Finding a Seat for Social Justice at the Table of Dialogue and Deliberation

The 4-page article, Finding a Seat for Social Justice at the Table of Dialogue and Deliberation (2014)was written by David Schoem and published in the Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 10: Iss. 1. In the article, Schoem discusses the relationships that many dialogue and deliberation organizations have toward social justice. Many D&D organizations have a tendency to shy away from social justice in an effort to maintain neutrality. Schoem puts forth three arguments 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. ”

Read the article in full below and find the PDF available for download on the Journal of Public Deliberation site here.

From the article…

First, most people, whatever language they choose to use, regardless of their political affiliation, perspective, or point of view, share a hope for a better society and believe in a more just world. To use the foundation of a just society or a better world as a common starting point allows for purposeful dialogue and is an invitation to a wide range of people, perspectives and viewpoints. Even the Pledge of Allegiance speaks of “liberty and justice for all,” so it’s surprising that those words are too often taken off the table in dialogue and deliberation organizations because they are seen as “too political.” To ignore social justice serves only to diminish the opportunity and promise that dialogue and deliberation have to offer.

Second, ignoring inequity and inequality predictably leads to the marginalization and exclusion of less privileged groups and those expressing unpopular opinions. Rather than opening the door to open discussion and dialogue by invoking a value of neutrality, when issues of social justice are left off the table it signals to people who are concerned with such issues that the conversation will support the status quo, that substantive change will not result, and that they are unwelcome at the table.

Third, declaring an approach of neutrality, without accounting for power and privilege, almost always privileges those in power. The invocation of unexamined neutrality ignores the power relations embedded in social issues, makes invisible the privilege and power of members of different social identities actually participating in any dialogue and deliberation, and serves to silence less privileged voices. To presume a priori an approach of neutrality mistakenly creates an unequal situation from the outset.

Fourth, efforts to convene substantive dialogue and deliberation without a social justice orientation typically end up as an exercise to give already privileged people more power. When the D&D community gathers people together for good discussions and conversations without any acknowledgement of or attention to issues of social justice, power or privilege, it simply creates space for a privileged group of people to gain an even larger voice and to reify existing inequalities. Admittedly, some in the D&D community who previously felt excluded have carved a niche for themselves and found a voice in public discourse through D&D, but too often when doing so without any social, racial, economic and/or other justice orientation, they have left even further behind those with even less privilege and power.

Fifth, issues of power and privilege are present in dialogue and deliberation whether or not people are ignorant of their presence or choose not to acknowledge them. The fact that people with more privilege are unaware of their power or may consciously choose to ignore it, does not mean that such dynamics are not present and salient in dialogue and deliberation.

Download the article from the Journal of Public Deliberation here.

About the Journal of Public Deliberation
Journal of Public DeliberationSpearheaded by the Deliberative Democracy Consortium in collaboration with the International Association of Public Participation, the principal objective of Journal of Public Deliberation (JPD) is to synthesize the research, opinion, projects, experiments and experiences of academics and practitioners in the emerging multi-disciplinary field and political movement called by some “deliberative democracy.” By doing this, we hope to help improve future research endeavors in this field and aid in the transformation of modern representative democracy into a more citizen friendly form.

Follow the Deliberative Democracy Consortium on Twitter: @delibdem

Follow the International Association of Public Participation [US] on Twitter: @IAP2USA

Resource Link: www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol10/iss1/art20/

Kettering’s Archives Hold a Quarter-Mile of History (Connections 2015)

The four page article, Kettering’s Archives Hold a Quarter-Mile of History, by Maura Casey was published Fall 2015 in Kettering Foundation‘s annual newsletter, “Connections 2015 – Our History: Journeys in KF Research”. Casey describes the treasure trove of information that can be found within the Kettering Foundation archives. The archives contain decades of documentation, dating as far back at the 1920s, which give detailed information on how citizens have interacted around a variety of issues.  Read an excerpt of the article below and find Connections 2015 available for free PDF download on Kettering’s site here.

KF_Connections 2015From the article…

The windowless, basement room that houses the archives of the Kettering Foundation is out of the way for most of the foundation’s visitors. But, in many ways, the records it holds serve as the silent sentinels of the organization. They tell a tale of where the foundation has been and hold clues as to the path ahead.

