out of the wreckage
(2017) by George Monbiot
1 – a story of our times
you cannot take away someone’s story w/o giving them a new one.. it is not enough to challenge an old narrative..however outdated and discredited it may be… change happens only when you replace it w another..
by telling.. perhaps more by modeling.. no?
those who tell the stories run the world..
so how about we model a new story.. where everyone tells the story.. everyday..
the only thing that can displace a story is a story
our challenge is to produce one that is faithful to: the facts; our values; narrative patterns to which we respond
like many people who seek a generous, inclusive politics, i have been listening for such a story, waiting for its bugle call to resound, so that we can rally in the expectation of a better future.. the wait continues.. t
listen deeper: a nother way book
most mainstream parties seek only to tweak existing narratives. this is why they often seem effete, passionless and exhausted..
despair is the state we fall into when our imagination fails..t
the failure to tell anew story has been matched by an equally remarkable omission: the failure to discern and describe the values and principles that might inform our politics.. t
when political parties dilute or abandon their values and adopt the values, phrases and stories of their opponents (a process known as triangulation), they change the political environment in which they operate.. they generate the toxic conditions that eventually kill them..
those who promote this story should know what their values are and be able to name the *w/o hesitation ..
list of 16 principles..
whoa.. how to name those *w/o hesitation.. perhaps we go simpler.. a and a
policies should grow from the soil of principles
or not at all..
not can all the principles i listed be incorp’d into a story
narrative.. should resonate w deep needs and desires..t
problem deep enough for 7 bn to resonate w today..
p 1 – original virtue
social contact reduces physical pain.. opioids relive both physical agony and the distress of separation.. which might explain the link between social isolation and drug addiction..
social pain can be harder to bear than physical pain, which could be why some people self harm in response to emotional distress: an attempt to replace emotional injury w physical injury.. one of most effective forms of torture is solitary.. we need connection.. just as we need food/shelter..
our extraordinary capacity for altruism and our remarkably social nature are the central crucial facts about human kind.. yet we remain in an astonishing degree, unaware of them..
our innate tendency is to stand together against threats to our well being to treat an attack on one as an attack on all..
this is what we are but something has gone terribly wrong
p 2 – disorder
an epidemic of loneliness is sweeping the world..
many people are unable to find anyone with whom they can connect
i’d suggest.. mostly because.. none of us are us.. (i’d say most of us.. but.. it really needs to be all of us in order for all of us to be ourselves..)
major impacts on our physical health..
we rip the earth’s living system apart to fill the gap in our lives, yet the gap remains..
loss of connection…
why has this happened
p 3 – the causes
part of answer is that this crisis is self-generating.. pursuit of material satisfactions.. dulls and blinds..
*we were once brought together by work, travel and entertainment. now these activities tend to estrange us
these tendencies are reinforced by econ system..
globalisation has weakened our connections w our neighbours and neighbourhooods..
i don’t buy that.. i think we were already dis connected.. globalisation (the way you describe it) is more a symptom of that disconnection (missing piece #2)
but above all .. driven by dominant political narrative.. ie: thomas hobbes 1651: default state of human relation is war of everyone against everyone else..
we have heard the story of our competitive, self maximising nature so often, and it is told w such panache and persuasive power, that we have accepted it as an account of who we really are.. it has changed out perception of ourselves. *our perceptions in turn change the way we behave…
*and we assume that is this is our innate/natural being..
the actual (p1 of the) problem.. we aren’t who we are.. so.. cause: missing 2\ attachment and 1\authenticity..
p 4 – the consequences
one result of mistaken belief is loss of common purpose..
loss of common purpose leads to loss of belief in ourselves as force for change.. loss of belief in democracy.. thru voting , mobilising and campaigning.. we can make our political system work.. for all of us
i see our democracy ness.. same as work/school ness… institutions of a survival gathering.. places of commiseration.. places where we’re offered spinach or a rock.. public consensus always oppresses someone.. so to me.. democracy ness.. was never truly free choice/decision
if politics as usual no longer delivers.. people look elsewhere for answers..
again.. like the globalization claim above.. i’d say.. politics never delivered.. we were seeking to fill a hole from the lack of our 2 basic needs.. and so we convinced ourselves to pretend politics worked.. to feel the holes.. symptom.. not cause..
this elsewhere often mean demagoguery: .. *abandonment of reasoned argument..
