aligned with, and enjoyed as an ephemeral pleasure, but it can’t be owned.
Hmmm
Term limits?
Once an Ocean dweller myself...
I would say when people, those already involved and well acclimated to a situation have prematurely set their sights beyond others seemingly obstructing their directive and view, and as a result don’t want to embrace or even accept the spirit of cooperation and respect to be rightfully granted to all those fresh on the scene wishing meaningful participation and wanting to get their feet wet, maybe submerge, the resident sharks below need to be summoned to surface to redirect/remind and check/test the lead boarder’s true balance and actual alignment before a defiant descent from the crest occurs out of reach, non retractable. Otherwise we must wait it out for all concerned to value the synchronicity of a better wave that can carry more concentrated weight. Or we can just nudge the set rudder enough off course to force the over-eager, reckless or rogue rider to momentarily prove his footing sure, or if not, watch it eventually slip out from underneath from his own haste and un-coordination in hot pursuit of personal gain.
This will accomplish keeping those who have become too top heavy as if the break away of an unstoppable swell, while continually posturing to gain an edge on the fast track, to rather fall to a determined place back in line to start again, their lesson to repeat, to feel the undertow. Another tactic is to let them flounder a bit separated and stranded from the security of the board itself that allowed such forward momentum, so they have to humbly hitch a ride from those they just tried to cut off if they are so willing and kind to bring them aboard. A growing school of relentless piranhas nibbling at their heels to steady them in the right direction may be just as effective at catching their attention.
No amount of philosopy...
…can change it. You either respect traditions and do what you can, or bludgeon your way into “the meeting”. (And perhaps the G.K. Chesterton quote I posted on Cris Ericsson’s announcement is more apt here. http://ibrattleboro.com/sections/politics/announcement-any-office-peter-runs-2016-im-running-against-him)
I’ve never been very good at politics, although I think I can hold my own in polemics. Your description of “alphas” rings a bell, although I don’t believe they are necessarily part of any “in-crew”. It’s one reason why most people shy away from politics. I’ve always been suspicious of such people but there’s really nothing you can do about it. They will exist like tomorrow morning’s sunrise I’m afraid to say, and usually command the immediate conversation. It’s just human nature. Although I believe that the more quiet the politics, the more effective, my little belief will never stop those insecure enough for the need to be the loudest.
But I remember when I first moved to Vermont, a mere 27 years old, and I found myself at a town meeting in Bellows Falls. It’s existence for me was something of a novelty and a miracle. The discussion came around about nuclear disarmament, which was the topic du jour at the time, and I presume it got put on the minutes by some rabble rouser. So I, knowing of course how wise I was at 27, stood up in full frontal naivete and cynicism, and made clear that despite any possible disarmament happening, the Soviet Union could get more bang for its buck by simply bombing something like the nuclear power plant in our midst. I still remember to this day the shudder that went through the crowd. I didn’t feel exactly ashamed of myself, but I did feel like I accidentally set off a firecracker and a bit nervous as to what interference and discomfort I might have wrought in the townspeople. This is reason #1427 why I will never run for office. :o)
Quiet politics
I think someday we’ll see a system where every voter can log in securely to a site and vote on all issues, like we see on C-Span for the House and Senate. It might be wisest to begin working on this as a future form of public participation.
The idea of “everyone voting” might scare some people, but that also might cause a shift of attention toward making sure all children are well-educated to participate in civic life.
I’d like to see a series of actual debates on issues – one person arguing for and the other against, with an audience following along. The current system of reps “cramming” for the meeting the week before by attending a lecture is a bit weak, in my view. Some of the questions that get asked show that reps haven’t paid attention throughout the year. The handouts are usually useful.
We also need to find a way to combine concerns of town and schools. The separation is costly in dollars and activity. The two systems need to inter-relate more often than once a year.
Not quite quiet
What do you want exactly, people glued to their screens?
Not at all
Just for the ten minutes it takes to vote. Everything else – in person.