The room contains a little more than a quarter-mile of material nestled in towering, rolling shelves. There’s an estimated 1,250 feet of paper files, 25 feet of photographs, and more than 100 feet of audio-visual material. The foundation thrives on conversation and discussion, and the archives make certain that all those words, and the research supporting them, leave records behind.

“The breadth of information that we have traces the research and follows various ideas relating to citizen roles involving community, government, and education and how to make citizen ideas visible,” Kingseed said. “We do a lot of work by talking, but those conversations leave traces. This is the place that backs up the stories we tell.

McDonough agreed. “You can’t know where you are going, unless you know where you have been,” she said. “For example, if you want to do work in public education, it’s always a good idea to see what we learned 20 years ago. As much as people like to think that in 20 years America has changed a whole lot [concerning education], well, it really hasn’t. All you have to do is examine our NIF issue guides from the 1980s: the things they talked about we are still dealing with today. And if you don’t save it, you won’t have it in the future.” Are the archives in danger of getting filled? Not for awhile, said McDonough.

The archives room is only about half-full. The foundation began to scan reports in 2010, but digitizing records won’t necessarily mean more room, as the originals are retained. Publications, such as the Kettering Review, Higher Education Exchange, and Connections, will be scanned and become .pdf copies, searchable through the foundation’s computer network. Changing technology, however, presents challenges of its own. McDonough keeps a floppy disk drive reader handy for accessing old files and will keep a DVD drive to read compact discs that are already being replaced by newer technology.

According to McDonough, materials related to Kettering’s Citizens and Public Choice program area take up the most files in the archives, followed by materials related to public education and higher education. Kettering’s archives are primarily organized by program area. Some materials are organized by a single foundation staff member, such as with the multinational/international program area. “Hal Saunders had it so well organized, I just kept all the files the way he had it,” McDonough said. When staff members prepare for retirement, McDonough starts working with them months in advance of their final day to get their files organized for inclusion in the archives.

About Kettering Foundation and Connections
KF_LogoThe Kettering Foundation is a nonprofit operating foundation rooted in the American tradition of cooperative research. Kettering’s primary research question is, what does it take to make democracy work as it should? Kettering’s research is distinctive because it is conducted from the perspective of citizens and focuses on what people can do collectively to address problems affecting their lives, their communities, and their nation.

Each issue of this annual newsletter focuses on a particular area of Kettering’s research. The 2015 issue, edited by Kettering program officer Melinda Gilmore and director of communications David Holwerk, focuses on our yearlong review of Kettering’s research over time.

Follow on Twitter: @KetteringFdn

Resource Link: www.kettering.org/sites/default/files/periodical-article/Casey_2015_0.pdf

Transformative Conversations

This 184-page book, Transformative Conversations, by Dr. Ada Gonzalez offers guidance on how to improve communication and strengthen dialogue skills. You can find more info on the book site here or go directly to Amazon.

From Transformative Conversations

transformative_convosThe book Transformative Conversations is a resource to any leader, coach, or facilitator who is working to improve their leadership. This is far from the first book written that deals with the dynamics of dialogue and effective communication. This book weaves wisdom from many sources into a useful flow that informs the reader about not only why this is a valuable subject, it gives clear guidance on how to pull it off.

This book provides practical tools and guidance to transform your communications by helping you create deeper understanding and meaning. The text is full of effective illustrations, stories, examples, helpful exercises and even prescriptive guidance on specifically what to say to facilitate participation, collaboration, dialogue and handle certain difficult situations.

If you want to know how dialogue helps to balance the amount of listening and asserting occurring between people at work, and how to ignite engagement and commitment to accomplishing business priorities, this book provides instructions on both. If you want to know how to improve dialogue and collaboration among any group of people, this book will give you guidance on how to do it.

More about Dr. Gonzalez
Dr. Gonzalez is an executive coach, facilitator, and a consultant in organizational behavior. She works with leaders, businesses and organizations to facilitate change, development and transformation through dialogue. She shows business leaders how to discover the power of leading through conversations. For more than 25 years as a change agent, and crafter of organizational dialogue, Gonzalez has provided support and created a safe space for development, learning, and growth.

Dr. Gonzalez lives in Delaware and serves as an adjunct professor for the University of Delaware. She did undergraduate and graduate work at Andrews University in Michigan, and post-graduate training as a Marriage and Family Therapist. She earned a Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior at the Union Institute and University in Ohio, specializing on leadership, dialogue, and transformation.