that’s what politics/democracy/work/school is.. our *abandonment of sense making.. thinking of James Suzman‘s affluence w/o abundance .. 99% (or whatever high percentage).. of our existence on earth lived w/o those supposed ‘original places of content/purpose’.. (ie: politics/democracy/work/school…)
we keep not going deep enough to see where the actual problem is.. we think we’ve gone back far enough.. so we spend all our energy trying to fix/bandaid/fight-about these symptoms of not us ness.. (ie:politics/democracy/work/school..).. but they don’t (and never did) fill/complete us.. they weren’t what was missing
we have to get a narrative that goes deep enough for 7 bn today..
p 5 – restoration
by reconnecting w each other we can conquer loneliness.. and loss of sense of meaning/purpose..
though we still need it, we can no longer rely only on the state. nor can we rely on the workplace to supply
again.. state.. work.. symptoms.. go deeper
by reviving community built around the places in which we live.. by anchoring ourselves, our politics and parts of our econ in the life of this community , we can recover the best aspects of our humanity.. we will renew democracy..
i don’t think we can as long as we are measuring transactions.. (assuming that’s what you mean by parts of econ).. we have to let go of the symptoms that showed up while we were seeking-while-intoxicated..
by rebuilding community we become proud of our society, proud of our institutois proud of our nations, proud of ourselves.. be coming together *we discover who we are..
*how..? with all that pride going on..? pride over .. nations? institutions..? ugh
the story – in summary
we are trapped in a vicious circle of alienation and reaction
true.. i’d add.. of partial solutions/causes.. as well..
by coming together to revive community life, we, the heroes of this story can break the vicious circle. thru invoking the two great healing forces – togetherness and belonging – we can rediscover the central facts of our humanity: our altruism and mutual aid..
nice.. but i think you’re missing the second (or first) piece.. (i see togetherness and belonging as one piece).. if we just focus on belonging.. we’re dead in the water.. via maté trump law..
i propose a name for this story the politics of belonging
community togetherness and belonging are values invoked across the political spectrum . thomas paine: the mutual dependence and reciprocal interest which man has upon man, and all the parts of *civilised community upon each other, create that great chain of connection which holds it together… edmund burke: to be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle.. of public affections.. it is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a **love to our country, and to mankind.
few people would disagree w either writer on this point
i’d disagree on the *civilised ness. and even the **love to our country.. just because it’s resulted in competition/division you talked about earlier. thinking lennon’s imagine.. and i’m not the only one..
2 – a captive audience
neoliberalism invented at a meeting in paris in 1938
need to go back further.. before money..
financialisation has had a similar impact, enhancing the opps for the rich to acquire unearned income.. perhaps the most dangerous impact of neolib is not the econ crises it has caused, but the political crises. as domain of state is reduced, our ability to change the course of our lives thru voting also contracts..
more symptoms (finance, state, voting, ..) .. go deeper
if dominant ideology stops govts from changing social outcomes and delivering social justice.. they can no longer respond to the needs of the electorate..
did they ever. now could public voting/consensus ever respond to needs of all of us
we cannot contest a narrative until we have named it..t
deeper than all the others..
we have the means to go deep
to change the world, you must tell astory: a story of hope and transformation that tells us who we are..t
rather.. model a means for 7 bn to leap to a nother way to live (an innate way.. already in each heart)
3 – don’t look back
social democracy.. acquired much of its power and coherence from the thinking of one remarkable man.. john maynard keynes’s across 4 decades.. work dominated economic thought and practice.. .. widely credited w reviving economies and distributing their benefits
that’s not the rich old story we need.. it’s a fine bandaid story.. but not the narrative we need for betterness of 7 bn people.. begs we look at an 1\ older story.. ie: affluence w/o abundance.. and 2\ deeper story..ie: roots of healing.. combined with a 3\ new one (aka: eagle and condor ness) .. ie: tech as it could be.. via 2 convos
otherwise.. the rest of your book/story is going to be about made up money.. and measuring transactions.. (which specifically did till p 53 .. but books and volumes.. tons of energy are spent assuming money)
his (corbyn) policies represented a clean break from both the neolib of his opponents and the triangulation of his labour predecessors…. however.. did not amount to a new political narrative.. next obvious step is to consolidate party’s renewed political id by embedding these politics and others w/in a wider story of change.. seek to engage politically alienated people.. could become irresistible..
and those ‘young people many of whom had failed to participate in previous elections, began to flock to the party‘ .. cool.. but they weren’t speaking their voice.. they got angry and used the only means available.. ie: voting; protesting; parties; .. we have to go/listen deeper.. since we now have the means.. and it has to include detox
4 – alienation
the loss of *trust cuts across social categories…
indeed.. but not the loss of *trust in institutions ie: from financial crisis.. the loss of *trust in people.. dating back to hg time.. or whenever..
