I remain very skeptical of the Transition Movement whose guru is Rob Hopkins. I try to remain open to new information that will convince me that his ideas are constructive. However, there continue to be pieces like this that reinforce my skepticism. He seems to be quite the politician by acknowledging different points of view and thus appearing to be broadminded on any given subject. However, he clearly steers people in the direction of his movement and its collaboration with the policies of the ruling class.
For example, in this article he acknowledges a critical view:
Of course the cynic might point out that the reason for the Big Society is the sweeping cuts in public spending that are only just beginning. If you replace the word ‘localism’ with ‘privatisation’, it is not that different in some ways from the Thatcher government’s agenda. There is a challenge within it around what people are actually capable of doing in their spare time. Working full time, and also running a school? Working, managing a family, looking after an ailing relative, and running a Community Land Trust? Of course there are incredible people out there who do that, but it will have its limits unless people are supported in other ways too.But, as you can see, he dismisses it as cynical and continues on with the great opportunities the "Big Society" presents for the Transition Movement.
Having said that though, I welcome the potential that the Big Society represents. It offers a context within which Transition can really step up to the plate. It explicitly states that it wants to see communities stepping up and taking control, and that can only be to the good. It has lots of hooks onto which Transition groups can hang their projects, and it also raises lots of questions which Transition initiatives have hard-won experience they can feed into.
