lisa michel & john on local global
FRAME #4 | Evolutionary frictions: Localism vs Globalism – 32 min video via boundaryless – lisa, michel & john robb
notes/quotes:
3 min – m: i think we should clearly separate what we would like to happen and what we are seeing is happening.. (on local resilience and global cooperation balance/tension over next 5-10 yrs).. we have to have our desire but also realistic.. i’m seeing we reached peaked globalization (sound like talking only trade et al).. also see revival of the state (sound like talking only voting et al).. we shouldn’t dismiss the state.. there is a strong countermove to control global trade and migration.. this is all one part of reality that we shouldn’t ignore.. it’s there.. my argument to p2p self org.. any state in harmony with nature and horizontal structure.. it it doesn’t have a state.. will be wiped out.. will be under influence of stronger actors.. we have to be very careful w our dreams
6 min – m: on the other hand.. it’s equally clear that self org is growing.. whether shared resources or 10 fold increase in urban commons.. we can see that permaculture.. fab labs.. micro factories.. capacity to produce is reach low capital production
7 min – m: to conclude.. for me .. it is an open question how these two things are going to intersect.. ie: a possible restrengthening of nation state on one hand.. and p2p translocal org on the other..
m: what i would suggest.. and we’re not doing that.. we absolutely need to create new institutions.. like indy johar talks about.. he uses word civicis.. i use commons .. but i think we are talking about same thing
8 min – m: but we really need to focus on org.. and we’re kind of undermined by social media.. i think the problem w sm is that we create influencers.. i would consider myself as an influencer.. but are we leaders.. can we move the masses.. that’s the big question that i have.. we spend a lot of time online.. and i think that’s an issue as well..
yeah.. this change begs something deeper than a leader.. what we need is to org around something so essential to what being human is.. (something 8b people already crave – rather than want to talk about).. so that rather than leading people somewhere.. we’re just creating the conditions for them to lead/org themselves.. everyday
9 min – l: the dance between self org and global scale is outside of our movie in our head.. reality is playing out in a diff way..
that’s because we don’t have a legit org in place for it
10 min – l: how do we incite the future we want to see
we let go of control
j: most of my intention now on intersection of tech, warfare and politics.. before that focus was on resilient communities and how to connect to the network on your own terms.. so not dependent on it .. but get benes from it.. which tends to be best resilience strategy
gershenfeld something else law
11 min – j: black swan as a concept is about some big unexpected event.. it’s not really what we’re seeing w 9/11.. covid.. et al.. what we’re seeing is a complex crisis sweep into the system and destabilize everything
yeah but the system wasn’t stable
12 min – j: the systems we have for decision making.. since 15-1600s.. aren’t capable of making good decisions in this environ.. in a complex environ as opposed to a complicated environ.. *where engineering tended to work better
decision making isn’t what we need (if we want a more antifragile, healthy, thriving world.. the ecosystem we keep longing for)
let’s try curiosity over decision making
*when has anything ever legit worked for human being?
mufleh humanity law: we have seen advances in every aspect of our lives except our humanity– Luma Mufleh
j: now things are moving/shifting too quickly for complex plans of bureaucratic organization work on
? plans.. b.. works? where..? when..? how..?
j: one of the frameworks that i’m using and that is useful is the big social decision making systems that started off very clumsily as the reformation kicked off.. refined over time.. and the ones we’re using are: bureaucracy (kind of the cockroach of orgs); markets; and tribalism (a refined tribalism we see today is nationalism)
13 min – j: each of those systems add to our decision making capacity as a group
wow.. b, markets, and tribalism.. add to ?
i guess i could agree if we’re agreeing that decision making is not a humane way to live.. but none of those are adding to anything humane
j: tribalism/nationalism.. allows us to cohere.. to trust each other.. we nationalism breaks down we see a loss of trust
nah.. ie: marsh label law et al
j: you can’t even make a decision.. b’s are good at mobilizing resources
yeah .. maybe passing them around.. but by the time you’ve infiltrated a human being w b.. they have no idea what they deeply want/need.. let alone what enough is.. so all that B is just b.. keeping us from us
j: they’re great at executing large plans
more B is just b.. that are killing us
let go man – your sigh at the end of that phrase tells more than your words do
j: large/small scale structuring info.. works great in science.. works great in govt
oi.. intellect ness.. research ness.. telling people what to do ness.. et al
j: and then you have markets which are great at allocating resources..
again.. makes no diff if you don’t even know the resources we legit need/want
j: and discovering untapped sources of info
really.. ? markets..?
marsh exchange law: all trade must benefit those powerful enough to reciprocate – Heather Marsh
let go.. let’s try cure ios city.. to legit untap us
14 min – j: and those systems have been refined and they’re probably maybe even a little decrepit right now
?
j: but they’re really terrible at dealing w these really big complex crises.. and they’re not really moving us forward
why would they.. they were/are the tools creating the crises.. why would they put themselves out of work?