govt no longer seen as an effective force in delivering change
when was it..? when did it effect change..?
the era our intellectual forebears anticipated, in which the majority of humankind would be equipped w enough ed and leisure to permit a general engagement w the great questions of life, has not materialised, and shows no sign of doing so..
because we’re defining equipped wrong.. we’re already equipped.. we just need to be set free from the compulsion ness.. once you believe equity is everyone getting a go everyday.. redefining public ed becomes rev of everyday life.. which today.. we can facil
the activities what once brought us together now drive us apart. where once we traveled to work on buses, trams, and trains, .. many have little choice but to drive in car.. media.. sm..
what..? those brought us together..? stressed in a bus on the way to work..?.. do agree with the cars on the street keeping us from walking et al..
people w few attachments to the tangible world are easily deceived.
ie: if attached to money, work ethic ness, meds as fix, school as learning, et al.. easily deceived..
daniel pauly: shifting baseline syndrome: we perceive the situation that prevailed in our youth as normal and natural, ,and use it as the baseline against which we measure change.. over generation we adjust to almost any degree of deprivation or oppression, imagining it to be natural and immutable..
three will be no effective response w until those who oppose .. adopt a new political story.. mobilise around it in a sustained and coherent fashion..
5 – belonging
the revival of society remains an essential component of the benign transformation we seek, even if it could somehow be dissociated from economic and political revival..
could if started seeing econ and polit as irrelevants..
ie’s of participatory culture.. gardens.. gathering spaces.. walkability
turning such initiatives into wider social revival remains creating what practitioners call ‘thick networks’ : projects that proliferate, spawning further ventures and ideas that were not envisaged when they started..
a study commissioned by london borough .. sought to id how these thick networks are most likely to emerge.. a crucial aspect is that at least some of the projects must readily engage people who do not have much money, ed, or social confidence.. otherwise participatory culture can become stuck in ‘exclusive feel good’..
but a wide rand of ‘low threshold, low commitment’ activities have the potential to draw almost anyone in.. cooking and eating often a first step..
wrong order.. don’t offer a project.. even food … first: listen to each curiosity.. and find them their people.. otherwise ie: pbl in school would have changed the world by now..
projects of this kind tend to spawn others, widening the opps to engage more people. when enough schemes have been launched they catalyse a deeper involvement generating community businesses, coops, and hybrid ventures, which start to employ people and generate income
tipping point is reached when 10-15% of local residents are engaging regularly..
1| have to disengage from money/work/school.. all the intoxicating myths we keep holding onto and 2\ has to be all of us.. all day
may sound ridiculous.. undoable.. but we’ve been saying and doing.. 10-15% et al for years.. and not getting there.. aren’t curious why none of this has worked yet.? i’m thinking because we’ve not yet let go enough..
this process, the study reckons, takes about three years
again.. then why haven’t we yet..?
i believe there’s a nother way .. one that 7 bn people could leap to ..
6 – our economy
must have misled you. those aspects of life i described in previous ch.. community action/design/ownership – appear to have been an illusion.. none of them exist.. i cannot find them, at least in the standard econ models..
market cannot meet al needs; nor can state, nor can combo.. both, by rooting out attachment, have helped fuel the alienation.. that breeds extremism.. over past 200 yrs.. element missing from both econ models.. and most dominant ideologies.. : the commons..
our relationships are reduced to the exchange of financial value, as both human life and the rest of the living world are commodified..
we don’t need to call for the elimination of either state power or commercial markets to argue for the extension of the commons. a hybrid system, consisting of a market economy, state provisions, the commons, alongside the fourth crucial sector of the economy, the household, would meet a wider range of needs and generate a stronger sense of belonging and mean that the market, the state, or a combo of the two can deliver..
not common ing then.. the cancer will spread.. otherwise.. we’d have it by now.. enough people have been practicing this hybrid ness.. ie: why didn’t it expand in 20s and 30s..?
who qualifies as a member of this commons and how they should best be compensated
commons ness is compromised if we bring in thinking such as: qualifies; compensates;..
similar principles (as to land) could be applies to many common assets that private businesses and individual users currently take either freely or few very low fees..
can’t comprehend a commons.. people common ing.. if money/trusts/whatevermeasureness .. is involved..
perhaps most ambitious proposal.. is fro a common sky trust
ubi.. even small payments make big diff – strong improvements seen in health, nutrition and school attendance..
let’s try ubi as temp placebo..
the measure discussed in this ch might enhance the distribution of wealth and our sense of belonging. but, on their own , they do not guarantee either general prosperity or the protection of the world’s ecosystems and natural processes.. to defend long term interests of humanity and all other living beings.. we must take a wider view.
