Center for Collaborative Policy Job Openings

Our colleagues at the the Center for Collaborative Policy – an NCDD organizational member – have recently announced three promising job openings at their California State University, Sacramento campus. We know some of our NCDD members would be a perfect fit for these positions, so we encourage you to find out more in CCP’s announcements below.

Job Announcement – Business Development Director

The Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University, Sacramento is recruiting for a Business Development Director.  The successful applicant will have experience in attracting significant revenues from public and private sector sources for collaborative public processes and activities.   The applicant is also expected to be a senior practitioner in conducting multi-party collaborative public processes with a high degree of complexity.  Responsibilities include:

  • Directly generate revenue for the Center through communicating with prospective clients as well as teaming partners, responding to competitive proposals, pursuing sole source agreements and creating other statewide business opportunities.
  • Develop and implement an annual Business Development Plan, and train and coach Center practitioners to execute the Plan and attract client business.
  • Develop, supervise and provide oversight for the Center business development personnel and data system.

Salary is competitive and commensurate with experience. Attractive benefits are provided. Application review will begin on July 14, 2014 and continue until the position is filled.

For further information and to view duties, qualifications and application process, see: http://www.csus.edu/about/employment. The website Job Identification number is 101075. All submissions are done electronically. California State University, Sacramento is an equal opportunity /ADA employer. For more information on the Center for Collaborative Policy, see www.csus.edu/ccp.

Job Announcement – Assistant Facilitator

The Center for Collaborative Policy, California State University, Sacramento is recruiting for two Assistant Facilitator positions.  Successful applicants will have the ability to: document technical and interpersonal discussions (including conditions of conflict); write reports on complex, multi-topic conditions; use web-based facilitation and meeting management tools such as Go-To Meeting/Webinar; WebEx, Doodle, Survey Monkey, MindMapper, etc.; and have excellent verbal and written skills, strong interpersonal skills, and knowledge of and interest in collaborative policy making practice and theory.

Duties include:

  • Accurately and objectively record information from fast-paced, highly technical discussions
  • Prepare draft and final detailed summaries and reports from meetings
  • Render complex and lengthy information into clear and accurate lay person terms
  • Provide logistical support for meetings
  • Develop meeting agendas, facilitation plans, and group process plans
  • Schedule and conduct stakeholder interviews
  • Conduct policy research

Salary is $3897 – $5847/month. It is the general practice of Sacramento State to hire at the lower end of salary range. This position is covered by health benefits. Application review will begin July 9, 2014 and will continue until positions are filled. Final application deadline is July 23, 2014.

For further information and to view duties, qualifications and application process, see: http://www.csus.edu/about/employment. All submissions are done electronically. The website Job Identification number is: Job ID #101088. For more information on the Center for Collaborative Policy, see www.csus.edu/ccp.

California State University, Sacramento is an equal opportunity /ADA employer.

Everything is …

I quickly Googled the phrases “Everything is X,” where X was each of the words below. The link will take you to the top result for each sentence.

These are not foolish or obscurantist claims. And they are not mutually contradictory, because it could be the case that everything is, for instance, both politics and education. (That would imply something interesting about the two concepts.) Some people place themselves within intellectual traditions or communities by making just this kind of claim. It may be important to a political theorist, for example, that everything is politics. But I must admit that I find the multiplication of such discourses increasingly amusing. We are getting to the point where Everything is everything.

The post Everything is … appeared first on Peter Levine.

Special Snowflakes

There’s a common complaint against Millenials – that they think of themselves as a “special snowflake.” That is, to say, they are entitled.

Now, first of all, anyone who is prepared to level charges against a whole generation of people is undoubtedly feeling entitled themselves.

Surely, some young people are lazy, entitled, or otherwise self-centered, but there is no indication that these traits are somehow limited to those under 30. Nor is it clear that the younger population possess an abnormally large share of people with these traits.

Let’s be honest. A lot of people are self-centered. It’s just that when you’re an adult, being self-centered somehow becomes your prerogative.

