Group items tagged

Issues or problems to be solved versus governance and democracy.  The later interferes with the former. Argues that the power of individual people is uncovered.  Democracy is not seen as perfect just better than all the other ways. In a true democracy all funding would come from the people as a whole.  Democracy has we know it is inadequate.  It is slow, biased, inaccurate and expensive. Talks about pushing democracy to the original ideological principles but which one's Greek, English, American and whose version?  Is Leaving politicians in office even if we collectively want to change the system right now OK? Can we pick and choose policies instead of being forced into all or nothing?  Can we hold more elections (while at the same time pointing out increasing costs) Points out problem with technical issues (chads) which supposedly go away.  No fail-ability and instantaneous results based it seems on the same infrastructure that brings about social opinion online.  Landmark events Obama's election. Given the right catalyst democracy thrives through the power of the individual.  Individuals of like minds come together to create change.  A collective consciousness that bubbles up from each individual in the group.  This consciousness governs the way the group behaves. Complex Adaptive Theory how simple elements self organize into super organisms. Civilization or at least what is deemed to be civilization by two researchers without the use of reason. 

Tries to make a case of similarity between the evolution of termites as a super organism and humans as a super organism seeking equivalence between ant colonies and human nations that only obstacle being language.  Really actually the same thing.   The super organism is more competent than the individual parts.  Argues for transformation by humans into a super global organism.  This global organism created is competing with nations. Held by ideas rather than genetics of insects. Cites Darwin both philosophically and photographically.  We are supposedly going to a better place because of technological evolution than we are now. Radical Inclusion supposed maturity in technology allow for problems to be brought up that are effecting this super organism and improve its self regulation.  Radical Inclusion is a vehicle for shifting the consciousness of this super organism we are a part of. Breaks down barriers of geography, language and politics. 

 Ideas can spread but does not mean they are good ideas. Top rated content. Claiming that  changes in Egypt were due to wanting to connect online rather than a local wish to change the government. Fast Unbiased Accurate and Inexpensive. Voting is available from anywhere to where though to whom. Stops bias supposedly supposedly more accountable but somebody is in control of the accounting.  Allows global votes so everyone can vote on the Secretary General of the UN rather than the nations. Brings up technical issues such as authentication or access to the internet. Come back is to compare this endeavor with putting a man on the moon. Done we are told with less computing power than with a regular cell phone. Then just implementation issues. Finishes up with From the very beginning we have loved one another and lived in the company of one another and through giving up much we have live strong to become the greatest power on earth. Love and ingenuity allowed the weakest of us to collectively triumph through it all villages become cities become states become super organism. Still waiting for it to mature though. Radical Inclusive Democracy is a step catalyst seems like genetic engineering. Online UN voting platform for COP15.  At that point focus was bringing accountability to advocacy. COP15 was a cop out is beside the point. Does Radical Inclusion permit responses to crisises against humanity will it allow harnessing the power of individuals of global change at speed. And do what is right for us all. 

Economics and creating livable cities notes and comments on the video. Related blog post http://bit.ly/qXggrn    related wiki post http://bit.ly/nKYXWt 

The future of communities promises to be austere with less public funding available.  This means other means need to be used to create new community paradigms but the challenge is that any major change must take hold in the first 6 months or the existing organizational culture will put the brakes on the effort in self survival.

Major efforts also take 3 requirements. Leadership, Vision and Funding. I suspect for community paradigms the most important is Vision around which Leadership can be organized around to attain funding. One important focus for the community as a whole will be job creation.

These efforts need to work with outside usually private agencies and finding avenues of mutual benefit.  Having a cooperative government entity to work though can therefore be a plus.

Universities are changing their role in the working with communities.  They can be great resources without necessarily trying to establish political control. Students are also a great resource for community change. Different disciplines design, technology and business can be brought together to help create innovative ideas. They can, as should community paradigm organizations, challenge the status quo. At the same time there is a necessity for structure. The question is how to community paradigm groups achieve structure?

In creating community paradigms outcomes are as important as outputs.  Outputs is the metric by which an effort is judged and usually quantitative but outcomes are the changes to the community that come from implementing the effort. You leave behind something sustainable in new partnerships, new ways of working, new ideas.

The challenge is working with experts for innovative ideas without being snare by ideas that are politically or economically motivated to give another advantage or because they are expedient.

The very idea of endeavoring to bring about new community paradigms means creating an environment with more social capital from which to draw to achieve the desired shift in community paradigm requires a good deal of volunteering where the participants actively pursue their role as producers of democracy. Volunteering is not limited to formal volunteering but all altruistic forms of social interaction. It helps to increase democratic participation. Robert Putnam's work demonstrates that it also has positive economic benefit as well. See wiki page for more info. There does however need to be something more to the effort of creating a new community paradigm beyond volunteering. What that is not clear but it seems to rise out of the act of creating a viable community paradigm shift.

Danger of disconnect brought about by austerity measures cutting people of from the community. Thousand flowers wll bloom without government theory is without merit

Communities should do more than provide shelter they should provide opportunities and fundamentally economic opportunities. 

Need a more holistic view, local competency, asking private sector to work in totally different way from traditional way but business still wants government to get out of the way. 

Government can be overly reactive going for the flavor of the minute.

What is the relationship of virtual communities to real communities through the enabling of programs such as car sharing.  Can it reinforce the connections of communities?

Volunteering at its best is a face to face proposition

Liveable is not merely a means of economic advantage but also must include other factors including environmental. We seek what cities give us culturally and aesthetically 

This part of the discussion mirrors the work of Soul of the Community blog post http://bit.ly/qfZtt2 wiki post http://bit.ly/mXp0sF

Metaphors matter, foundationally, in creating communities. Democratic governance is not best done through the machine of government but through a garden of governance by a community.

Changing the relationship of citizens to government as called for by Code for America means changing the relationship of members of civil society to community and of community to government. Community needs to take over a greater role in governance from governance. Code for America provides some of the tools but not the craftsmanship.

Code for America is networked across the USA but grounded in local communities. It is, however, too often leveraged through city councils and city management which is great for cities more in the fashion of Innovatatown than Parochialville. In some cases, it will need to be implemented from outside of city hall.

A need to redefine the notion of self-interest. Human nature stays the same, what changes is human understanding from fatalistic to mechanistic to hopefully organic.

The world is complex and networked not simple and add-on, systems are non-linear and non-equilibrium. Systems should not be described as efficient or inefficient but effective or ineffective. We are interdependent, cooperation drives prosperity and we are emotional approximators. Our systems are impacted positively or negatively by contagion.

Viewing the world in a new way redefines your approach to politics. The mechanistic model of citizenship "atomizes" individuals according to Eric Liu. Under a Gardens of Democracy model, individuals are networked and citizenship can be redefined accordingly making true self-interest mutual interest as understood by Tocqueville http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/ch2_08.htm

Understanding the new reality. You are not stuck in traffic. You are traffic. We need to be more than simple spectators to the political process. In my view, it means being more than simple participants in the existing system but redefining that system. We need to be more than customers and consumers of a system of community management and become co-creators of the system.

We also use mechanistic metaphors in defining our economy, including "efficient markets". The economy is an ecosystem. Economies prosper best from the middle out not from the top down.

Big government versus small government misses the point. According to Eric Liu government should be big on the what and small on the how. Government should strive to set great goals, does invest resources making them available at scale but the innovation to achieve those goals should come from the bottom up in networked ways.