A (Possible) Poll - Second Draft
By Michael Albert at Mar 01, 2010 |
|
This is the second draft of a POSSIBLE poll about joining or not joining an imagined new membership organization.
If we put this poll up online, it will seek to discover just how much support such a new organization, with features chosen to be consistent with the overwhelming majority of respondents to the earlier (and still online) resoc poll, would attract.
In a few more weeks, perhaps after another draft or two, if this new poll idea still seems sensible, we will put it up on ZCom and strongly urge users to post their answers and, in the event that they so desire, to also post a blog or comment explaining their answers - all of which would display together.
Before deciding whether to make such a new poll live, however, we would like to get more feedback on the idea, and also on possible wording of the questions.
To indicate your views, please, just comment on this blog post. Commenting here will impact our actions, so please take some time to do so. Regarding alterations, if possible, please don’t just say we should make it better, clearer, shorter, or whatever - but instead, if you can, propose actual changes you think would help.
A (draft of a possible) New Poll
IMAGINE that a new organization is established in your country, that it has a chapter where you live along with other chapters in your country and in many other countries as well, and that it has the defining features listed below -- and that is has no additional features that you significantly dislike.
1. On hearing about this new organization, would you:
- Be eager to join and promptly sign up
- Consider joining
- Definitely not join
2. How would you feel about such an organization if it were to be launched?
- I would be confident that with sufficient people and energy the organization will have a positive impact.
- I would hope the organization will prove positive.
- I would be concerned at the organization’s existence, fearing it might do more harm than good.
- I would be quite upset about the organization’s existence, feeling pretty sure it will do more harm than good.
3. If you were to join, how would you relate to the organization?
- I would give considerable time to it, making it one of my priorities.
- I would have a wait and see attitude, hoping it would be worth my time, but waiting for evidence.
- I would expect to give only a little time, given all my other responsibilities and my expectation that my priorities would not change much, regardless of the organization’s growth and effectivity.
Here, then, are the defining features that the proposed organization hypothetically embodies. In light of these features, please answer the above questions...
Organizational Description
The organization, as some general priorities:
-
is anti capitalist, anti racist, anti sexist, and anti authoritarian.
-
seeks to transcend 20th Century market and centrally planned socialism.
-
flexibly explores and advocates long term vision sufficiently to inspire and orient current activity, but without seeking detailed blueprints that transcend needs and knowledge.
-
centrally addresses economics/class, politics, culture/race, kinship/gender, ecology, and international relations without privileging any one focus above the rest.
-
sees social strategy as largely contingent on place and time and therefore continually provides means for revision of shared views in light of new evidence, including constantly updating analysis, vision, and strategy.
The organization seeks a new society a new political system that:
-
facilitates all citizens deliberating sufficiently to arrive at well-considered views and to participate in decision-making in all realms.
-
utilizes transparent mechanisms to carry out decisions as well as to assess that they have been carried out correctly.
-
conveys to all citizens a self managing say in legislative decisions proportionate to effects on them whether via grassroots assemblies/councils or communes and by way of various forms of direct participation or representation and delegation and/or voting options such as majority rule, some other voting algorithm, or consensus, etc., as needed to attain self management.
-
offers maximum civil liberties to all, including freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly, organizing political parties and other organizations, and dissent.
-
promotes diversity so individuals and groups can pursue their own goals consistent with not interfering with the same rights accorded to others.
-
builds solidarity among people and fairly, peacefully, and constructively adjudicates disputes and deals with violations of social norms and laws, seeking both justice and rehabilitation.
-
supports all community members contributing to solving problems and exploring possibilities to ensure that there are no political hierarchies that privilege some citizens over others.
The organization seeks a new economy for a new society such that:
-
no individuals or groups own the means of production (land, mines, factories, etc.) such that ownership is social and doesn’t impact anyone’s decision making influence or share of income.
-
payment for labor provides everyone morally fair shares of the social output and economically and socially effective incentives, including rejecting payment according to property, bargaining power, or the value of personal output, and instead establishing that workers who are able and who work longer at socially valued labor (including their own training) earn proportionately more for doing so; workers who work harder at socially valued labor earn proportionately more for doing so; and workers who work under more onerous conditions earn proportionately more for doing so, while those who are unable to work receive a full and fair share nonetheless.
-
there is no authoritarian workplace decision-making by any elite operating above the workforce and instead workers have a say in decisions to the extent possible, and over time, proportionate to effects on them, where this degree of say is sometimes best attained by majority rule, sometimes by consensus, or other arrangements in accord with diverse conditions and the characteristics of different types of decisions.