7 – framing the economy
sustainability and sustained growth are antithetical concepts. but not one seems to have noticed: they are used interchangeably..
after all, monetary figures are meaningless unless the goods they measure can be redeemed.
the goods we don’t need.. and/or most of us don’t get.. because we don’t have the money.. so .. what was the meaning again..?
the presumed financial loss (whose quantification is as dodgy as most such attempts to *price the biosphere).. distracts us from the real issue: that this is the **basis of our subsistence. when the soil goes, we go with it..
not so mention to *price/measure people..
on hayek.. and soil.. soil should be treated like any other form of capital: disposable and exchangeable for money. our sole duty to each other is to maximise income..
earth itself (on moving to mars) treated like a plastic cup.. thrown away .. perhaps it would be more accurate to say that we see ourselves as disposable.. the ultimate negation of belonging
exactly.. that’s the deeper problem.. human energy is what we need.. most
this (on nasa saying.. mars as thrilling prospect) ..is what is delivered by a system that insists we are subject to *no resource constraints..
actually.. it’s not the *no resource constraints.. it’s the not trusting humans .. the dance we’re missing of: we have enough.. just not being resourceful/indigenous.. affluence w/o abundance.. et al
reason this is important is because if we think the problem is that *we don’t have resource constraints.. then we’ll keep on measuring/controlling everything.. when.. i believe.. the answer we’re missing.. is to let go.. and trust us.. (which we haven’t done yet.. anywhere)
under the current economic programme, success is measured by the expansion of commerce, regardless of the net effects on our well-being.
measuring success, measuring transactions.. all intoxicating/compromising..
to succeed.. we must destroy ourselves
the thought of ‘success ness’ is destroyer..
the genius of Kate Raworth’s book – doughnut econ.. lies in her comprehensive reframing of the subject.. she does this by redrawing the graphs thru which economics see the world.. to ‘make assumptions explicit and blind spots visible’
diagram has 4 parts: market, state, commons, household..
unless children are loved, looked after, fed, *taught **basic skills at home and taken to ***school, they will have no means of joining the ****workforce, except at the lowest level, when they grow up
this is why i hadn’t yet added a page of hers/doughnuts.. ie: what are **basic skills..?.. we’d do best to zoom our more to basic needs.. and what can we *teach..? we learn from being curious and around people who are modeling the things we are curious about.. hg child ness.. ***school is one of the ‘frames that created’ this mess.. ie: science of people in schools ness.. as is ****work..
household, id’d by some thinkers as the core econ, makes everything else possible.. by ignoring this sphere, and treating unpaid labour as no labour at all, .. despite the gains made by feminism, women remain the principal providers of the core econ: the carers w/o whom everything falls apart..
Raworth, whose work is the most considered and far reaching of the materials i have read while researching this book..
we keep missing it.. because we keep just looking at what is in view
*to break the growth hegemony, we need new metrics..t..: measures of well being rather than expansion..
maybe we need to just stop measuring..
we might also need new money… monetary design helps determine the form that commerce takes..
commerce: the activity of buying and selling, especially on a large scale; social dealings between people
via first defn.. we need to get away from buying/selling.. via second defn: social dealing shouldn’t be measured.. moneyed.. if we care about betterness.. freedom.. well being.. whatever you call it
developing new currencies could encourage both the protection of the gifts of nature and the distribution of the wealth arising from them
oy – same time i see Raworth suggesting the new currency be shaped like a doughnut
money anchored to productive value – such as a basket of commodities – would reduce the incentive to exhaust those commodities
? if we need incentive.. big red flag we’re doing it wrong
the virtual wealth on which the financial sector feed could no longer be detached from the real wealth on which all of us survive and thrive..
they aren’t connected at all.. only in that if we insist on the virtual/financial ness.. we compromise the real wealth.. they can’t be a team.. we’ve been proving that for years..
so how might any of this be implemented? it seems to be that a necessary (though insufficient) step is to take control of public budgets..