The term “special snowflake” is used because no two snowflakes are alike. Each is unique. Theoretically, it’s this quality of being unique which makes young people feel that they are special. That they deserve special treatment.

Again, it’s far from true that “all young people” feel any way – much less all feel special – but that’s the idea behind the phrase.

But that assumption misses the point. To say that “being special” is equivalent to “feeling entitled,” overlooks a deeper truth.

Every person is special. Every person is unique. Every person is different. Every person is a “special snowflake.”

Some would take this even further and argue that every life is special, every living being unique. No two trees grow the same.

But this specialness, this uniqueness, isn’t a reason to feel entitled. It isn’t a reason to feel above everybody else.

It’s a reason to commit to diverse communities. A reason to fight for justice and equality. A reason to hold every life sacred and to give every voice power.

Yes, you are a special snowflake. Just like every body else.

And it’s your duty to help all your neighbor snowflakes flourish. Because we are each different and we are each unique.

The loss of even one voice, even one, degrades the whole.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

roots of crime

Since May, I have been able to spend time in two of the world’s biggest metropolises, Istanbul and Mexico City. They are similar in several ways beside their vastness. Each is the leading city of a substantial and proudly independent nation with a distinctive culture. In both, neighborhoods of poor, traditionally religious migrants from the countryside abut cosmopolitan secular districts.

One significant difference is the crime rate. Three people per 100,00 are murdered annually in Istanbul, versus 13.2 in Mexico City. This is a case where a quantitative difference becomes qualitative. In Turkey, crime is so low that I have seen—admittedly, in a smaller city than Istanbul—a whole shop’s worth of consumer goods left outdoors and unguarded overnight. In Mexico City, conversation quickly turns to avoiding violence. Is it safe to hail a cab? (Generally, the answer right now is: No.) Can you drive safely along a certain road?

According to Philip Mansel (in Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire), Istanbul was notably safe in the 1500s, when it was already one of the biggest—or perhaps the single most populous—city in the world. “Merchants could leave stalls unattended; pastry-sellers trusted members of the public to pay for the wares they left on a small round tray.” Mansel quotes Lord Charlemont’s report from the 1700s: “Housebreaking and street robbery, crimes so unfortunately common in our great towns as to render dwelling in them unpleasant and unsafe, never happen in the Turkish metropolis, and a man may walk its streets at all hours of the night with his pocket full of money, without the smallest fear of danger or molestation.”

Charlemont had an explanation: “the salutary rigour of frequent acts of execution.” It is hard to believe that executions were more frequent in Constantinople than in London or Paris, where a child who stole a roll would be hanged. And even if the Ottomans really used capital punishment more than the English or the French, I doubt the executions of those days can explain the safe streets now.

The “broken windows” hypothesis won’t explain the difference, because Mexico City and Istanbul are both rather chaotic and rife with violations such as illegal construction. Poverty is not a likely explanation, because Mexico City’s per capita GDP is twice as high as Istanbul’s, and its inequality index is not much worse. The proportion of residents under age 20 is virtually identical in both cities. Any explanation of the difference may have to be regional, because Mexico City shares similar crime rates with most other large cities in its region. (With Istanbul, it’s a little harder to say what the region is, and I cannot find crime statistics for possibly similar cities, such as Tehran.)

I’m sure there’s a large literature on this topic, but no persuasive explanation is well-known enough that it has reached me.

I suppose one possibility is that there is no root cause. Crime is part of a cycle: each act of violence begets more violence, puts strains on the state, and makes law-abiding behavior less rational for other people. Once you get into a high-crime pattern, it is hard to get out. But if you can avoid or stop the circle, you may be better off even five hundred years later.

The post roots of crime appeared first on Peter Levine.

A Year of Blogging

I began this blog a year ago today.

I had previously blogged periodically, but never consistently. Before that I kept a hard copy journal which I’d go through bursts of maintaining. But this is the first time I’ve consistently reflected every (work) day for a year.

