Monthly Archives: September 2019

translations from Kuruntokai

Posted on by
Reply

Kuruntokai (The Short Collection) is an anthology of classical Tamil verse collected by Pooriko Nachinarkiniyar in the sixth or the seventh century CE. The poems are lyrics of love and longing. Apparently they offer layers of religious symbolism. Here are two translations of #36, giving some sense of the original:

Poem from the purple-flowered hills

Talaivi says to her friend—

He swore “my heart is true.
I’ll never leave you.”

My lover from the hills,
where the manai creepers
sometimes mount the shoulders of elephants
asleep among the boulders,
promised this on that day
when he embraced my shoulders, making love to me.

Why cry, my dear friend?

Paranar, Kuruntokai, verse 36, translated by A. Anupama
She Said

On his hills,
 the ma:nai creeper that usually sprawls
 on large round stones
 sometimes takes to a sleeping elephant.

At parting,
 his arms twined with mine
 he gave me inviolable guarantees
 that he would live in my heart
 without parting.

Friends, why do you think 
 that is any reason for grieving? 

 Paranar (Kuruntokai 36), translated by A.K. Ramanujan

Or #46 …

Poem from the fertile fields and fragrant trees

Talaivi says—

Don’t you think they have sparrows
wherever he has gone, with wings like faded water lilies,
bathing in the dung dust in the village streets
before pecking grain from the yards
and returning to their chicks in the eaves,
common as evening loneliness?

Mamalatan, Kuruntokai, verse 46, translated by A. Anupama
She Said

Don't they really have
in the land where he has gone
such things
as house sparrows

dense-feathered, the color of fading water lilies,
pecking at grain drying on yards,
playing with the scatter of the fine dust
of the street's manure
and living with their nestlings
in the angles of the penthouse

and miserable evenings,

and loneliness? 

 Ma:mala:tan (Kuruntokai 46), translated by A.K. Ramanujan

I’ll try a reply:

We used to watch sparrows like this one.
They'd look up at her, at me, hopeful,
Head tilted: crumbs? fly away?

Now it's only me. This one flutters up
To hunch under an eve and wait.
When the rain stops, maybe it will find a bite.

See also: when the lotus bloomed, nostalgia for now, voices

NCDD Podcast on International Day of Listening on Sept. 19

Posted on by
Reply

Have you listened to someone today? How about someone that you disagree with? If not, why not? Sometimes we focus more on speaking than on listening, though both are crucial to dialogue and deliberation. That is why NCDD is restarting their podcast series with a feature on the fourth annual International Listening Day taking place on Thursday, September 19th. The International Day of Listening (https://internationaldayoflistening.com/)  evolved in response to our modern-day “listening crisis” as one of many ways to remind us all of how to engage with one another even when we disagree, and even encourage us to actively listen precisely when we disagree.

The guests are Sheila Bentley and Jean Francios Mathieu, members of the International Listening Association (https://www.listen.org/) and designers of the International Day of Listening day will speak with NCDD intern, Annie Rappeport. They will share the origin story for the initiative, movements taking place all over the world and how everyone can participate around this year’s theme to “Be Bold and Listen for Common Ground”.

You can listen to this podcast episode by searching “NCDD Podcast” on Apple Podcasts (iTunes) and Google Play, and on Soundcloud at https://soundcloud.com/ncddpodcast/international-day-of-listening.

More about The International Day of Listening (IDL)

The IDL is a one-day event that is sponsored by the International Listening Association (ILA) and was initiated in 2016. The IDL takes place the third Thursday of September each year. The day promotes a variety of events from one-on-one conversations with friends and family to business or community meetings to governments and their citizens talking about mutual concerns. This year’s IDL theme is based on listening first for similarities – what we have in common. That’s what we mean by “listen for common ground”. Once two people have found common ground and priorities (and are surprised by the number of them), it is far easier to discuss differences, points of disagreement or conflict, in a mature and respectful way.

Fostering Information Ecosystems with Info Districts

Posted on by
Reply

Simon Galperin recently shared this article with us on info districts, “Towards a public choice for local news and information” and we wanted to lift it up here on the blog. The piece includes an excerpt from the full Info District report and “this guide — published thanks to support from the Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri’s Missouri School of Journalism — outlines what a democratic process could look like if it was targeted at understanding a community’s information needs and mobilizing collective action to meet them”. You can read the article below and find the original version on Medium here.