? we need to stop measuring
given that there are general social benefits that only govts can provide, and given that ineq and exclusion cannot be sensibly addressed w/o a redistribution of wealth thru taxation and public investment,
lady in ny – this (participatory budgeting) just feel like democracy, and the way desicion should be made in the city. (on practice began in 1989 porto alegre where around 50 000 people are typically involved in developing of budget)
1\ imagine if we weren’t spending all our time.. on all the measuring 2\ that is not the best way to do decision making in 2017.. we have the means to hear every voice.. not just a good consensus of 50 000.. or however many beyond 1..
participatory budgeting is, i feel, an essential component of a politics of belonging..
if we want to belong.. we have to disengage from getting value from measuring..
in porto alegre it has led to a situation that many politicians consider impossible: large numbers of people demanding that the city council raise their taxes..
municipal budget not enough.. challenge is find ways to extend process in two directions: citizens to determine greater portion of local budges, and to intro participatory budgeting at the state and national levels..
too much ness
democracy becomes fainter as scale increases..
maybe in the past.. but not today.. if we 1\ redefine democracy 2\ use tech as it could be
the larger the scale of any form of politics, the harder it is to ensure that *popular control remains a live proposition..t
we can do better than *popular control.. both words are killing us
once we begin to gain control of he budgets that belong to us, our engagement w the public investment is likely to proliferate into ever bigger questions: what is the economy for? who does it serve? what dos it ignore? how could it be better design?
sounds like stuvoice ness.. not truly free questions.. should be asking if a and a are happening..
in seeking answers, we are *drawn almost inexorably towards the principles raworth id‘s: to meet the needs of all w/in the means of the planet.. her reframing of the economy **allows us to see what we were unable to see before..
inexorably: in a way that is impossible to stop or prevent.
*good principles.. not inexorably drawn.. ie: i don’t see her reframing as addressing those id’s.. better than now perhaps.. but still a bandaid.. and not what we’re capable of..
**true perhaps.. but it doesn’t allow us to see enough..
8 – our politics
every polity could be improved, by drawing both on the practices of other nations and on ideas yet to be realised anywhere..
let’s go with the ideas yet to be realized anywhere.. ie: let’s try a nother way
is it (democracy) worth saving? it is plainly a system that lends itself to abuse and corruption.. so why grant power to reps.. rather than exercising it directly..?
to answer picture: perfect republic of unarmed black commoners living on their own land,.. in absence of external authority/coercion, next to perfect republic of well armed white racists..
this isn’t why we need democracy/rep ness.. this is why we have it.. so go deeper.. why would we even picture that scenario.. let’s fix that..
in the absence of govt, powerful elites are even more dangerous to the common welfare
not true.. we don’t know that.. we’ve not yet tried it.. or.. we have .. look to the hg..
it is true that our rights and freedom s are often threatened by the state. but how do we defend them in the absence of the state.. we would need to find the means not only of resolving conflict w neighbours , but also protecting ourselves from the might of people as yet known to us.. we would need to codify our rights and freedoms and ensure they were respected by others.. we would need to discover a common method fro protecting them, for preventing violence and theft, and negotiating a balance between our interests and other people’s: an arrangement know as the rule of law, in other words, if govt ceased to exist, we would need to reinvent it.
no we wouldn’t.. if we look deep enough at what we all want/need.. let’s try gershenfeld sel to make all those bad things you listed.. irrelevant
our task is not to dissolve the state they have corrupted, but to wrest it back from them
us/them talk .. fitting with thinking we need govt and state et al..
only the state is beg enough to defend us from our common threats
so not true..
there is a democratic means of achieve this: a constitutional convention.. a meeting whose prupose is to id a set of governing principles and then put them to the vote..
oh man.. a meeting.. that’s one of the symptoms as well.. what about all the people not at the mtg.. what about all the people at the meeting whose voice isn’t heard..? voting is hearing.. voting is a survey with given choices..
perhaps every nation should run a constitutional convention once every twenty years.
dang.. we have the means to listen to 7 bn everyday.. no given choices.. just listen to their curiosities.. let’s do that..
so how should members of the convention be chosen?.. white argues .. for process know as sortition.. choosing by lot.. the aim would be to rep the character of the population as closely as possible..
oy.. we have the means to not rep each other.. thinking we have to rep each other is a symptom of a deeper problem.. let’s go there..
in the third phase, helped by facilitators who *ensure that every voice was heard, they worked out what to do
depends what you mean by heard.. heard their response to the given choices.. that’s not voice..
we do have the means today however.. to *ensure every voice is heard.. has nothing to do with given choices..
a system in which almost every vote counts and almost every voice can find a fair hearing during the electoral terms is a system likely to build engagement, trust and belonging.. but the electoral process alone does not guarantee that politics works.
