I was born on the island of Taiwan, and I currently reside on the island of Manhattan. Both are terra firma, hard and fast granite bedrock.
But I also inhabit imaginary islands: online groups, forums, and other virtual places which bring to mind the dated term, â€œcyberspace.â€ Here I commune with like-minded souls with shared interests.
Other imaginary islands exist in the physical realm, but they are ethereal and fleeting in time. Festivals and conferences bring together communities of shared interest for a set period of time. Then we disperse. We may reconvene after an interval or fork forever into smaller cells distributed around the world.
My fellow humans on these imaginary islands are neotribalists. We equally reject the rigidity of traditional tribalism as well as the isolation of industrial individualism.
We form imaginary islands as safe spaces for our freak flags to fly free. Imaginary islands are unbounded by physical distance, as we unite with others of mutual interest and shared spirit across geographies. We form archipelagos of fellowship across expanses. Our imaginary islands can be open to everyone or hidden to all but insiders.
The Truku (also known as the Taroko) people of Taiwan have a saying, â€œthe land is blood, the mountain is home.â€ The Hawaiians have a related saying, â€œHe aliâ€™i ka â€˜Äina, he kauÄ ke kanaka.â€ The land is a chief; man is its servant. These sayings reflect the indigenous worldview where the land owns the people and not the other way around.
But what happens when the â€œlandâ€ that we inhabit is virtual? What happens when we inhabit imaginary islands, shifting cartographies made up of networks andrhizomes in perpetual flux? We craft our communities, our imaginary islands, with intention. How do we belong to these artificial lands. How do our imaginary islands shape us and own us?
Tupi, or Not Tupi
To answer these questions, we will need new stories, new myths, and new truths. We need new stars to guide our way and to connect the far-flung archipelagos of our imaginary islands. We will need to construct new chimera: new combinations and reconfigurations, new ways of doing and of being.
We adapt, appropriate, and remix from a variety of cultural sources. One of the iconic lines of Andradeâ€™s manifesto is â€œTupi, or not to Tupi,â€ a linguistic pun that brings together references Shakespeare and to the Tupi indigenous peoples of Brazil.
In a discussion of cybernetic cannibalism, Lawrence Lessig explains:
we could describe it using modern computer terminology as kind of read-write culture. Itâ€™s a culture where people participate in the creation and in the re-creation of their culture. In that sense is read-write.
In this sense, as we are reading and writing our culture, we are terraforming the imaginary islands that we inhabit.
Lessigâ€™s idea of a read-write culture echoes Henry Jenkinsâ€™ concept of participatory culture:
For the moment, letâ€™s define participatory culture as one:
1. With relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement
2. With strong support for creating and sharing oneâ€™s creations with others
3. With some type of informal mentorship whereby what is known by the most experienced is passed along to novices
4. Where members believe that their contributions matter
5. Where members feel some degree of social connection with one another (at the least they care what other people think about what they have created).
May the neotribes that we form aspire to be participatory cultures.
Dreamers and Doers
As neotribers, let us dream big but also stay rooted in pragmatism.
Bruce Lee taught us: â€œAdapt what is useful, reject what is useless, and add what is specifically your own.â€
This teaching echoes the motto Wakon-yÅsai (å’Œé‚æ´‹æ‰ â€œJapanese spirit and Western techniquesâ€) from Meiji-era Japan. The island nation had just emerged from centuries of self-imposed isolation. It found itself vulnerable to Western colonialist powers with superior technology. The motto was an invocation to adopt new methodologies and new technologies while preserving a spirit that was authentic and grounded in â€œJapaneseness.â€
Of course, there are many ways to critique and deconstruct notions of cultural authenticity, but the point I am trying to make is, how do we adopt or create new technologies and new ways of organizing ourselves that reflect the spirit to which we aspire?
The recently-departed activist Grace Lee-Boggs reminds us: â€œWe need to grow our souls.â€ Activism and philosophy must work together in tandem.
Back in 1977, Marshall McLuhan warned of the violent tribalism of the global village. He derided this tribalism for being â€œcollective and without any individual consciousness.â€ But we have also seen that individualism taken to an extreme can lead to loneliness and alienation. May neotribes find a middle way in between these extremes.
We can learn from the new nationalisms like the Scottish and Catalan sovereignty movements. While they reject the status quo of the nation states in which they are currently a part, they simultaneously embrace a united Europe and membership in a larger international community. These are nationalisms with more open access to identity and belonging. They eschew the old violent tribalism of blood and soil. Neotribes aspire to be both grounded in the local and connected to the global.
We acknowledge that our blood is mixed, are cultures are mixed. Our destinies are intertwined.
When talking about neotribes, we must be careful not to fall into the old traps of neo-colonial â€œprimitivism.â€ None of that â€œnoble savageâ€ narrative here please. We must learn to incorporate without (mis)appropriating. We must decolonize and deconstruct ourselves first in order to build something new. We must first empty our cups.
By imaginary islands, I mean â€œof the imagination.â€ We are communities of shared interest who dare to dream, who dare to explore, who dare to imagine what might be possible. We must be careful not to allow our imaginary islands to become pure escapism. We must also engage with other communities and tribes outside of our own, to negotiate the global commons and the other shared spaces of our common humanity.
In the Polynesian legends of the MÄori of New Zealand and the of native Hawaiians, the ancestral homeland is called Hawaiki. Some anthropologists think that Hawaiki refers to Taiwan. But the truth about Hawaiki is lost to history and immortalized in myth.
In other legends, Hawaiki is also the underworld or the world of the spirits. In other words, Hawaiki is an imaginary island, a utopia, a â€œno place,â€ an imagined place. A destination always a bit past the threshold and out of reach, but a perpetually in our hearts and minds.
Our imaginary islands, the homelands of our neotribes, are like Hawaiki. We belong to these islands, and we belong to each other.