-
there is no corporate division of labor of the sort common to both capitalist and 20th century socialist economies in which roughly a fifth of the workforce do overwhelmingly empowering tasks and four fifths do overwhelmingly rote, repetitive, and, in any event, disempowering tasks - and, instead, each worker enjoys conditions of work suitable for him or her to be sufficiently confident, informed, and empowered to participate effectively in decision making, which includes having a socially average share of empowering tasks, whether this be accomplished by balanced job complexes or some other suitable new design of work.
-
allocation would not occur by market competition or top-down dictate, but instead by decentralized cooperative negotiation of inputs and outputs consistent with self-management, whether this be accomplished by participatory planning by workers and consumers councils, or by some other suitable methods for addressing both day to day outcomes and longer term investment choices, as well.
The organization seeks gender and kin relations for a new society that:
-
seek to eliminate hierarchies of reward of influence based on gender or sexual preference
-
do not privilege certain types of family formation over others but instead actively support all types of families that are consistent with society’s other broad norms and practices.
-
promote children’s well-being and affirm society’s responsibility for all its children, at the same time as affirming the right of diverse types of families to have children and to provide them with love and a sense of rootedness and belonging.
-
minimize or eliminate the use of age-based designations, preferring non-arbitrary means for determining when an individual is old enough, or young enough, to participate in certain economic, political or other activities, or to receive certain benefits/privileges.
-
respect marriage and other lasting relations among adults as religious, cultural, or social practices, but reject the idea of legal marriage as a way to gain financial benefits or social status.
-
respect care giving as a socially valuable function including ensuring that it doesn’t disproportionately fall on women, including making care giving a part of every citizen’s social responsibilities or other worthy means to ensure equity.
-
affirm diverse expressions of sexual pleasure, personal identity, and mutual intimacy while ensuring each person honors the autonomy, humanity, and rights of others.
-
provide diverse, empowering education about sex, as about all social relations including legal prohibitions against any kind of non-consensual sex.
The organization seeks ecological relations for a new society that:
-
account for the full ecological (and social/personal) costs and benefits of both short and long term economic and social choices, so that future populations can make informed choices about levels of production and consumption, duration of work, self reliance, energy use and harvesting, husbandry, pollution, climate policies, conservation, consumption, and other aims and activities as part of their freely made decisions about future policies.
-
foster a consciousness of ecological connection and responsibility so that future citizens are well prepared to decide policies regarding animal rights, vegetarianism, or veganism, etc., that transcend sustainability, and even husbandry, consistently with their ecological preferences and their broader agendas for other social and economic functions, as they freely decide for themselves in future settings.
The organization seeks cultural and community relations for a new society that:
-
ensure that people can have multiple cultural and social identities, including providing the space and resources necessary for people to positively express their identities, while recognizing as well, however, that which identity is most important to any particular person at any particular time will depend on the person’s situation and assessments.
-
explicitly recognize that rights and values exist regardless of cultural identity, so that all people deserve self management, equity, solidarity, and liberty, and so that while society protects all people’s right to affiliate freely and fosters diversity, its core values are universal.
-
guarantee free entry and exit to and from all cultural communities in society including affirming that communities that do have free entry and exit can be under the complete self determination of their members, so long as policies and actions don't conflict with society's laws.
The organization seeks international relations in a new world such that:
-
international institutions put an end to imperialism in all its forms, colonialism, neo colonialism, neo liberalism, etc.
-
international institutions are internationalist in that they diminish economic disparities in countries’ relative wealth while also protecting cultural and social patterns interior to each country from external violation and facilitating international entwinement and ties as people desire.
The organization’s broad action agenda or program, while of course regularly updated and adapted, nonetheless always:
-
seeks to incorporate seeds of the future in its present projects at least regarding class, race, gender, sexual, age, and power relations, both in the ways members act as well as by actively building institutions that represent the values of the movement and which the organization can present as liberating alternatives to the status quo it combats.
-
seeks to constantly grow support and membership among the class, nationality, and gender constituencies it claims to aid.
-
seeks to learn from and seek unity with audiences far wider than its own membership including emphasizing attracting younger generations and affirmatively empowering younger members and of course participating in, supporting, building, and aiding diverse social movements and struggles.
-
seeks changes in society both for citizens to enjoy immediately, and also to establish by the terms of its victories and even more so by the means used in its organizing, a likelihood that citizens will pursue and win more change in the future.
-
seeks to connect efforts, resources, and lessons across continents and from country to country, even as it also recognizes that strategy for different places, and times will differ.