Follow on Twitter: @PhDAda

Resource Link: www.transformativeconversations.com/take-action/

This resource was submitted by Dr. Ada Luz Gonzalez, owner of Logos Noesis, via the Add-a-Resource form.

The Transpartisan Listserv

The Transpartisan Listserv was launched in March 2014 by the National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation, Mediators Foundation, and over a dozen co-founders who are leaders in political bridge building work.

The purpose of this moderated listserv is to introduce potential colleagues to one another, to expand our knowledge of transpartisan theory and practice, and to showcase ongoing activity in the transpartisan field. Our goal is to provide a simple, safe communication channel where individuals and organizations that are active in this boundary-crossing work can connect and learn from each other.

What is transpartisanship? One perspective was published in the Washington Post on January 27, 2014. In Katrina vanden Heuvel’s editorial, she wrote: “At a time of paralyzing political polarization, partisanship has naturally gotten a bad rap. But a reactionary shift toward bipartisanship — toward an anodyne centrism — isn’t the solution. Passion, deftly deployed, is actually an effective political tool with which to advance good ideas. That’s the promise of transpartisanship.”

The Transpartisan Listserv was launched by the following co-founders:

  1. Mark Gerzon, Tom Hast and John Steiner of Mediators Foundation
  2. Sandy Heierbacher, National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation (NCDD)
  3. Tom Atlee, Co-Intelligence Institute
  4. Steve Bhaerman, humorist and author
  5. Dr. Don Beck, The Spiral Dynamics Group
  6. Joan Blades and Debilyn Molineaux, Living Room Conversations
  7. Laura Chasin, Bob Stains, Dave Joseph and Mary Jacksteit, Public Conversations Project
  8. Lawry Chickering and Jim Turner, co-authors of Voice of the People: The Transpartisan Imperative in American Life
  9. Jacob Hess and Phil Neisser, co-authors of You’re Not as Crazy as I Thought (But You’re Still Wrong)
  10. Margo King, Wisdom Beyond Borders-Mediators Foundation; John Steiner’s networking partner
  11. Mark McKinnon, NoLabels.org
  12. Ravi Iyer and Matt Motyl, CivilPolitics.org
  13. Evelyn Messinger, Internews Interactive
  14. John Opdycke, IndependentVoting.org
  15. Michael Ostrolenk, transpartisan organizer and philosopher
  16. Pete Peterson, Pepperdine University’s Davenport Institute
  17. Amanda Kathryn Roman, The Citizens Campaign
  18. Michael Smith, United Americans
  19. Kim Spencer, Link TV and KCETLink
  20. Rich Tafel, The Public Squared
  21. Jeff Weissglass, Political Bridge Building Advocate

You are welcome to subscribe to the Transpartisan List if any of the following are true:

  • You are interested in learning more, and sharing what you know, about current efforts to transcend and transform unproductive partisan politics.
  • You want to meet potential colleagues who share your concern and are working to improve research, dialogue, deliberation, collaboration, and improved decision making across party lines.
  • You want to share what you (or your organization) do in this field that you consider “transpartisan” – conversations that break out of the narrow, predictable ideological exchanges.
  • You believe this subject is vital to our country’s future and simply want to learn more about how you might get involved.

If some or all of these statements apply to you, join the Transpartisan List by sending a blank email to transpartisan-subscribe-request@lists.thataway.org. Together, we can ask the questions that need to be asked about this challenging field, and seek the answers as a learning community.

As you may know, NCDD-sponsored listservs are moderated and embrace ground rules that have proven effective for our lists. Please follow the following guidelines if you choose to participate.

Transpartisan Listserv Guidelines

The following guidelines will help keep the list focused, manageable, and useful for subscribers. Please read these over before posting or replying to the list. The moderator may choose not to approve messages that break one or more of these ground rules.

