To:

Zcom_simple
Home » Z Blogs » Conor Cradden's Blog » My Resoc Interview

Hello,

Blogs are a familiar feature on the internet - where users post content in an accumulating manner, with comments, and search options, etc. They facilitate expression and exploration, and via attached comments, also debate and synthesis.


Reading and
Navigating Blogs

Our blogs are quite powerful. Each writer can post, as is typically the case. Sustainers who have the option can also post, however. All Blogs appear in the blog system, and sometimes also in content boxes the top page of ZNet - and always via the left menu of the top page - and can be found via searches, etc.

Commenting on blogs follows the blogs, attached at the bottom, and blog comments, like all others, are also visible in many places that show comments including in the forum system. In addition, the entire blog system gathers content for everyone - but one can look at the accumulating content in many ways.

  • For example one can look at one writer's efforts - so one is seeing what is effectively a blog system for that one writer, or Sustainer.
  • One can also look at the content by topic, seeing blogs that are tagged as being about a certain topic - or place, as well. Thus, when doing that, it is a blog system about a topic, or a place, with many contributors.
  • One can look at only writer blogs, or only sustainer blogs, as well.
  • One can look at blogs for particular Groups, too.

All this is easily done using the left menu. Searches allow even more variables and refinements.


Creating Blog Posts

If you are a Sustainer with permission, and are logged in, you will see a link in the left menu for you to post a blog - and you can use that to post one, and then tag it various ways (such as with a topic or place, or a group tag), and once you do, it is in the system with you as the author.

You can also use the console button to the left to post a blog - anytime and from anywhere in the site, as long as you are logged in.

Meanwhile, enjoy the blogs - and, by the way, if you are a Free Member or a Sustainer with a ZSpace page, of course you can put one or more content boxes on it, pulling blog links of any sort you may want to filter for, for example, by you or by your friends or by others - and by topic, about places, for groups, etc.

Blogs

Conor Cradden's Blog

Web Address: http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/conorcradden
Bio: Conor Cradden is a specialist in research and policy development in the fields of industrial relations and management. His particular areas of expertise are workplace democracy, partnership forms o... (More)

All Cradden Blogs

Recent Cradden Content

Znetarticle_icon ZNet Articles
Zblogpost_icon Blog Posts

My Resoc Interview

By Conor Cradden at Nov 17, 2009

PDF Version

Printer Friendly Version
Change Text Size a- | A+

         1. At a public talk someone asks you, "okay, I understand what

         you reject, but I wonder what are you for? What institutions

         do you favor that will be better than what we have for the economy, 

         polity, gender, race, ecology, or whatever you have vision for?

I would say that the precise form of institutional design is less important than the principles of extending democratic control to EVERY sphere in which decisions are taken that affect people's lives; and of ensuring that democracy is both appropriately direct -- sufficiently close to everyday life that it becomes a permanent feature of the social landscape -- and indirect or representative -- retaining a capacity to take a broader view or adopt a regional, national or international perspective, depending on the kind of issue in question. Crucially, the economy cannot be left out of this equation. If I could change one thing about the market capitalist society we live in it would be to introduce strong forms of democracy to business organisations and to the regulatory bodies that (in principle at least) control them. On the question of institutions, all I would say is that they need to be as informal and unregulated as is compatible with stability and accountability. Bureaucracy is not always bad, but overly bureaucratic procedures kill democracy.

     

         2. Next, someone at the same event asks, "Why do you do what

         you do? That is, you are speaking to us, and I know you

         write, and maybe you organize, but why do you do it? What do

         you think it accomplishes? What is your goal for your coming

         year, or for your next ten years?

I try to write about how to improve and extend democracy because I think that extending and improving democracy is not only the right thing to do in itself (from a moral and political standpoint), but also because I think it is the only way to get truly effective forms of social and economic governance. I have some ideas about how this could be done that I think are worth talking about, so I talk about them. I believe in the power of ideas -- that in the final analysis ideas are more powerful than social and economic structures -- and so I believe that getting ideas into circulation is an accomplishment in itself. I'd like to think that in ten years more people will believe in the importance of economic democracy.

 

         3. You are at home and you get an email that says a new

         organization is trying to form, internationally, federating

         national chapters, etc. It asks you to join the effort. Can

         you imagine plausible conditions under which you would say,

         "yes, I will give my energies to making it happen along with

         the rest of you who are already involved?" If so, what are

         those conditions? Or - do you think instead that regardless

         of the content of the agenda and make up of the

         participants, the idea can't be worthy, now, or perhaps ever.

         If so, why?

As you might expect from the answer to question 2, I have rather more faith in ideas than in organisations. I'd have to be convinced that the organisation in question was mainly about ideas before I'd consider joining up. I wouldn't be interested if the idea was simply about accumulating sufficient political weight to 'fight' more effectively. I'm not naïve enough to think that just talking is enough, but I'd have to be really convinced that the organisation was sufficiently focused on thinking and learning to avoid becoming just another group more interested in getting power than in what they would do if they were to get it.

 

 

         4. Do you think efforts to organize movements, projects, and

         our own organizations should embody the seeds of the future

         in the present? If not, why not? If yes, can you say what, very

         roughly, you think some of the implications would be for an

         organization you would favor?

If I follow you, then you're asking if social movements and organizations should somehow reflect their vision for the world and for social organization in their own structures. To be honest I don't see how they can be sure that they're doing this unless the institutional structures they envisage are already very clear. On the other hand it's clear that if an organisation is arguing for democracy and participation it would be ludicrous to have a highly centralised structure and strongly enforced 'party discipline'.

 

         5. Why did you answer this interview? Why do you think others

         did not answer it?

I answered because I think it's a good idea and because you kept on asking. With other people, as with me, the reluctance to respond is probably no more than a question of time and opportunity costs.

Comment On This Blog Post  See All Comments (0)

Loading_border