I’ve written 229 posts. Well, 230 counting this one.

My most popular post got over 200 views. A fact which I wrote about here.

I still feel like a tool every time I see my big ol’ face up on Facebook. I still feel like nobody. But I still keep writing anyway.

I’m not sure what I was hoping for when I started this blog. A communications professional ought to have an online presence, of course, but more than that – this blog was one in a series of selfish changes. Dedicated time to self-improvement. That endless striving towards unobtainable perfection.

What I’ve learned is that too many people feel lost and confused. Overwhelmed by the tumult of life. Angry at too much injustice.

Too many people feel like they are nobody – that public problems are the burden of someone else, some expert who will inevitably screw it up worse while trying to make it better.

Too many people have been taught that their voice doesn’t matter. They may hold opinions if they feel so bold, but they cannot fathom that opinion could ever crystallize into change.

Children are meant to be seen, not heard.

Too many of us have been taught that we are children. That our lives and experience don’t matter. That we could never hope to have expertise. That we could never hope to have value.

But the truth is that even children ought to be heard.

All of us should clamor for recognition, but too many of us have stopped even trying to be heard. Too many of us have become invisible, even to ourselves.

When I began this blog, I didn’t know who I was. I’d spent too many years hiding myself – trying to fit in amongst the crowd. When I began this blog, I didn’t have my voice. I just had my anger and the sense that something was very, very, wrong in the world.

When I began this blog, I hoped to learn about myself, and to learn about the world. To share the hidden perspectives of all the Nobodies like me.

A year has gone by and I still have much to learn. I am still striving towards unachievable perfection. I am still lost and confused, angry and overwhelmed.

But I have changed. I have found my voice.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Save the Teatro Valle Commons in Rome!

The three-year occupation of Teatro Valle in Rome is now legendary:  a spontaneous response to the failures of conventional government in supporting a venerated public theater, and the conversion of the theater into a commons by countless ordinary citizens.  Now the mayor of Rome is threatening to end the occupation, evict the commoners and privatize the management of the facility.

It’s time for the international community of commoners to take a public stand against this very real threat. The mayor has summoned Italian law scholar Ugo Mattei to meet with him on Monday to negotiate a resolution. In advance of that meeting, Mattei and Salvatore Settis, President of the Advisory Board of the Louvre Museum in Paris, have prepared an international petition calling on the mayor to back away from his proposal and to allow this historic experiment in commoning to continue.

Below is a copy of the petition.  You can express your support by sending you name and affiliation to Ugo Mattei at matteiu /at/ uchastings.edu.

A number of human rights scholars around the world are keenly interested in Teatro Valle.  Noted human rights scholar Anna Grear alerted the Global Network for the Study of Human Rights and Environment that "the attempted denial of popular 'ownership' of 'place' is fundamental to the cultural and material enclosures enacted by privatising and controlling agendas.”  She added that “closing down an important, even iconic, example of a fundamentally vernacular, community-based engagement with place (a vibrant, evocative commons) is entirely consistent with the deeper logic visible in moves such as the attempt to control the world seed supplies and breeds, to extend the corporatisation of the social spheres, to privatise urban space in ways that shut ordinary human beings out of them in central and important respects.”

For more on the backstory of Teatro Valle, here is a previous blog post on the occupation from February 2013.  Below is the petition now circulating.  Sign it!

The commons “Italian Style” must continue their experimentation! An International call to protect the Teatro Valle Foundation from Eviction.