  • Please refrain from over-posting (once per day maximum; 3-4 posts per week max). Aim for quality over quantity.
  • Identify yourself. Include your usual email signature (i.e. your name, organization, email address, where you’re from…) when you send a message to the list. This will help us get to know each other a little better and make it easier for people to connect with you.
  • Keep your messages relevant to transpartisan work. If it is not immediately apparent that your message is relevant to transpartisan work, explain in your message why you think it is relevant.
  • Please do not use this list as a forum for debating public policy issues. If you really want to delve into a specific social or policy issue with other members of the list, feel free to contact members individually via email or social networking sites.
  • This goes without saying, but please stay civil and treat other subscribers with respect. Model good dialogue behavior and refrain from name-calling, making unwarranted assumptions about people, and making sweeping statements about individuals or groups of people without backing them up with facts and data. If you’re unclear about why someone said something or thinks/feels a certain way, ask them. (Note: the moderator reserves the right to reject or ask you to reframe posts which seem overly confrontational towards another person on the list, since we are fostering a supportive, respectful space for leaders in transpartisan work.)
  • Direct your message to the subscribers of the list. If you forward an announcement or article, please offer some context. Emails with attachments/links and no explanation of what’s in the attachment/link will not be approved.
  • If your message is directed at one individual in particular, do not send your message to the entire list. If replying to an individual, click “Reply” instead of “Reply All.”
  • Please do not fundraise or send regular digital newsletters to the list.
  • If you ask the list for advice and get a variety of good responses on and off-list, consider taking the time to compile or summarize the responses and share them with the list. We’d greatly appreciate that!

Please note that this listserv has a daily digest option. If the list becomes busy and you’d prefer to receive no more than one message a day from the list, email NCDD office manager Joy Garman at joy@ncdd.org and let her know you’d like to be switched to the daily digest for the Transpartisan List. Joy can also remove you from the list or change your email address.

Subscribe by sending a blank email to transpartisan-subscribe-request@lists.thataway.org. Once you’re subscribed, use the email address transpartisan@lists.thataway.org to send a message to the list.

Song of a Citizen Video Essays & Interviews with D&D Leaders

Song Of A Citizen has produced a second series of dialogue and deliberation-related videos. The first was a series of Video Op-Eds with esteemed political philosophers, academics, and leaders of major deliberative democracy organizations (see the NCDD resource listing here). Those were filmed at various locations around the country between 2008 to 2010.

EricLiuVid-screenshotThe more recent series features Q&A interviews with key practitioners and other experts in the dialogue and deliberation community, filmed at the NCDD Conference in October 2012. Most of them are on the SoaC site, and all of them are on SoaC YouTube Channel.

Now that “Song Of A Citizen” has produced a wide range of interesting and informative videos with field leaders and experts, as of August 2013 they are seeking funding for new productions designed to resonate with the general public.

Making films and videos that reach and impact millions of people is actually SoaC founder Jeffrey Abelson’s strong suit, as witnessed by his 30 year background as a creative filmmaker, whose work ranges from prime time PBS documentaries to high profile MTV videos. More about that can be found at http://jeffreyabelson.com.

Video interviews on the Song of a Citizens site: http://songofacitizen.com/songofacitizen.com/Video_Q%26A.html

Song of a Citizen YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDlxTRB4Z8g&list=PLNmpXlQNJcSNo65iOeiSlBjxD16kZTBMY

Democracy Pays

The U.K.-based Democratic Society produced a white paper in association with Public-i Ltd., on how democratic engagement can help local government save money in a time of cuts.

Executive summary:

This is a time of fiscal pressure and service cuts. Councils are restructuring services and looking to cut back on non-essential areas of spending. Is democratic engagement one of those areas?

Aside from the moral argument for democratic engagement, there is evidence that investment in strong democratic participation is important if reformed local government approaches are to result in more efficient spending and better-targeted services.

The evidence of self-directed support and personalised budgets shows that involving citizens and users in service provision can produce better-tailored services that operate at lower overall cost.

Where councils need to cut expenditure, high-quality democratic engagement in the budget setting process can provide them with better information, while increasing participants’ opinion of the council.

In countries with a tradition of more participatory democracy, higher levels of participatory democracy correlate with more efficient services and greater willingness to pay tax.

Creating a single architecture for public consultation and engagement can also reduce the cost of duplication in consultation exercises.

If they can create an attractive offer on democratic engagement, councils should be able to realise benefits, because there is a large untapped market of people who want to get engaged in their local area, as well as broader reach and range for online democratic engagement tools.

Resource Link: www.demsoc.org/democracy-pays-white-paper-how-digital-engagement-can-save-councils-money/

Direct Download: http://www.demsoc.org/static/Financial-Case-white-paper.pdf