Towards a public choice for local news and information

Information is power. But decisions about how information gets discovered, shared, and used are made by those already in power. In most places, the people who are most in need of information have little say in those decisions. Info districts is a proposal to change that.

The Community Information Cooperative’s “How to Launch an Info District” report is intended for people who want to organize their communities to change how decisions are made about what news and information gets produced, how it’s distributed, and — most importantly — why.

Social media platforms and the majority of our news media exist for profit. The products and services they provide maximize the extraction of information and wealth from our communities. Mission-driven news organizations and public institutions exist for our benefit but most resemble for-profit corporations in their decision making. Foundational issues are decided on by a handful of people usually far removed from the impact of their decisions.

If news and information is what fuels democracy then it should be guided by democracy.

For the Community Info Coop, the process is the product. We believe you cannot have a democratic outcome without a democratic process. This guide — published thanks to support from the Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri’s Missouri School of Journalism — outlines what a democratic process could look like if it was targeted at understanding a community’s information needs and mobilizing collective action to meet them.

We do this work because we believe that news and information is a public good. We believe information ecosystems can empower people instead of scare and profit from them.

Redesigning those systems to improve the way we communicate with each other and hold our institutions accountable is an international project. Platforms, governments, foundations, media organizations, and technology companies require democratization if we are to sustain and expand democracy in the 21st century.

It is an imperfect project. And one without end. But it cannot be done without a local effort leading and sustaining the change. Info districts are one part of that effort.

We’ll return to “How to Launch an Info District” as we continue our work. We’ll add new resources, share new findings, and make it more practical.

The following is an excerpt from the guide to introduce you to the the info districts concept. For more detail, read the full guide here.

To support the development of this new vision for public media, reach us at connect@infodistricts.org. We’re actively seeking financial and coordinating support. To follow our work, subscribe to our newsletter here.

Syllabus of Introduction to Civic Studies, fall 2019

Posted on by
Reply

Fall 19 Civic Studies 0020-01 Intro to Civic Studies

Instructors: Peter Levine, Brian Schaffner. TA: Gene Corbin

Sept 4: Introduction

Introduction to the course and the instructors.

In class exercise: “The “Christmas Tree Crisis” at Sea-­?Tac Airport” (handout in class)

Sept 9: Problems of collective action

(In class, we will simulate a collective action problem.)

Sept 11: Elinor Ostrom’s solutions to the Tragedy of the Commons

Sept 16: Ostrom continued

Sept 18: Ostrom Continued

Sept 23: Social capital as part of the solution

Sept 25: Why do people voluntarily participate?

Sept 30: Discussing good ends and means

Reading assignment: the Harvard Pluralism Project’s case entitled A Call to Prayer (Links to an external site.).  In the discussion sessions this week, students will deliberate what the people of Hamtramck, MI should do. In the class session on Sept 30, additional discussion of deliberation (what it is, what it can accomplish, and what else is needed for good decision-making).

Oct 2: Habermas and Deliberative Democracy

Oct 7: Does deliberation work?

Oct 9: Other forms of discourse: 1) testimony and empathy

[Oct 14: vacation day]

Oct 15 (Tuesday): Other forms of discourse: 2) dissent

  • Tommie Shelby, “Impure Dissent” from Dark Ghettoes: Injustice, Dissent and Reform (2016)

Oct 16:  How can we design for deliberation?

Oct 21: Midterm in class

Oct 23: Exclusion and Identity

Oct 28: What happens when people experience diversity?

Oct 30 Guest lecture on political hobbyism (Eitan Hersch) 

Social Movements 

Nov 4: Identity and the Common Good

Nov 6: Social Movements 

(Nov 11: no class)

Nov 13: Community Organizing

Nov 18: Nonviolent Campaigns

Nov 20:  Gandhi 

Nov 25: Gandhi continued

  • Gandhi, Notes, May 22, 1924 – August 15, 1924, in The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (Electronic Book), New Delhi, Publications Division Government of India, 1999, 98 volumes, vol. 28, pp. 307-310

[Nov 27: no class]

Dec 2: Does nonviolence work? Does violence work?

