Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rob Wheeler on November 13, 2011 at 10:39am

Robert, 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and this important resource re Sacred Economics with us. While this may be one of the most important, I doub that it is The only paradigm-shifting alternative economics. For example, Margrit Kennedy has written a lot about both interest free economic systems and basing the monetary system on a basket of basic goods, etc. which would profoundly shift our current economic system and the paradigms on which it is currently based. 

Similarly, there is a great proposal for how we can create a global alternative currency and new economic system based on Gradidos and VitaMoney that I would suggest we all check out, support, and use. It would not only create a new paradigm but support the transition that is needed to a fully sustainable and earth respectful society. See: http://gradido.net/en/Academy

Would love to see what you think about it once any of you have read how the VitaMoney transition plan works.

Rob Wheeler

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicole Smith on November 13, 2011 at 10:48am

If on a wide scale we actually could learn to work by consensus that would be a tremendous contribution to the world.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Riversong on November 13, 2011 at 2:12pm

The consensus process - at least as developed and taught by Quakers in both their spiritual meetings and in the non-violent movement-building work of A Quaker Action Group that later became the Movement for a New Society (MNS) - is almost universally misunderstood and hence abused.

It was designed primarily for small groups of people who shared core values, but it's been adapted and successfully applied to larger and somewhat more diverse groups and movements as well.

MNS trained the Clamshell Alliance organizers in consensus, who in turn shared it with the anti-nuclear power movement that they seeded. In 1978 at Seabrook, we successfully used the consensus process, though a concentric series of circles with spokes that radiated from the individual affinity groups up through a coordinating committee, to come to a very challenging group decision among 6,000 people in two days.

The difficulty in using the consensus model is two-fold. It works best in small, intimate groups with strongly-shared values and visions; and it requires that we "check our egos at the door" and act for the highest good of the group rather than pushing our own ideas. 

It does not, as too many people believe, allow one person to "block" the consensus of the group; but strong objections are taken very seriously by the group (since the prophetic voice is often the lonely one), which seeks the third way between two apparently conflicting paths. If the impasse reveals that the objector does not, in fact, share the group's values and visions, then it results in that person voluntarily leaving the group - otherwise, if the objection is merely strategic, that person can choose to stand aside and allow the group to proceed. But these options require a degree of egolessness that few of us moderns can achieve.

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicole Smith on November 13, 2011 at 2:39pm

Robert, agreed, the block especially is difficult to negotiate and achieving egolessness... well, a challenge to say the least.

Thanks for sharing, that was very helpful, may I crosspost?

Nicole

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Riversong on November 14, 2011 at 12:27am

"may I crosspost?"

Is that like cross-dressing? Sure ;-)

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nicole Smith on November 14, 2011 at 10:24am

Thanks :) I will share it on my Facebook!

Nicole

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Horvitz on November 13, 2011 at 4:06pm

The national InterOccupy deliberative process is evolving into this very topic.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob Wheeler on November 13, 2011 at 11:41am

Paul and friends,

Thank you for starting this very important discussion. A number of efforts are underway to try to come up with and support proactive campaigns and collaborative actions within the Occupy Movement; but the efforts are still somewhat disjointed, overlapping, and unintentionally somewhat competing. We could probably do a great service to the movement if we can catalog, list, and provide some means to support the movement in taking more collaborative and collective action on key "demands" or solutions ie Educational Advocacy Action Campaigns. 

I totally support your suggestions for the types of Solutions that could be supported. I also find the discussion on this forum thread so far to be pretty enlightened and valuable. Thanks everyone for your contributions. I would like to see if we can make use of Occupy Cafe to help the Movement unify somehow around key actions and solutions - of which there are many. 

In fact here is an effort that has drawn 10s of thousands of people to contribute to developing and voting on a generally supported occupy platform: 

http://coupmedia.org/occupywallstreet/occupy-wall-street-official-d...

 

An occupier named Andy Rose is also working on A Proposal Of A Process For Inter Occupy Consensus

http://groups.google.com/group/nationalfacilitationtest1?pli=1

and: http://groups.google.com/group/nationalfacilitationtest1/browse_thr...

 

And there is another proposal for a Superassembly hybrid model linking the use of the internet and conference calling: 

http://plntry.net/adv/adv_001.htm 

 

I am also attaching or uploading an article I wrote some years ago entitled, "Establishing a Participatory Model of World Democracy or Global Governance, which describes a model for participatory approaches to shared decision making combining the General Assembly model and processes with other civil society organizing. 

So, I think that there are processes available if we do want to take more effective action as a unified and collaborative movement. Thanks again everyone,

Rob

Attachments:

• Wheeler_Participatory WP.doc, 76 KB

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page