-
seeks short term changes by its own actions and programs and by support of larger movements and projects as its affected members decide, both internationally and by country and also locally, including addressing global warming, arms control, war and peace, level and composition of economic output, agricultural relations, education, health care, income distribution, duration of work, gender roles, racial relations, media, law, legislation, etc., as its members choose.
-
seeks to develop mechanisms that provide financial, legal, employment, and emotional support to its members so that its members can be in a better position to participate as fully as they wish and negotiate the various challenges and sometimes negative effects of taking part in radical actions.
-
works to substantially improve the life situations of its members, including aiding their feelings of self worth, their knowledge, skills, and confidence, their mental, physical, sexual, and spiritual health, and even their social ties and engagements, leisure enjoyments, etc.
-
sets up internal structures and defines its action agenda to facilitate everyone’s participation in the organization, including, when possible, offering childcare at meetings and events, finding ways to reach out to those who might be immersed in kinship duties, aiding those with busy work schedules due to multiple jobs, etc., monitoring and responding to sexism, racism, classism, and homophobia as they may be manifested internally, having diverse roles in projects suitable to people with different situations, etc.
-
seeks means to develop, debate, disseminate, and advocate truthful news, analysis, vision, and strategy among its members and also in the wider society, including developing and sustaining needed media and means of face to face communication, etc.
-
uses diverse methods of agitation and struggle from educational efforts to rallies and marches, to demonstrations, boycotts, strikes, and direct actions, etc., to win gains and build movements.
-
places a very high burden of proof on utilizing violence, including cultivating a decidedly non violent attitude.
-
assesses engaging in electoral politics case by case, including cultivating a very cautious electoral attitude.
The organization’s structure and policy:
-
seeks to be internally classless and self-managing including structuring itself so that a minority who are initially disproportionately endowed with needed skills, information, and confidence do not form a formal or informal decision-making hierarchy, leaving less prepared members to follow orders or perform only rote tasks.
-
strives to implement the self management norm that "each member has say proportional to the degree they are effected" in its decision-making structures.
-
guarantees groups of members rights to organize “currents” and guarantees these “currents” full rights of democratic debate
-
welcomes internal debate and dissent, making room, as possible, for contrary views to exist and be tested alongside preferred views.
-
respects diversity, so that continental, national, regional, city, and local chapters can respond to their own circumstances and implement their own programs, so long as their choices do not interfere with the shared goals and principles of the organization as a whole, or with other local groups addressing their own situations.
-
provides extensive opportunities for people to participate in organizational decision making, including engaging in deliberation with others so as to arrive at the most well-considered decisions, including implementing mechanisms for carrying out collective decisions and for the membership to assure that the decisions have been carried out correctly.
-
strives to provide transparency regarding any actions by elected or delegated leaders with a high burden of proof for secreting any agenda to avoid repression, etc.
-
provides the membership with a mechanism to recall any leaders or representatives who the members believe are not adequately representing them.
-
provides internal means for fairly, peacefully, constructively - and non destructively - resolving internal disputes.
-
apportions empowering and disempowering tasks among its members to ensure that no individuals control the organization by having a relative monopoly on information, etc.
-
expects its members to participate in the life of the organization actively, taking responsibility for it as part of a collective, and presenting a unified voice in action.
-
incorporates its members in developing, debating, and also deciding on proposals, and treats lack of participation as a serious problem to be addressed whenever it surfaces






more concrete proposals???
By Evans, Mark at Mar 06, 2010 19:48 PM
Hi Michael – I think that the second draft is an improvement on the first attempt. I think that the three sets of questions make the poll much more meaningful in terms of identifying potential unity within the z community for a new international organisation with active members.
I think that the wording of the defining features for the "Organizational Description" is good and I find it hard to suggest improvements here.
In addition to your "considerable time" and "little time" options following question three Matt Grinder has suggested we add "some time". I think this is fine - but it is not clear to me what the difference is between the "little time" and "some time" options and therefore what the benefit is in having this additional option.
I guess I would like to see something in there about rejecting both democratic centralism and representative democracy on the grounds that they are elitist and manipulative forms of democracy with a tendency towards authoritarianism – but I’m not sure how in-keeping this would be with the results from the ReSoc poll.
As I have already stated I think that the additional questions make the poll more meaningful but I wonder if we might consider some more concrete options? Question 3, option 1 states –
"I would give considerable time to it, making it one of my priorities."
But poll takers might wonder what "it" might entail?
I know that this is a tricky balancing act but I do think that if we are to move towards setting-up a new international organisation then surely we can identify / suggest some initial activities – real tasks that people can do - that will need to be undertaken. For example –
Perhaps these initial activities could also be incorporated into the poll? Or do we think that this is something that is best left for a later poll, depending on the results of this poll?