Dec. 4: Student presentations in class

Dec 9: Student presentations in class

Dec 17: Final exam (3:30-5:30 in the Rabb Room)

Conceptual Outline of the Course
(click for more information)

The New (Old) John Locke Manuscript on Catholics

Posted on by
Reply

Reasons for Tolerating Papists Equally with Others

I read about it in the Guardian yesterday, and my cousin at St. John’s found the digital copy right there on the internet in plain sight. Apparently no one had attempted to transcribe it yet? It’s a confusing document–looks like reading notes from some separate document, as there are page numbers which appear out of order in the manuscript.

Here is a rough first effort. Please share edits! The folks who discovered the original manuscript in Annapolis have published a transcription at the end of this article–I used it to correct my transcription, though the remaining errors are mine. (Especially impressed by them figuring out “lex talionis” which was really irking me.) Congrats to Walmsley and Waldmann for showing that archival work can be rewarding!

7 Persecution disobliges the best sort amongst the papist as well as amongst others.

12 If liberty of conscience makes all men faily more and more to abhor popery, papists may be tolerated as well as others.

13 If liberty of conscience breed men up in an irreconcilable dislike to all imposition in religion, Papists may be safely tolerated.

If liberty of conscience unite the Protestants against the Papists, Papists may be safely tolerated.

15 If toleration be the way to convert Papists as well as others, they may equally be tolerated.

16 If Papists can be supposed to be as good subjects as others they may be equally tolerated

17 If all subjects should be equally countenanced and employed? by the Prince, the Papist have an equal title.

If ability alone ought to prefer men to employment and the King ought not to lose the use of any part of his subjects, Papists are to be tolerated.

If liberty of conscience oblige all parties to the Prince and made them wholly depend upon him, then the Papists may be tolerated.

18 If to force dissenters to one’s opinion be contrary to the rule of religion and to no purpose, Papists should be tolerated.

20 If suffering for it will promote any opinion, Papists are to be tolerated.

3 The papsist can be as little satisfied with or reconciled to the government by toleration as restraint. Liberty of conscience being here intended to unite the protestants under one common interest, under one protector in opposition to them, and so can not oblige them.

3 Persecution of them alone can as little make them unite with the other parties, as toleration can make them divide amongst themselves. Both which effects follow a general toleration or persecution of other dissenters.

4 In punishing papists for their religion, you are not so liable to mistake ??? (agreement?) by prosecuting that as faction which is indeed conscience. For those who are guided  as in persecuting other dissenters for those who are absolutely disposed of by an authority supposed infallible, whose interests is directly opposed to yours, must necessarily be all factions however some of them may be similarly conscientious. 

Though persecution usually makes other opinions be sought after and admired; yet perhaps it is less apt to recommend popery than any other religion. 1st because persecution is its own practice and so begets less pity. 2ndly The principle and doctrine of that religion seem less apt to take inquisitive heads or unstable minds, men commonly in their voluntary changes do rather pursue liberty an enthusiasm, wherein they seem their own disposers, rather than give themselves up to the authority and imposition of others. Besides Popery, having been brought in and continued by power and force joined with the art and industry of the clergy, it is the most likely of any religion

to decay, where the secular power handles them severely or at the least takes from them those encouragement and supports they receive from their own clergy.

Query: Whether the Papists or Protestants gains most proselytes by the persecution they suffer in those changes at the beginning of the reformation?

7 Standards-by will be less dissatisfied with severity used to papists then to others because it is lex talionis. Besides he cannot be thought to be punished merely for conscience who owns himself at the same time the subject and adherent to an enemy prince.

8 That a prince ought to encourage knowledge, from whence springs a variety of opinions on religion, matters not at all for papists who own an implicit faith and acquiesce in ignorance and who may as well submit to the imposition of their own lawful prince, as those of a foreigner. The infallibility of both sides as being equal.

All the rest that is said (on page 8) favours the toleration of papists less than others.

9 Twill be less dangerous to discontent the papist when the other parties are pleased then now. Especially when indulgence will less secure you of their fidelity to the government then that of others. Every subject has an interest in the natural prince, whilst he does not own subjection to another power.

