Part of what prompted the text dump in my last post was that I just stepped down from a position in the international. I’ve got some thoughts on that that I’ll be mulling over, started them today on paper. For now, a few random things.

First, I took all that stuff I just posted up here and the stuff linked to in that post and put it in a word file. I did the word count, it’s like 36,000 words. Neat. And no wonder I’m tired. Kind of feels like an accomplishment, though, like that one November when I did my own version of nanowrimo. I hope there’s some dialectical relationship between quantity and quality… (ha! I kill me!)

Second, and hopefully at least a little more interesting, I had a thought about this stuff about developing people that I posted about a little bit ago, thinking also about being tired and stepping back/stepping down. Developing people, like a lot else, is form of labor. It’s work to do, and it’s work performed on an object. I suggested that the objection that some folk have to this way of talking, in terms of developing people, is really an objection to the practice regardless of the term. That fits with development as labor – the object of the labor is other people, it involves working on people. Ideally, working on them to get them to work on themselves too. There’s some connection here to the issue of paid staff, about whether or not development is valorizable in a sense (not sure if I should say marxist sense or capitalist sense or both). It seems to me that it is. So being paid alone is not evidence that development isn’t happening or isn’t possible. I think the issue with paid staff and development in this (admittedly idiosyncratic) sense of the term is like w/ so much else about what’s the driving force or main logic – the use value of development or the need for surplus value? I had another thought on this but I lost it somewhere in my sleepy brain. Ah well.