[iDC] voting as an act of citizenship, perhaps? cont.

Janet Hawtin lucychili at gmail.com
Mon Jan 7 00:04:18 UTC 2008

Blogging is a kind of participation which enables specific conversation
about process and effect in governance.

Beyond beliefs was an event, film and report which enabled some
hundreds of Australians to start from individual points of view and to
spend time negotiating with different points of view with the core
brief that:
We are all here and contributing to a new tomorrow. This is Australia,
the beginning of a new day.  What would we like to make of this new
day together.

The difference between that kind of process and a voting process is that it
builds connections between nodes with different characteristics.

Voting is a way to secure right of way for one group of same nodes a
and does not inherently facilitate a negotiated outcome or have a
process for meshing different perspectives.

In a group I am a member of there is an annual bid to be the team
chosen to run an event. The teams submitted bids. Then they were asked
to describe the strnegths of their opponents bids and the weaknesses
in their own. This kind of cross meshing means that all teams have
some process through which to appreciate the value in 'other' and to
be able to see ways forward which might include a bit from column A
and a bit from column B without seeing that as a win lose transaction.

Large scale conceptual monoculture is a good way to facilitate right of way.
It creates outcomes consistent with that kind of process.
It creates tensions and conflict and a blindness to issues and
interests which can not be represented or included easily with that
kind of mechanism.

If the team could look at ways of voting and participation which
facilitate good networking between diverse nodes this would be a more
powerful kind of process
for connecting with better governance imho.


More information about the iDC mailing list