Liberty will less destroy the hopes and pretensions of papists that desire public mischief, then of others. Because they are backed by the foreign power and are obliged to propagate their religion by force. 

A small part of the trade of English is (I think) managed by papists ad the imposition of religion will lessen their trade

It is perhaps a reason why they should not be tolerated.

10 If it be the King’s interest to be head of the Protestants this bespeaks no indulgence for Papists. Unless the persecuting of them here will draw the same wage or worse upon the protestants beyond sea. And how far own that may be advantageous to us in the present posture off of affairs, can only be determined by those who can judge whether the Hugonots in France or Papists in England and likeliest to make head[way], to disturb the respective governments.

11 I doubt whether upon protestant principles we can justify punishing of Papists for their speculative opinions on Purgatory, transubstantiation, as if they stopped there. But possibly no reason nor religion obliges us to tolerate those who practical principles necessarily lead them to the eager prosecution of all opinions and the utter destruction of all societies, but their own so that it is not the difference of opinion, but their dangerous and factious foments in reference to the state which are blended with and make a part of their religion that excludes them from the benefit of toleration who would think it fit to tolerate either Presbyterian or Independent, if they made it a part of their religion to pay an implicit subjection to a foreign infallible power?

13 Severity to papists only cannot make them unity with any other party. nor toleration disunite them among themselves.

EP Shares Article on the Poverty of Partisan Identity

Posted on by
Reply

In this piece published on The Fulcrum, “The poverty of partisan identity” by Daniel Pritchard of NCDD sponsor organization Essential Partners, he challenges the belief that our identities, particularly the partisan facets, are leading to the decline of our democracy. He responds that it is actually the immense complexity of our identities that make our democracy, and society, richer and more vibrant. He states, “To sustain this democracy, we must work to make space for the complex and contradictory identities within us and within each other. It must become the fabric of our civil and civic lives, a democratic method that makes all the rest of democracy possible.” Below is a brief write-up from the Essential Partners’ site and the original can be found here.

The poverty of partisan identity: op/ed at The Fulcrum

Today The Fulcrum published “The poverty of partisan identity,” an opinion article by EP Director of Strategic Communications Daniel E. Pritchard.

In his article, Daniel makes the case for a democracy that’s built on individual relationships rather than partisan identities, a democracy that makes space for nuance conversations and manifold identities. He writes:

Partisan identity has incorporated every fault line of American politics — with little ideological consistency — while refashioning views about wholly local problems, formerly transpartisan issues and institutional norms.

The poverty of public discourse stems from the domination of these two highly polarized identities, and the high level of polarization today stems from the flattening of every public discussion beneath this electoral opposition.

Read the rest of the article at The Fulcrum, a digital news organization focused exclusively on efforts to reverse the dysfunctions plaguing American democracy.

You can find the original version of this on Essential Partners’ blog at www.whatisessential.org/blog/poverty-partisan-identity-oped-fulcrum.

Wednesday Webinar Roundup ft Courageous Leadership Project, LRC, IAF, and ICMA

Posted on by
Reply

Here are the upcoming D&D online events happening over the next few weeks, including NCDD sponsor org The Courageous Leadership Project, NCDD member org Living Room Conversations, as well as, from the International Association of Facilitators (IAF) and International City/County Management Association (ICMA).

NCDD’s online D&D event roundup is a weekly compilation of the upcoming events happening in the digital world related to dialogue, deliberation, civic tech, engagement work, and more! Do you have a webinar or other digital event coming up that you’d like to share with the NCDD network? Please let us know in the comments section below or by emailing me at keiva[at]ncdd[dot]org, because we’d love to add it to the list!