j: so we have a new social decision making system.. the one i’ve been tracking/writing about.. it’s called network decision making.. it’s different.. and it’s proving to be stronger than the other systems
holding my breath.. can’t wait to hear how different different is this time.. esp since it’s ‘proving’ to be stronger
j: i started working on this back in 2003-4 w open source warfare.. saw the open source model according to the war in iraq.. i’ve seen i grow over time
holy cow.. great ie
j: what we’re seeing in terms of networking decision making systems now is that social networking has brought it up to a whole new level.. it’s rewired our brains.. it’s changing how we make decisions socially
15 min – j: ie: covid.. absent any govt.. people made decisions in mass to start to socially distance.. wear masks.. well ahead of when govt said.. our big failure (in us) .. is that we didn’t lead that network consensus fork to solve the problems
16 min – j: less of a focus on self org.. i think biggest thing we have to focus on right now is a decision making system that’s happening right now.. it’s not what we want.. it’s what is.. what you have to deal/work with.. and you have to transform/shape it in a way that yields positive development
oh my
j: this network decision making system allowed took over in 2016 – we call it right wing populism but it.. really was an open source network applied to politics.. it’s transformed the republican party.. and now we see similar things on left.. slew of open source things in dem party
so.. again.. not different.. at al
17 min – j: we have to figure out how to regularlize these and make these systems work in our favor
why.. why make cancerous systems work better?
j: i mean there’s lots of benes to network decision making
edge of my seat
j: it’s faster
nice.. faster broken feedback loop.. killing us softly w its song
18 min – j: response in us.. as far as B response and making mistakes.. i think this is all what is.. what happened.. in a positive decision making.. we have a dynamic tension between consensus and dissent.. if there’s a problem we can get consensus really quick.. and it has to be narrow consensus.. can’t be this broad million item want list.. it’s got to be very narrow consensus like: covid or solve this specific problem.. and it lasts as long as the consensus is valuable.. and the dissent keeps on pushing against it and it rapidly rolls it up when it’s done
public consensus always oppresses someone(s)
what we need is a means to undo our hierarchical listening (ie: 2 convers as infra) so that consensus becomes irrelevant
19 min – j: but the big danger with this and what i’m writing about right now is that networks tend toward consolidation and if it gets too much residence in the system it will be the basis for a new type of tyranny/authoritarianism that exceeds anything we’ve seen in the past
we need to let go of all the writing/talking/measuring.. and get an infra to set/keep 8b people free.. we don’t need to keep hearing specific people’s words/numbers
telling (writing) people what to do is our tyranny/authoritarianism.. and it is exceeding things in past.. because more people are at the mic but not enough.. it won’t work until 8b are being heard.. everyday
literacy and numeracy both elements of colonialism/control/enclosure.. we need to calculate differently and stop measuring things
20 min – l: covid has highlighted all the vulnerabilities.. in this chaotic moment.. what techs/interventions do you see as practical
tech as it could be..
21 min – m: what happened in states was massive state/market failure.. and then this p2p coord networks did best to compensate failures.. neither state/market were ready to work with them.. there was no inter institutional (means) .. that’s what i want to stress.. it’s not enough to say the market and now commons centric network.. what’s important is to design the cooperation between them.. and that’s where policy is still very important
so not diff.. ie: letting policy keep being too much
m: ie: italy regs.. i still think politics and policy still very important scaling org
we have no idea the scale we could be having.. what the world needs most is the energy of 8b alive people.. we could be scaling to that.. and we’re missing
23 min – m: we need markets that work for the commons.. radical exchange markets..
markets keep the commons from common\ing.. i wish you could see that.. (i think you have seen that.. just can’t imagine a nother way)
m: to the state.. in history .. there has never been more than 200 000 people that did not have a state.. so in complex society.. the state will not disappear
data from studying/researching history of whales in sea world – let go michel.. non legit
24 min – m: either we believe that individuals/groups can make agreement and that creates society .. and i think that’s not the case.. we always live already in a society w norms/structures.. so there has to be common good institutions.. not just people that do their stuff for their own.. common good institutions are essential
there’s a third way.. let go of agreement ness and make the structures non institutional (established law et al.. has to be flexible.. everyday)
m: so the scaling mech.. what i call the partner state is very important and i think that is also what indy is hinting at.. what kind of form that could take
m: ie: global urban commons would be a state form.. coalition of cities as a state form.. urban commons w ethical finance.. locally adaptable.. this is 1 on scale of 1-10 on the actual side.. i don’t know much of cities working with other cities.. viral spread is happening
28 min – l: we could figure out a way to connect public servants.. bubbling up things that are working.. copying and refining.. something i think we should take away from this as a tech
29 min – j: always good to be with the larger trends.. population has peaked.. with covid.. rapid wipeout of retail.. distribution.. squeezed down like farming in the 20s which caused great depression.. getting the value and number of people down to small amount.. ie: amazon.. see that.. so big shift in value being created.. is all going to be on the virtual side..
32 min – l: i think you’re both saying we need both.. local and scale
yeah.. i think we’re missing that the bigger scale is local (w/in 8b souls.. everyday)
_____________
found here:
Michel Bauwens (@mbauwens) tweeted at 3:59 AM on Mon, Aug 10, 2020:
RT @Boundaryless_: mbauwens and @johnrobb in Evolutionary frictions: Localism vs Globalism and the quest towards a healthier and more resilient society #FutureOfPlatforms2020 #PlatformDesign #OrganizationalDesign https://t.co/o0GumsNjlZ
(https://twitter.com/mbauwens/status/1292762406775672832?s=03)
______________
_____________
____________
be you. 