Since June 14 2011, a community of artists and militants has transformed the Teatro Valle, the oldest and most prestigious in Rome, then at high risk of privatization, into the “Teatro Valle Occupato,” one of the most advanced experiments of merger between political struggle and performing arts in the current world. A trust-like legal entity, the “Fondazione Teatro Valle Bene Comune,” was created in the interest of future generations, with a membership of almost 6,000 people by a genuinely new process of cooperation between some well-known jurists and the Assembly of the occupants. While a notary has recognized the Foundation, the Prefect of Rome has denied its moral personality on the assumption that possession was not a sufficient title on the Valle premises.

read more

JPD Special Issue Looks at “The State of Our Field”

JPD logoThis month, the Deliberative Democracy Consortium (DDC) and the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) released a special issue of their collaboratively produced Journal of Public Deliberation, and it is a must-read.  They collected writings from leading scholars and practitioners of our work – including numerous NCDD members and our director, Sandy Heierbacher – to create this special issue focused on “The State of Our Field”:

This is a special issue that assess the state of our field, celebrates our successes, and calls for future innovative work. The authors are scholars and practitioners who represent the diversity of our field and provide a wide range of perspectives on deliberation, dialogue, participation, and civic life. The ideas from this issue will be discussed at the upcoming Frontiers of Democracy conference, after which the editors will write an “afterword” reflecting on lessons learned.

We’re excerpting all of the abstracts of the articles in this issue here on the blog, because we think it will entice you to read these important articles. The special issue starts with an introductory overview, then is divided into three areas of focus: the scope of our field, challenges to our field, and promising future directions that some of us are taking.

Visit www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd to download each article for free.

JPD Volume 10, Issue 1 (2014) Special Issue: State of the Field

Introduction

The State of Our Field: Introduction to the Special Issue by Laura W. Black, Nancy L. Thomas, and Dr. Timothy J. Shaffer – “This article introduces the special “State of the Field” issue. The essay highlights some of the key tensions that our field is wrestling with at the moment, and advocates that we think carefully about the terms we use to describe our work. It previews the articles in this special issue and urges future work in the field to take up the ideas, questions, and challenges posed by these essays.”

The Scope of the Field

Why I Study Public Deliberation by John Gastil – “The author argues that scholars can best advance public dialogue and deliberation by conducting systematic research on practical innovations that have the potential to improve political discourse. The author explains and justifies this position through a personal narrative that recounts formative experiences with debate, group dialogue, political campaigns, academic research, and electoral reform.”

A 35-Year Experiment in Public Deliberation by David Mathews – “In the late 1970s, a small group of academics and former government officials began an initiative that led to the creation of a network of National Issues Forums (NIF) in 1981. NIF-style deliberation is based on the assumption that the greatest challenge in collective decision making is dealing with the tensions that result when many of the things most people hold dear are brought into conflict by the necessity to act on a problem. Public deliberation is a naturally occurring phenomenon that makes use of the human faculty for judgment. The most powerful insight from the NIF experiment has been the recognition that democracy depends on constant learning and that deliberation is a form of learning.”

Repairing the Breach: The Power of Dialogue to Heal Relationships and Communities by Robert R. Stains Jr. – “Dialogue can be a powerful force for healing communities and relationships broken by divisions of identity, values, religion and world-views. This article explores the reparative effects of dialogue and the elements that make them possible: re-authoring stories, communicating from the heart and witnessing others’ identities in constructive ways.”

What We’re Talking About When We Talk About the “Civic Field” (And why we should clarify what we mean) by Matt Leighninger – “The field of public engagement is experiencing a harmful identity crisis. While advocates of public participation may all agree that our work relates somehow to democracy, we have not established or articulated a common vision of what that really means. This lack of clarity has dire consequences, producing rifts between academics and practitioners, community organizers and deliberative democrats, civic technologists and dialogue practitioners, policy advocates and consensus-builders. Worst of all, the lack of clarity about democracy provides no help to people who are trying to create sustainable, participatory political systems in Egypt, Thailand, Ukraine, and many other countries. None of the participatory tactics and assets we have developed will reach their full potential if we don’t admit, to ourselves and the world, their true significance: these aren’t just props for conventional processes, but building blocks for new political systems.”