Upcoming Online D&D Events: Living Room Conversations, IAF, The Courageous Leadership Project, ICMA

Online Living Room Conversation: Social Equity – 90-Minute Online Conversation

Thursday, September 5th
8:30 am Pacific, 11:30 am Eastern

Social equity can be defined as a commitment to promote fair, just, and equitable recognition of basic needs of all residents and the total community, and a commitment to diligently advocate for the provision of those needs to all residents and the total community. This conversation focuses on our own personal and community experiences with the idea of social equity and our beliefs that there is a common good in the recognition and acceptance of this idea. HERE is the conversation guide.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/living-room-conversation-social-equity/

Living Room Conversations Training (free): The Nuts & Bolts of Living Room Conversations

Thursday, September 5th
2 pm Pacific, 5 pm Eastern

Join us for 90 minutes online to learn about Living Room Conversations. We’ll cover what a Living Room Conversation is, why we have them, and everything you need to know to get started hosting and/or participating in Living Room Conversations. This training is not required for participating in our conversations – we simply offer it for people who want to learn more about the Living Room Conversations practice.

Space is limited so that we can offer a more interactive experience. Please only RSVP if you are 100% certain that you can attend. This training will take place using Zoom videoconferencing. A link to join the conversation will be sent to participants the day before the training.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/training-free-the-nuts-bolts-of-living-room-conversations-17/

Online Living Room Conversation: Abortion – 90-Minute Conversation w/ Optional 30-Minute Q & A with Hosts

Thursday, September 5th
4 pm Pacific, 7 pm Eastern

Abortion is seldom a topic that we speak about in casual conversation. More often we hear abortion talked about by news media, politicians or, more rarely, depicted in books, television shows or movies. In pretty much any situation, abortion elicits an intense emotional response. In the U.S. the conversation on abortion generally centers on whether you are “for” or “against” it and very rarely explores personal narratives, what we believe about abortion as a decision, what the procedure entails, or how abortion affects an individual’s reproductive and mental health. Engaging in an honest and vulnerable conversation on abortion provides an opportunity to explore the depths of our beliefs about sex, life, death, agency and parenting. It gets at the very root of what we care deeply for in life and opens the door to finding potential common ground. Here is the conversation guide.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/abortion-90-minute-conversation-w-optional-30-minute-q-a-with-hosts/

International Association of Facilitators webinar – Use of Language to Create Inclusiveness in Groups

Monday, September 9th
3 pm Pacific, 6 pm Eastern

This session will explore the power of language and how it has the ability to create an inclusive environment, or unconsciously exclude people from hearing what you have to say. Expand your facilitation skills through building self-awareness of the things you communicate to others and how you can begin to rephrase your thoughts and words. Annette Denny from The University of Waterloo in Canada will lead the session.

REGISTER: www.iaf-world.org/site/events/webinars

The Courageous Leadership Project webinar – Brave, Honest Conversations™

Wednesday, September 11th
9 am Pacific, 12 pm Eastern

Some conversations are hard to have. Fear and discomfort build in your body and you avoid and procrastinate or pretend everything is fine. Sometimes you rush in with urgency, wanting to smooth things over, fix them, and make them better. Sometimes you go to battle stations, positioning the conversation so you have a higher chance of being on the “winning” side. NONE OF THIS WORKS. Instead, it usually makes a hard conversation harder; more divided, polarized, and disconnected from others. The more people involved, the harder the conversation can be. I believe that brave, honest conversations are how we solve the problems we face in our world – together.

In this webinar, we will cover: What is a Brave, Honest Conversation™? Why have one? What can change because of a brave, honest conversation? How do you have one? What do you need to think about and do? How do you prepare yourself for a brave, honest conversation?

REGISTER: www.bravelylead.com/events/bhcfreewebinar

International City/County Management Association (ICMA) webinar – Grappling with Gnarly Issues-How Local Government Can Help

Wednesday, September 11th
10 am Pacific, 1 pm Eastern

Communities want their local governments to take action on tough issues, sometimes even when a local government may not be the primary entity responsible. Learn about successful efforts by local governments to tackle gnarly issues like environmental challenges, opioids, and homelessness. Gain insights and approaches you can use to address the tough issues your agency faces.

REGISTER: https://icma.org/events/free-webinar-grappling-gnarly-issues-how-local-government-can-help

Online Living Room Conversation: Gender – 90-Minute Conversation w/ Optional 30-Minute Q & A with Hosts

Thursday, September 12th
4 pm Pacific, 7 pm Eastern

What’s the big deal about gender? In this conversation, we will explore biological sex, gender identity, and gender expression to better understand how these concepts impact your life and the lives of others. Here is the conversation guide. We will use the following definitions:

  • Biological Sex- refers to the biological anatomy of an individual’s reproductive system, and secondary sex
    characteristics (male, female, intersex, etc.)
  • Gender Identity- an individual’s concept/identity of themselves (man, woman, trans, gender non conforming, etc.)
  • Gender Expression- how individuals present themselves (masculine, feminine, androgynous, etc.)