Reply this comment
Re: more concrete proposals???
By Albert, Michael at Mar 06, 2010 21:50 PM
On rejecting stuff - I always think it is much better if people assert positive commitments. "Rejections" easily slips into a tone and stance that turns off those listening. Let's see what others may have to say about that. Adding a few such as entries might clarify...again, let's see how people react...
If you reply, can you let me know again what you have in England, parsoc wise. Are the orgs you have called orgs for a participatory society or do they have some other name? Is there just one in London, or are there others?
Reply this comment
Re: Re: more concrete proposals???
By Chrysostomou, Jason at Mar 12, 2010 15:06 PM
Michael,
We are still called 'Project for a Participatory Society U.K (PPS-UK)' as I think Mark set it up tentatively as a project not knowing how many people would join and how it would develop. So we still go under the banner of 'PPSUK', although it may make more sense now to call ourselves 'Organisation for a Participatory Society U.K' as we have developed further from the incipient stage, although of course there is still some way to go.
We setup a facility on the website for anyone who has signed up to be able to create or join a 'local chapter' in their region. So there are around 10 local chapters that have been setup around the U.K that go under the umbrella PPS-UK although most only have a few members. As far as I know the 'PPSUK London Chapter' with 12 members is the only group that meets regularly - once a month.
We decided to have 3 national gatherings a year. We have one coming up next week so I will print out this proposed organisational outline for discussion and let you know the feedback.
Reply this comment
Re: more concrete proposals???
By Chrysostomou, Jason at Mar 12, 2010 14:58 PM
Mark,
I totally agree that we will need to encourage commitment and participation by listing some tasks and even responsibilities of what is expected from a member so that there are real things happening.
I think for this possible draft poll it be too much detail for now and can be something that could be worked out later along with other issues that would need to be addressed such as subscription fees, attending meetings, etc. I reckon the last two points of the organisation's structure and policy on expectation of members and participation is sufficient for now.
For PPS-UK it is of a priority that we need to address and I'll be making a proposal at the meeting next week that we introduce a new type of 'active' membership that lists some rights and responsibilities and that could include some of the tasks you mentioned.
Reply this comment
Question #3
By Grinder, Matt at Mar 02, 2010 22:25 PM
Upon reflection, I DO have a editing comment. Go me! I think question #3 might better be put as follows.
3. If you were to join, how would you relate to the organization?
Reply this comment
Re: Question #3
By Albert, Michael at Mar 02, 2010 22:33 PM
Seems like a good idea to me...unless others have some problem...
Reply this comment
Re: A (Possible) Poll - Second Draft
By Petersen, Robert at Mar 02, 2010 21:35 PM
Hi Michael, the short answer to the question, would I want to join an organization that champions a participatory society, is yes, by all means. To paraphrase Leonard Cohen, I’m not exactly digging the scene with what’s going on now, here in the U.S. or worldwide. But please be patient with me, and perhaps others that may be thinking the same thing, I don’t fully understand where we’re headed with this proposal. This is where I’m coming from: Are we talking about actually forming community organizations where movement building can transpire within the existing social structure, promoting a participatory society; or are we talking about withdrawing from society as in a Baker Farm commune type structure? Maybe both? Wherever we’re going, I believe the former would be more effective than the latter. But whatever, please don’t laugh, this question needs to asked, and answered, by everyone seriously considering such a proposal.
I encourage full steam ahead on this poll, and in the future look forward to participating with others in the community face to face, instead of merely in a virtual community. There are so many possibilities with this it’s impossible to know where to begin, but begin we will. And yes, I will participate.
Reply this comment
Re: Re: A (Possible) Poll - Second Draft
By Albert, Michael at Mar 02, 2010 22:50 PM
Robert,
I personally agree with you that withdrawing from society is at best suicidal and also anti social - though building alternative institutions while relating to society and its struggles is very worthy. But the thing is, self management, even just democracy, for that matter, if it is serious, means decisions being made not before the fact by some few who happen to be aroused at the moment, but later, by those affected and involved. What you and I think now is one thing - much less what others think now, much less what what active people in trying circumstances do, is another thing.
I understand wondering about the future, thinking it, thinking about your own take, etc. But I don't get thinking that not fully understanding where this may be going is some kind of problem.
Of course we don't know. We find out, in this case a step at a time. We don't even know if we take a poll, don't know if the results are positive, don't know - what that would propel, etc. There is no blueprint, no grand plan, no scenario - there is no one deciding - what there is, or what we can hope there is, is people participating. That's what's needed.
