On 19/08/08 02:32, charlesarmstrong wrote: > hallo rufus > > you make some substantial points so apologies for what is bound to be an > inadequate response at this hour.
Really burning the (post-) midnight oil I see :) > - i do not assert a causal relationship between technological innovation > and new organisational forms, i merely observe that there are clear > connections between the phenomena. Absolutely -- I hope you did not construe my response as suggesting you did. I simply took the title "Emergent Democracy" and your excellent blurb as impetus to look at one particular thing. As you stated there are many things that could be altering technology. That said, I do note that of many (most?) your speakers tonight come heavily from the techy side of things. > - by background and temperament i am an ethnographer. i tend to base > speculation about the future upon past observation. i've never yet > encountered a society that didn't concentrate authority in some manner > so i don't expect that to change. the communities where i've seen Surely the question was the extent to which that authority was concentrated, and perhaps more importantly, monitored. The 'Dictator and the Anarchist' story was all about the fact that concentration of power may not be problematic if combined with other factors (such as the nonrivalry and open licensing of the underlying good being governed). > highest levels of participation in formal democratic processes were > (surprise surprise) in small towns in northern california but i think > they are probably exceptional. when i try to imagine an emergent Very interesting. As an ethnographer would you have any pointers to literature on this. I'd love to know more about what actually happened in said northern californian towns. > democratic system operating in practice i still see 95% of people taking > only occasional interest in decision-making. but there does seem to be a > certain proportion of the citizenry who are motivated to take on more > responsibility than the current system permits them. for me the key > thing is not how many people are involved in decision-making, but how > easy it is for someone who decides they want to get involved to start > doing so, and the way they are able to start exerting influence. Absolutely. The question is how much they do on their own. That is why I had linked information (and technology) with the free-rider problem for I think that is what creates problems for the informed (or simply) active minority. > in hosting the event tonight i'm not seeking to forge a consensus, > rather to hear a bunch of interesting people with different ideas talk > about their work and maybe start to spot some patterns emerging. now bed! Of course, the entire purpose of this is discussion -- something already successfully achieved (or at least started) even before the physical meeting :) I was simply contributing here in lieu of my inability to attend what looks like it will be a fun and fascinating evening. All the best and look forward to hearing more, Rufus _______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