Democracy by Design by Nancy L. Thomas – “Renewing US democracy will require an active and deliberative public, people who can work together to address pressing social and political problems. To engage effectively Americans need an understanding of how American democracy works, its foundations and the complex and sometimes changing dimensions to those foundations. Advocates for increasing active and deliberative citizen engagement need to work with reformers in different areas of democracy’s ecological system, integrating public engagement with reform efforts in justice and equal opportunity, knowledge and information development, and government integrity.”

The Next Generation of Our Work by Sandy Heierbacher – “In this reflective piece, Sandy Heierbacher, Director of the National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation (NCDD), outlines some of the trends she has been noticing from her unique vantage point in the rapidly growing and innovating field of deliberative democracy. Heierbacher reflects on ways this field, centered around practices designed to engage citizens in the decisions and issues that effect their lives, is changing its relationship with government, becoming more receptive to online tools for engagement, shifting its attention back to local efforts, focusing attention on building infrastructure, and increasingly relying on collaboration to achieve its goals.”

Challenges

Public Engagement Exercises with Racial and Cultural “Others”: Some Thoughts, Questions, and Considerations by Yea-Wen Chen – “Concerns about the inadequacy of using dialogue to address the material realities of race and racism motivate this essay. Hence, I reflect on the current state of conversations on race, diversity, and inclusion from the standpoint of cultural and racial “others.” To orient my reflections, I first unpack assumptions about what might constitute “productive” public deliberation on race. I argue that productive public engagement exercises on race (a) move participants into praxis, (b) require participants to consider cultural identity differences, and (c) demand an understanding of how social forces such as racism and whiteness hinder and/or enable public engagement processes. I then reconsider public engagement from a cultural lens and rethink intercultural communication as publicly deliberating highly charged topics such as race. Finally, I caution against relying on cookie-cutter formulas to address complex issues such as race and recommend utilizing the strategy of counter-storytelling in public engagement exercises on race.”

Deliberative Democracy, Public Work, and Civic Agency by Harry C. Boyte – “This essay locates deliberation and deliberative theory as an important strand in a larger interdisciplinary and political movement, civic agency. The civic agency movement, and its related politics, a politics of civic empowerment, include a set of developing practices and concepts which enhance the capacities of diverse groups of people to work across differences to solve problems, create things of common value, and negotiate a shared democratic way of life. Stirrings of civic agency can be seen in many settings, including efforts to recover the civic purposes and revitalize the civic cultures of institutions such as schools and colleges.”

The Unfulfilled Promise of Online Deliberation by Jannette Hartz-Karp & Brian Sullivan – “Since online deliberation has not delivered on the expectations of more considered, democratic participation, the authors propose less focus on technological ‘fixes’ and more on re-conceptualizing its primary purpose to gathering resonance in an authentic public square. The ideas that emerge can then be deliberated in representative face-to-face public deliberations, with the coherent voice that results contributing to more inclusive, legitimate, and implementable democratic decision-making.”

A Brief Reflection on the Brazilian Participatory Experience by Vera Schattan Pereira Coelho – “The article highlights Brazilian participatory experiences such as the participatory budget and the policy councils and conferences. Based on research done by the author on daily routines and policy impacts of these forums, it is argued that there is still a long way before fulfilling normative expectations. In light of these challenges, reflections about how to move forward in the future are presented.”

Beyond Deliberation: A Strategy for Civic Renewal by Peter Levine – “To expand opportunities for discussion and reflection about public issues, we should look beyond the organizations that intentionally convene deliberations and also enlist organizations that preserve common resources, volunteer service groups, civics classes, grassroots public media efforts, and partisan, ideological, and faith-based movements that have some interest in discussion. Many of these groups are not politically neutral; more are adversarial. But they have a common interest in confronting the forces and decisions that have sidelined active citizens in countries like the US. They are all threatened by the rising signs of oligarchy in the United States. Collectively, they have considerable resources with which to fight back. It is time for us to begin to stir and organize–not for deliberation, but for democracy.”