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/gender-90-minute-conversation-w-optional-30-minute-q-a-with-hosts/

September CGA Forum Series: How Can We Stop Mass Shootings in Our Communities?

Saturday, September 14th
4 pm Pacific, 7 pm Eastern

Please join us for a Common Ground for Action (CGA) online deliberative forum on How Can We Stop Mass Shootings in Our Communities? We’ll discuss this issue by considering the actions and drawbacks for three options: (1) reduce the threat of mass shootings; (2) equip people to defend themselves; and (3) root out violence in society. f you haven’t had a chance to review the issue guide, you can find a downloadable PDF copy at the NIF website: www.nifi.org/es/issue-guide/issue-advisory-how-can-we-stop-mass-shootings-our-communities-2016

REGISTER: www.nifi.org/en/events/september-cga-forum-series-how-can-we-stop-mass-shootings-our-communities

“Free, Fair and Alive” is Now Published!

Posted on by
Reply

I’m thrilled to say that Free, Fair and Alive: The Insurgent Power of the Commons – the book I’ve been working on for the past three years with my long-time colleague Silke Helfrich – is published today. The book is our ambitious attempt to synthesize what we've learned from scores of commons around the world over the past twenty years.

The book is wide-ranging in its analysis of the power of commoning, but it focuses on the internal social and interpersonal dynamics of commoning; how the commons worldview opens up new possibilities for change; and the role of language in reorienting our perceptions and political strategies.

To dip into the book, check out the Contents page and Introduction. We will be posting new chapters every few weeks. 

Next week I’m embarking on a tour in Europe and UK with Silke to engage a number of audiences with the themes of the book. You can check out our appearances on the right of this webpage, or on the Free, Fair and Alive website at www.freefairandalive.org.

Our book is a foundational reconceptualization of the commons as a living social system. Instead of regarding commons as resources, in the style of standard economics and Garrett Hardin's “tragedy of the commons” essay, we show that commons are in fact dynamic, living social processes. (That’s why economists can’t see them!) They rely on a whole set of human values and behaviors that the standard economic narrative regards as marginal. Our book is a rare inquiry into commoning – the verb, the social practices, the moral relationships – which is quite different from the commons -- the noun, as resources and their exchange value.  

The further Silke and I got into studying and rethinking the commons as a concept, the more that we realized that prevailing categories of thought are simply too reductionist to capture what is really going on within commons. For example, standard economics, property law, and policy assume the reality of rational, autonomous individuals, as reflected in the idea of homo economicus, the philosophy of modern liberalism, and the presumed separation of humanity and “nature.”

These assumptions struck us as fundamentally misleading, especially if you understand humanity in a biological sense. We humans are all inscribed within larger collectives that make us who we are. We are shaped by intergenerational cultures, geographic communities, extended families, affinity groups and a living, pulsing more-than-human ecology (aka "nature"). Why can't we begin to acknowledge that life is far more relational than transactional?

People engaged in commoning are not caught up in “prisoner’s dilemma” scenarios or rationally calculating how they can get more for themselves. They are trying to meet their needs, or simply survive, by working together in social solidarity. From co-housing and agroecology to alternative currencies, and from community land trusts to open-source everything, people around the world are turning to commoning to emancipate themselves from predatory market/state institutions This is one reason the cachet of the commons has soared in recent years: it offers a discourse and real projects for challenging capitalism and building socially constructive alternatives.

A theme that resonates throughout our book is the idea of relationality. Commoning is about building relationships of trust in the course of meeting collective needs. In this fashion, the commons help us develop a new “politics of belonging” that works quite differently than the ideological polarization of "representative" democracy. Commoning also helps us develop a new economics of sufficiency that can deal with runaway economic growth and ecosystem collapse.

To try to express the realities of commons that we have witnessed, Silke and I had to develop a new theoretical and practical framework for understanding the commons. 