none of us are free if one of us is chained (not listened to).. and true freedom/choice matters.. we have to have a system (because most of us are not ourselves today) that frees us and detoxes us at the same time.. all of us at once.. if we want the dance to dance.. sync matters..
it might have been possible to offer a partial justification for this system when the quill pen was the fastest means of record taking.. it is unjustified in the digital era. the idea that any govt could meet the needs of a modern nation by ruling w/o *constant feedback, and actual rather than notional consent, is ridiculous..
i wish you could grasp that last sentence.. not to mention that we’re beyond *constant feedback.. and ruling.. we can facil listening to 7 bn curiosities .. everyday..24/7.. ridiculous that we’re not..
this is how disempowered people w/o either the means or the incentive to engage effectively tend to respond
we have to get beyond people.. behaving a certain way in a non-true-choice meeting.. we have to go deeper than things that require incentive.. we have to quit assuming life is about .. responding..
after yrs of being marginalised, disenfranchised and treated like idiots, people recognised that, in many cases for the first time in their lives, they were *being offered genuine political power..
i don’t think that’s ever happened..
swiss rate was 75% (people who felt confident in govt).. used as model..
75%..? none of us if one of us..
(on new techs could expand potential).. they (algos) also search for unusual vocab and sentence forms that, as ai improves, might allow them to id and highlight original thinking..t
this might enable the reykjavik model to be scaled up to allow meaningful mass participation in national decisions..
improving (speeding up .. gathering more data) the decision making .. isn’t deep enough.. it’s still.. given choices.. spinach or rock ness.. not original thinking/curiosity.. and it’s still with people who are not really free.. we need to facil curiosities which means we need to detox most people back to innate curiosities..
the most obvious application of digital techs is to provide us w the info we need to make intelligent political choices..
no.. that’s so off.. that’s just another ongoing symptom of manufacturing consent.. et al.. ie: the consent to letting others decide what our choices are.. because we’re too busy readying/studying info.. because we’ve voluntary complianced ourselves to believing we have to prep/train for life.. that we’re not enough.. until we get ged‘d et al..
in either case (germany or switzerland) it helps voters to cross a crucial barrier: seeing themselves as political agents who can exercise meaningful choice, rather than as people to whom politics is done
no.. politics is still done to them/us.. we’ve just sophisticated our pluralistic ignorance (in believing it’s not).. because we spent our day studying info about topics other people chose..
(on replacing ie: world bank, imf, et al).. given where power now lies, these are vastly ambitious suggestions (*vastly ambitious, of course, is what we need to be.)..t
yes.. let’s be that.*vastly ambitious.. disengage
9 – making it happen
while the clinton campaign was organising money, the sanders campaign was organising people..t
imagine if that was our day.. org ing people.. money no longer existed..
what brings them around is a convo w a real person.. ideally a person like themselves, rather than a paid persuaders..t
imagine if that was our day.. 2 convos..
he (sanders) could stay true to his principles w/o worrying about the money..t
imagine if we tried that for 7 bn people.. all at once.. ie: short bp
conclusion: the politics of belonging
its (this book) purpose is to reveal the defining aspects of our nature.. it seeks to revive our humanity..t
our failure to tell anew story w which to replace it (neoliberalism) has allowed this power to persist and grow.
i’m afraid your story.. will just perpetuate neolib ness
a real democracy is one that allow the people to design the system.. new methods and rules for elections ensure that every vote counts and that financial power can never vanquish political power
so let’s do that.. rather than try to make people feel more empowered w/in a given system (of elections, voting, finances) .. let go.. ie: a nother way
rep democracy is reinforced by a participatory democracy that allows us to refine our political choices..
refine our political choices.. how is that a new system..?
decision-making is returned to the smallest political units that can discharge it..t
today.. that is 7 bn people.. 24/7 .. let’s facil that..
in combo w new strategies for reaching and persuading politicians, there may be nothing *w/i the scope of democratic politics that this method cannot achieve, **nothing that it cannot change..
**nothing it can’t change.. *within the scope of dem politics.. so.. actually.. nothing it can change..
thru restoring community, renewing civic life and claiming our place in the world, we build a society win which our extraordinary nature – altruism, empathy, connection – is released.. we find a person waiting for us.. whose real character has been suppressed.. the one who lives inside us, who has been there all along
but dang.. the things you’ve written in your book.. won’t get there.. have to go deeper..
would love to talk to you about perhaps.. a nother way.. to truly get there..