| From: | "S'ace" <cjdegroot(at)wanadoo.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:11:04 +0200 |
| Subject: | Richards Response ... Re: [WDDM] Bernard Clayson's response |
Bernard> Fascinating, intriguing ....... and very predictable.
What is it in human nature that makes people in groups do,
and use, the 'tools' that they are against when used by the
ones that they are fighting i.e. the Representative
Democracy 'tools'.
I too found the move toward hierarchy quite predictable. Bernard asks why
we use these tools which in principle we are against. His question is
particularly poignant in the context of WDDM, presumably a home of those
who understand the value and practice of dialog and deliberation.
In the case of WDDM, which is Internet based, I think the answer is
straightforward: the net is simply not an appropriate medium to support a
democratic process, not unless there is a strong pre-existing shared
understanding, shared goals, and a shared sense of urgency, among the
participants. Lacking these, there is always a futile struggle to achieve
a consensus out of chaos, by means of sporadic email exchanges and website
visits. I've seen the same dynamics in countless net-based initiatives,
many involving very well-meaning and knowledgeable people.
The tools of dialog and deliberation are indeed the tools needed to
support a democratic process, but they don't work well on the net; they
work in face-to-face gatherings. Hence it is not surprising that WDDM
fares no better than other groups on the net, despite its area of
expertise, and despite its valiant attempts to create rules of online
dialog that mirror proven face-to-face rules.
Bernard:> Democracy is supposed to be THE alternative to
representative democracy, yet:
a) no one knows how to make it work,
b) the first resort is to set up rules that may exclude the one with
guts enough to challenge the hypocrisy of the current system.
I think Bernard's observations are more interesting in the case of the
'real world' - society - than they are in the context of net-based groups.
Indeed, I have been largely uninterested in WDDM postings because they
don't deal with the question that is in my view most appropriate to this
group, namely: How can the tools of dialog and deliberation be used to
support the emergence of a democratic society? This is a question that
needs to be answered, a question that the people in this group are
well-suited to address, and a question that might be effectively pursued
by net dialog.
It is also a question that I have been seeking answers to for the past
five or six years. The results I've come up with are promising, and they
indicate that appropriate application of dialog processes has the
potential not only to support the operation of a democratic society, but
to bring about the transformation of society from its currently sad
configuration. I've written a complete report on this investigation in the
form of a book, "Escaping the Matrix: how We the People can change the
world" - http://EscapingTheMatrix.org.
As regards the proposal before the group, I abstain from voting. Voting is
an inappropriate mechanism for almost anything, particularly a democratic
process.
Regards,
Richard
http://cyberjournal.org