We found a way forward in pattern languages, an idea developed by the renegade architect and urban planner Christopher Alexander who saw that certain design patterns in buildings recur again and again across cultures and history. He realized that there is no universal set of principles for identifying these patterns – but if we study the patterns that exist despite very different contexts, we can identify some striking regularities. We found that his approach that fits very well with commons, which have many regularities despite varying immensely another around the world.

To showcase these patterns, our book synthesizes dozens of patterns of social practice, ethical values, and group behaviors that we observed in countless commons. We integrated this vision through what we call the "Triad of Commoning" framework. It combines three essential aspects of any commons – provisioning, peer governance, and social life – each of which is entangled with the others. This framework acknowledges that commons are alive, alive! They are not simply inventories of unowned “resources.

In the course of rethinking the commons, Silke and I realized that if we are going to escape the dead-end of neoliberal capitalism, we need to invent and learn a new vocabulary. So we coined a lot of new terms. Instead of seeing nature mostly as a set of “resources,” commoners tend to see water and land and forests as “care-wealth” -- living things that they care about and that shape their identities and cultures.

Instead of seeing everyone as isolated individuals striving to maximize their material gain, we coined the term “Ubuntu Rationality” to describe a logic of human interaction that deeply aligns a person’s interests with the well-being of others.

Instead of seeing “property” as something that is owned absolutely and used to dominate and control others, we explore the idea of “relationalized property.” There are, in fact, “other ways of having” – ways to access and use things -- that go beyond the extraction, exclusion or marketization associated with conventional property ownership. Examples include open source seeds, the federated wiki platform, and the Park Slope Food Coop in Brooklyn, which depends upon members working for free several hours a month. 

Our publisher, New Society Publishers, is touting our book as "a cultural critique, table-pounding political treatise, and practical playbook for commoning." We’re honored to have some heroes of ours give endorsements to the book. Bill McKibben, author of Falter and founder of ‘350.org’ wrote:

“If you want a truly exciting glimpse into what the world after this one might look like, this book is for you. When we move past “markets solve all problems” into a more mature approach, it will incorporate precisely the insights in this lively and engaging volume!”

Raj Patel, author, The Value of Nothing and Stuffed and Starved, said:

“David Bollier and Silke Helfrich don’t just establish that commoning can work, and work well. They’ve analysed the contours of successful experiments in how humans have come together to make their worlds freer, fairer and more alive”.

The activist and author Vandana Shiva wrote that the book

“shows the path to respond to the ecological emergency and the polarization of society, economically, socially, culturally. The recovery and co-creation of the commons offers hope for the planet and people.” 

We are proud that Free, Fair and Alive is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, which should enhance its availability. The German version of the book was published by transcript Verlag in April, and Spanish and French translations are planned.

voter suppression shows we have a democracy

Posted on by
Reply

An interesting panel at the American Political Science Association conference explored whether the conceptual distinction between democracy and authoritarianism is (still) useful. In arguing against this distinction, some panelists cited ways that a particular democracy–the USA–fails to honor democratic norms. An example of our failure (which didn’t provoke any overt dissent on the panel) was voter suppression.

To be clear, I oppose the policies that are described as voter suppression. I was deposed and testified as an expert witness in the successful federal lawsuit against North Carolina, and I have done other work to promote access to voting and to attack restrictions.

However, I would make the conceptual distinction in a different way from several of the panelists. “Democracy” is not the name for a just or fair society. A democracy is a society in which majorities govern (for better or worse). Having a democracy opens vistas for developing human potential and for improving the world. But it also presents characteristic challenges.

Two endemic challenges of democracy are relevant to voter suppression. First, when the majority of people hold problematic views, we get problematic policies. For instance, requiring photo identification for voting is unnecessary and creates a barrier, but it is highly popular among a broad spectrum of Americans. Second, because majorities are powerful in a democracy, you can expect bare-knuckled struggles over who actually turns out. When such struggles go well, they become competitions to boost turnout. But you will predictably see efforts to keep the other side home.

Precisely because it matters who votes in the USA, political actors play rough here. Conceptually, that just reinforces the thesis that the US is a democracy. Nobody would bother to erect subtle impediments to turnout if the vote didn’t matter.