Finding A Seat for Social Justice at the Table of Dialogue and Deliberation by David Schoem – “What does it mean for the dialogue and deliberation or public engagement community to exclude social justice from its mission and activities? Many dialogue and deliberation organizations, though clearly not all, shy away from either an explicit or implicit acknowledgement of issues of social justice or inequality, and power and privilege. This article argues that the field needs to 1) work intentionally for social justice and serving the public good for a strong, diverse democracy, 2) confront the illusion of neutrality, and 3) address issues of privilege and power. It discusses five principles to achieve this goal.”

Deliberative Civic Engagement in Public Administration and Policy by Tina Nabatchi – “This article explores deliberative civic engagement in the context of public administration and policy. The field of public administration and policy is seeing a resurgence of interest in deliberative civic engagement among scholars, practitioners, politicians, civic reformers, and others. Deliberative processes have been used to address a range of issues: school redistricting and closings, land use, and the construction of highways, shopping malls, and other projects. Additional topics include race and diversity issues, crime and policing, and involvement of parents in their children’s education. Finally, participatory budgeting, which has been used with success in Porto Alegre, Brazil since 1989 and has been employed in over 1,500 cities around the world, has been one of the most promising forms of deliberative civic engagement. Finally, the article suggests what we must do to build a civic infrastructure to support deliberative civic engagement, including government, but also practitioners and scholars.”

Key Challenges Facing the Field of Deliberative Democracy by Carol J. Lukensmeyer – “Deliberative Democracy has proved its value as an alternative to governance dominated by special interests, but its use in governing remains inconsistent. Overcoming this challenge will require the field to focus its energy on 1) building a cadre of elected leaders and public officials who understand deliberative democracy’s value and how to do it, 2) engaging with the media so that it becomes an effective partner for the field and a more productive part of our democratic system, and 3) continuing to embrace opportunities – like Creating Community Solutions – to work in unique partnerships, build national infrastructure to support high-quality deliberation, and innovate across methodologies and models.”

Promising Future Directions

The Design of Online Deliberation: Implications for Practice, Theory and Democratic Citizenship by Idit Manosevitch – “The essay focuses on the role of design in online deliberation, and outlines three directions for future research. First, research must embed the study of the technical and organizational architecture of online discussion spaces, as an ongoing area of inquiry. Scholars need to take stock of varying available design choices and their potential effects on the deliberative quality of online public discourse. Second, looking more broadly, research must examine the design of deliberative processes as they manifest themselves via digital technologies. The author discusses the importance of surveying the broad array of processes that are currently employed, and the varying theoretical assumptions that they convey. Third, the essay concludes with an outline of possible implications that online deliberation endeavors may have on democratic citizenship, and calls for further research on the broader implications of this work for promoting healthy democratic societies.”

Deliberation In and Through Higher Education by Dr. Timothy J. Shaffer – “This article explores how deliberative democracy has the ability to change how colleges and universities function. Deliberation offers a powerful way for students, faculty, staff, and community partners to learn and practice modes of reasoning and deciding together in a variety of settings such as classrooms, other campus settings, and in communities. The article includes scholarly resources as well as examples of deliberation in various contexts. The article suggests that deliberation can replace, or at least complement, many of the more familiar models pervasive in our institutions.”

The Critical Role of Local Centers and Institutes in Advancing Deliberative Democracy by Dr. Martín Carcasson – “Utilizing the development and early history of the Colorado State University Center for Public Deliberation as an example, this paper makes the case for expanding the number of and the level of support for such campus-based centers as critical resources for expanding deliberative democracy. Due to their ability to not only provide deliberative capacity to the community, but also to attract students to our field and equip with them with essential skills, to strengthen the connection of colleges and universities to their local communities, and to contribute to the further development of deliberative theory and practice, these local “hubs of democracy” represent a natural “win-win-win-win” that warrants significant focus as we work to develop the deliberative culture of our communities.”