And as far as participating goes, as best I can see, all that one needs to know to comment on the poll idea is one's reaction to the poll idea and the wording - not to an unknown future. And then even to take it the poll, if we get that far, one only needs to know one's reaction to the questions. And then, maybe, if people are in sufficient unity, and if there seems reason to take further steps now, or later, that will be the time for more questions, more discussion, more proposals, and finally more decisions by those participating.
Let me put it differently, the issue at hand isn't to ask where we are going - honestly - other than in the form of the poll to see how much we agree about that - the issue is to decide where you want to go and take steps as best you are able.
The proposal we are assessing, once again, is to have a poll, now three questions, to discover people's feelings about certain possible features of a possible future organization. Of course, later, the questions one must answer to actually establish and grow such an organization are quite different and more demanding - but also not raised as yet.
Reply this comment
my answers
By McGehee, Michael at Mar 02, 2010 16:23 PM
(1), (1), (1)
Reply this comment
Post poll plan?
By Grinder, Matt at Mar 02, 2010 06:52 AM
Hi Michael, I don't have any editing suggestions, but I do have some questions aimed at letting me better understand what it is you're proposing. In a nutshell, I am wondering what the plan is after the poll?
Obviously it's up to the participants, but off the top of my head, I would think there would be need for something like a Znet forum system (or something like it) so people can discuss ideas, and vote for large scale, coordinated projects? Will there be a meet up system so people geographically close to each other are encouraged to meet each other? I see Znet already has features to find people near you already, but I would guess a formal system is needed? I am guessing these two features are probably necessary to get such a project going.
Will there be online resources to help people get started, like pamphlets, powerpoint presentations about parecon, parpolity, and parsoc (and other subjects of course) that people might use to present to their local community? I don't see much controversy about having these available, but maybe there would be...
Reply this comment
Re: Post poll plan?
By Albert, Michael at Mar 02, 2010 16:08 PM
> Hi Michael, I don't have any editing suggestions, but I do have some questions aimed at letting me better understand what it is you're proposing. In a nutshell, I am wondering what the plan is after the poll?
Why don't you have editing suggestions? Is it perfect? I doubt it. And improving it is the task here - prerequisite for anything beyond that.
Whose plan? There is no plan before the fact. Because we don't even know if there will be a poll, nor how many will answer it if we do post it, etc. Suppose ten people take the poll, after it is refined sufficiently to be worth taking - assuming we get to that point. Then, of course, there is no follow up based on the poll. Suppose 10,000 take it, with overwhelming agreement. Then there is follow up, I would think.
> Obviously it's up to the participants,
Exactly...and so the current task, for you and I and anyone interested, if to get the poll to be worthy, and then if we go ahead, to get people to take it. To have participants.
> but off the top of my head, I would think there would be need for something like a Znet forum system (or something like it) so people can discuss ideas, and vote for large scale, coordinated projects? Will there be a meet up system so people geographically close to each other are encouraged to meet each other? I see Znet already has features to find people near you already, but I would guess a formal system is needed? I am guessing these two features are probably necessary to get such a project going.
Matt - anyone can see, easily, that ZNet is being steadily enriched in diverse ways that are compatible not only with providing information better - but also with facilitating online and even personal ties better - which could of course assist in any organizational effort. The poll system would permit votes - including differentiation by group, etc. The forums exist. There is much more coming. But the real issue - it may not be the fun issue, the exciting issue - but the real issue, for any of that to have any chance of moving far - is participation. That's the hard nut to crack, so to speak - the rest is easy, actually.
I should say, I feel I have been "guilty" of the same error I am pointing out. We have gotten further technologically, with the site, than socially. We have unused capacity/facilities already, even as we are putting in place more. We have to find a way to induce participation...that is what matters most now.
> Will there be online resources to help people get started, like pamphlets, powerpoint presentations about parecon, parpolity, and parsoc (and other subjects of course) that people might use to present to their local community? I don't see much controversy about having these available, but maybe there would be...
Of course there wouldn't be any problem doing that - and much more, and other - with or without an effort to create an organization. And of course our facilities are being extended having information communication and social ties both in mind, but not prejudging what the pursued content and program ought to be. So why should you prejudge it? Maybe there will be minuscule support for the type organization described in this blog post, much less a fully parsocish project, which you presuppose - but incredible support for some other type organization. The online facilities we are building would be just as applicable to the latter as the former. Again, the problem to help with, the problem to focus on, is getting people to participate - getting people to use the site, as free members, as sustainers, as bloggers, including refining and hopefully later taking the poll, and then - if the poll results warrant - there can be follow up.
Reply this comment