The community refers to an entity, mainly to a homogeneous group of people, whereas the idea of the public puts an emphasis on the relation between different communities. The public realm can be considered as the actual or virtual space where strangers and different people or groups with diverging forms of life can meet. – Stavros Starvides
a story about people grokking what matters,
will hasten/sustain/co-create the time/talent/share/connection/relationship economy
In listening to Tolle and Robinson’s convo – I heard – strip things down to what matters most.
Find the narrative – concerning all the people. The fractal that fits everyone. A global systemic change.
Perhaps we stop measuring learning, and let community be our curriculum. Perhaps a focus on crowdsourcing public/people yields the best prep for uncertainty, the best experience and awakening with empathy.
Perhaps evaluation/reflection/feedback loop is more about empathy.. can I hear your heart.. than it is about measuring. But perhaps the conceptual knowledge that is clouding our vision, that we learned through public ed, et al, is to measure things, rather than to know people, and to be known by someone.
From the Essence of Connected Learning (video), poignant quotes:
Connected Learning: ‘ESSENCE’ from DML Research Hub on Vimeo.
at 1:50 – .. Part of what’s wrong with the current educational system… is that it’s fundamentally starting with the wrong questions… outcomes… and then everything is defined by that. It doesn’t matter almost who the kid is… – Connie Yowell
at 5:10 – The problem is effective matchmaking… it’s not so much about finding the information anymore.. but about bringing people together who want to learn together… – Mimi Ito
at 7:15 – It’s about expertise that’s widely distributed in our society and culture, and the fact that anybody can help somebody else get better at something. – Mimi Ito
more on public/common spaces
and perhaps politics..
To follow authority has many advantages if one thinks in terms of personal motive and gain; but education based on individual advancement and profit can only build a social structure which is competitive, antagonistic and ruthless. This is the kind of society in which we have been brought up and our animosity and confusion are obvious. – Krishnamurti
imagine.. 7 billion people.. healing like Eleanor – on all levels – personal, community and public.
from David Graeber‘s revolution in reverse:
First of all, they assume that ‘the public’ is an entity with opinions, interests, and allegiances that can be treated as relatively consistent over time. In fact what we call “the public” is created, produced, through specific institutions that allow specific forms of action — taking polls, watching television, voting, signing petitions or writing letters to elected officials or attending public hearings — and not others. These frames of action imply certain ways of talking, thinking, arguing, deliberating. The same “public” that may widely indulge in the use of recreational chemicals may also consistently vote to make such indulgences illegal; the same collection of citizens are likely to come to completely different decisions on questions affecting their communities if organized into a parliamentary system, a system of computerized plebiscites, or a nested series of public assemblies. In fact the entire anarchist project of reinventing direct democracy is premised on assuming this is the case
begs we redefine decision making.. ie: disengage from consensus and voluntary compliance.. et al..
via ie: hosting life bits
public consensus always oppresses someone (s)
while reading bits from Pierre Dardot’s – common on rev in 21:
It is important to keep this last point in mind, for it is crucial in terms of understanding the public character of the so-called “public” service. The precise meaning of the word “public” demands our full attention here, because it is too rarely recognized that the concept of “public” is absolutely irreducible to the “state.” The term “publicum” designates not merely the state administration, but the entire community as constituted by all citizens: public services are not state services, in the sense that the state can dispense these services as it pleases, nor are they merely an extension of the state: they are public in the sense that they exist “in the service of the public.” It is in this sense that they constitute a positive obligation of the state toward its citizens.
Public services, in other words, are owed by the state — and its governors — to the governed. They are nothing like a favor that the state generously extends toward the governed, despite the negative connotations years of liberal polemics have imposed upon the phrase “the welfare state.” .. The public service is a mechanism by which the governors become the servants of the governed.
This is why the public service is a principle of social solidarity, one which is imposed on all, and not a principle of sovereignty, inasmuch as the latter is incompatible with the very idea of public responsibility.
This conception of the public service has largely been suppressed by the fiction of state sovereignty