A Path to the Next Form of (Deliberative) Democracy by Patrick L. Scully – “Supporters of deliberative democracy must work through complex tradeoffs if we hope to realize the full potential of empowered civic engagement in which citizens employ multiple forms of action and change. In order to sustain citizens’ interest, time, and resources in creating a robust civic infrastructure, we need to engage them in more highly empowered forms of civic engagement than is now typical of many deliberative initiatives. Our field’s strong emphasis on temporary public consultations diverts a disproportionate amount of time, intellectual capital, and other resources from efforts to improve the ability of citizens and local communities to have stronger, more active, and direct roles in shaping their collective futures. One set of choices facing us centers on tensions between reformism and more fundamental, even revolutionary changes to democratic politics. Other key tensions are rooted in aspirations for deliberative democracy to serve as both an impartial resource and as a catalyst for action.”

The State of Our Field in Light of the State of Our Democracy: My Democracy Anxiety Closet by Martha McCoy – “There is a large and troubling gap between the promise of deliberative innovations and the most prevalent practices of our largely dysfunctional democracy. A web of factors is widening this gap and increasing the urgency of addressing it. With democracy in crisis, the deliberative civic field is engaging in more collaborative efforts and in more pointed conversations about how to have a systemic impact. To have any chance of improving the state of democracy, our field needs to: 1) envision and work toward structural change; 2) find more compelling ways to describe empowered public participation and more welcoming entry points for experiencing it; and 3) address the challenge of equity head-on. As a field, we have begun to address the first two, though we have much more to do. Our field has been more reticent to address the challenge of equity.”

The Compost of Disagreement: Creating Safe Spaces for Engagement and Action by Michelle Holt-Shannon & Bruce L. Mallory – “The experiences gained in almost two decades of supporting community-based deliberative processes highlight the importance of balancing participants’ desire for civility and safety with the passionate expression of deeply held values and beliefs. Effective deliberations may surface highly contested positions in which intimidation or bullying can occur. At times, even the deliberative process itself may become the object of ideological objections. This has the potential to a create a climate of fear on the part of participants and public officials seeking solutions to complex issues related to public investments, long-term planning, or improved governance. We apply the metaphor of “community compost” to emphasize the value of eliciting diverse points of view on hot topics that have divided residents as well as public officials. By turning the fertile soil of passion, values, and disagreement, we have been able to find common ground useful to decision-makers. Balancing the need for safety and the benefits of strong disagreement, shared understanding and agreement may be achieved.”

- — -

If you’ve seen a few articles that you’d like to read more of, we encourage you to visit www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd to download the full text. Happy reading!

public deliberation: the state of the field

The current issue of the Journal of Public Deliberation (which offers open access) “assess[es] the state of our field, celebrates our successes, and calls for future innovative work. The authors are scholars and practitioners who represent the diversity of our field and provide a wide range of perspectives on deliberation, dialogue, participation, and civic life. The ideas from this issue will be discussed at the upcoming Frontiers of Democracy conference [at Tufts], after which the editors will write an ‘afterword’ reflecting on lessons learned.”

My own contribution is a short piece entitled “Beyond Deliberation: A Strategy for Civic Renewal.” My abstract says:

To expand opportunities for discussion and reflection about public issues, we should look beyond the organizations that intentionally convene deliberations and also enlist organizations that preserve common resources, volunteer service groups, civics classes, grassroots public media efforts, and partisan, ideological, and faith-based movements that have some interest in discussion. Many of these groups are not politically neutral; more are adversarial. But they have a common interest in confronting the forces and decisions that have sidelined active citizens in countries like the US. They are all threatened by the rising signs of oligarchy in the United States. Collectively, they have considerable resources with which to fight back. It is time for us to begin to stir and organize–not for deliberation, but for democracy.

The post public deliberation: the state of the field appeared first on Peter Levine.

The Threat of Political Instability

Our current form of capitalism undermines America’s core ethic. It has become ridden with obstacles to social mobility. A strong commitment to fairness is essential to our nation’s conception of the common good; a less democracy-friendly capitalism violates the common good in favor of top tier of the income scale.


Large inequalities become unfair in people’s minds only when they feel that they themselves are stuck in a rut with no opportunity to improve their lot in life.