These examples raise the normative question of whether a democracy is the ideal system. Most people would say no, at least insofar as they would want to modify the core idea of democracy with one or more adjectives: liberal, classically republican, social, deliberative, or otherwise.

Given my way of thinking, was the US a democracy before the Civil War, before women’s suffrage, and under Jim Crow? Is it a democracy now, when more than two million people are incarcerated?

These are profound injustices, but democracies can be–and frequently are–unjust. To the degree that large numbers of people are officially excluded from the polity, the system is undemocratic. Therefore, the US was not a full democracy until the Voting Rights Act. Yet a diagnosis of these past and current injustices must put some of the blame on the democratic aspects of our system. A reason for racist policies has been the racist views of many in the white majority. A major reason for mass incarceration is popular support (across racial groups) for draconian punishments. A motive for disenfranchising women and African Americans is that voting matters.

In short, I am against saying, “We are not really a democracy and should stop congratulating ourselves on being different from authoritarian regimes.” Instead, I favor saying: “We are a democracy, and that is why we (the people) must fight–constantly, effectively, and hard–for fairness.”

See also: do we live in a republic or a democracy?; from modest civic reforms to a making a stand for democracy; what does it mean to say democracy is in retreat?; “Habermas with a Whiff of Tear Gas.”

American Founders’ Month! Today: Phillis Wheatley

Posted on by
Reply
FMimage

Check out the National Constitution Center’s biographies of the Founding Fathers! https://constitutioncenter.org/learn/educational-resources/founding-fathers

It’s Founders Month here in Florida! According to the Florida Department of Education,

Section (s.) 683.1455, Florida Statutes (F.S.), designates the month of September as American Founders‘ Month and s. 1003.421, F.S., recognizes the last full week of classes in September in public schools as Celebrate Freedom Week.

So what does this mean for our schools and kids and teachers? Basically, it’s time to do some learning about the men and women who have helped shape this state and this country. Here on our Florida Citizens blog, we’ll be doing at least two posts a week with a brief overview of a particular Founder, Framer, thinker, or shaper of this state or this nation and how they made an impact.

PwFM

(This slide is available here: Wheatley FM)

Our first highlight this week is an incredible woman, one of the first great poets of what would become the United States. Phillis Wheatley was a slave, taken from Africa when she was just seven years old and enslaved by a prominent Boston family (a reminder that American slavery was not a uniquely Southern institution) who recognized her literary genius young and encouraged her poetry and writing, and she gained fame and support from significant figures in New England and in the British Isles. Freed at last when she was about 21, she continued to compose beautiful poetry, meditating on questions of life, death, liberty, family, and hope. One of the most important topics, near and dear to her, though, was America. As the Poetry Foundation tells us:

In addition to classical and neoclassical techniques, Wheatley applied biblical symbolism to evangelize and to comment on slavery. For instance, “On Being Brought from Africa to America,” the best-known Wheatley poem, chides the Great Awakening audience to remember that Africans must be included in the Christian stream: “Remember, Christians, Negroes, black as Cain, /May be refin’d and join th’ angelic train.” The remainder of Wheatley’s themes can be classified as celebrations of America. She was the first to applaud this nation as glorious “Columbia” and that in a letter to no less than the first president of the United States, George Washington, with whom she had corresponded and whom she was later privileged to meet. Her love of virgin America as well as her religious fervor is further suggested by the names of those colonial leaders who signed the attestation that appeared in some copies of Poems on Various Subjects to authenticate and support her work: Thomas Hutchinson, governor of Massachusetts; John Hancock; Andrew Oliver, lieutenant governor; James Bowdoin; and Reverend Mather Byles. Another fervent Wheatley supporter was Dr. Benjamin Rush, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence.

Sadly, one of the greatest poets of the early United States died impoverished and alone. Her poetry, though, and through it the memory of her and her dreams of what the new nation COULD be, lives on. You can learn more about Phillis Wheatley from the Poetry Foundation and from the third activity in this excellent lesson plan provided by the National Park Service.

Our next post will discuss our first and perhaps greatest president, George Washington. Watch this space for more!

And don’t forget to check out the resources provided by the Civics Renewal Network for more wonderful stuff for American Founders’ Month!