Large inequalities of income, by themselves, do not violate America’s sense of fairness. Billionaires like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are actually folk heroes. Large inequalities become unfair in people’s minds only when they feel that they themselves are stuck in a rut with no opportunity to improve their lot in life.

In his most recent State of the Union address, President Obama was wise to focus on social mobility rather than income inequality. Income inequality – the huge gap between rich and poor – troubles the more liberal wing of the democratic party. Opportunity inequality troubles everyone – liberals, moderates and conservatives alike.

Our economy’s recovery from the Great Recession of 2007-08 has been discouragingly slow. The recession was quite serious and the reasons for a slow recovery may yet prove to be cyclical and self-healing. If so, my hypothesis that we are witnessing a structural change in our system of capitalism may prove incorrect. Time will tell.

If my hypothesis is valid, however, we may well see higher growth rates in the next few years. But long-term unemployment will persist and wages will continue to stagnate for all but the top quintiles of the work force.

Such a scenario threatens our political stability. Inevitably, populist movements will arise both from the left and the right, further polarizing our political system. Convictions of unfairness will inflame political unrest and add to the economic distress caused by the growing gap in opportunity for self-betterment.

Add anomie to this scenario – the general erosion of norms – and you have a formula for troubled times ahead.



Rebooting Democracy is a blog authored by Public Agenda co-founder Dan Yankelovich. While the views that Dan shares in his blog should not be interpreted as representing official Public Agenda positions, the purpose behind the blog and the spirit in which it is presented resonate powerfully with our values and the work that we do. To receive Rebooting Democracy in your inbox, subscribe here.

Civic Studies Playlist

Nearly two dozen scholars and practitioners will be gathered in my office for the next two weeks for the annual Summer Institute of Civic Studies. Last year, I participated in this two week seminar which reflects on questions of what we – as people within communities – should do to make our communities better.

The two weeks cover a range of theorists and topics as participants grapple over important and challenging questions. It is a thought provoking and energizing experience.

But not everybody can give two weeks of their time to a thousand pages of reading and hours of discussion. So, for those of you playing at home, here’s a suggested playlist for civic studies:

We Will All Go Together When We Go by Tom Lehrer
Elinor Ostrom – What seems to be in your immediate best interest may lead to collective doom.

Tom’s Diner by Suzanne Vega
Jürgen Habermas – Lifeworld. System. Public Sphere. They all intersect.

Superman’s Song by Crash Test Dummies
John Dewey – Making the world better is tough work, but it can be done.

Killing in the Name Of by Rage Against The Machine
Walter Lippmann – People in power can convince you to do terrible things without you even realizing you’re being manipulated.

Small Town by John Cougar Mellencamp
Robert Putnam - Life is great when you know all your neighbors.

We Built this City (On Rock and Roll) by Starship
Harry Boyte – Those in power can’t write us off, we built this city.

(Lord It’s Hard To Be Happy When You’re Not) Using the Metric System by Atom & His Package
Bent Flyvbjerg – Those in power shape reality by deciding how things should be measured.

The Power of Love by Huey Lewis & the News
Mahatma Gandhi – Love has real power, tougher than diamonds and stronger than steel.

Boys On The Docks by the Dropkick Murphys
Saul Alinsky
– Though it starts with your fist it must end with your mind.

A Change Would Do You Good by Sheryl Crow or
We’re Not Going to Take It by Twisted Sister
Roberto Mangabeira Unger - Smash context, experiment radically

The Ballad of NATO by the Tossers
James Madison – A political diatribe gets your point across.

Handlebars by the Flobots
Edmund Burke – An individual with power is dangerous. An individual who believes he’s earned that power is even more dangerous.

Zombie by the Cranberries
Peter Singer – It may be easy to be silent in the face of human suffering, but it is morally wrong to do so.

Closer to Free by the BoDeans
Martha C. Nussbaum – Everybody wants to be closer to free.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail