|Material organisation||Ideational organisation|
|1:Individuals care about the world, recognise the need for radical change.||7: Information from levels 1-6 informs, inspires individuals.
Individuals maintain their own online presence, blogging, tweeting, podcasting, making videos, being citizen reporters – mass resource available for use by higher-order ideational holons.
|2:a) They join into affinity groups with people they know and trust in their immediate community.
b) As affinity groups, they connect with online communities, trade information. They realise the possiblity that their own concerns might relate to those of all people. They begin to feel part of something bigger. [...]
|6: Online sub-groups, nodes, communities. Small enough for individuals to have a voice. Individuals cultivate cross-loyalties between physical and online affinity groups.
Webrings, hacktivist cells. Promoting individual production, ideas, through collective synergy; creating recognisable mini-nodes for the construction/influence of larger ideational movements.
|3:a) Affinity groups join together in larger local groups.
Some adopt the global brand - a local chapter of the Global Justice Movement - some are happier as 'Transition Town Harlow', or Greenpeace (Soweto), or The New Cross Hackerspace, or Cochabamba Water Liberation Front, or the Little Missingden Village Green Preservation Society. Individuals joining these larger groups have the opportunity to find a place in smaller component affinity groups. Local communities are strengthened. Real-world connections are made. Multiple local groups share some of the same individuals without competing for attention - it is all plugged back in to the same endeavour, after all. An organic marketplace of belonging at the local level. Localised actions: makerhoods, local currencies, transition plans, communal food production and CSAs.
b) The various local groups join together online to create a collective regional media hub, reporting on the actions of the local groups, and exchanging information, tactics, successes, stories with other regional hubs. Information is disseminated through the local group. A platform for influence on local government. At the same time, any individual is still, of course, free to interact directly with any other regional (or local, or national) media hub.
|5: Non-localised online groups create cluster identities, nodes for collective recognition, from which they publish ideas and information periodically, under their collective banner.
A world of unreadably infinite individual voices starts to look more like an ecosystem of numerable stable centres. Creative interaction with the localised real-world collectives. Global memes cross-fertilising with local realities.
|4:a) Local groups join together in regional groups;
or declare their interest in joining various rotating coalitions on different issues. The Avaaz model – general progressive consensus, but inform and allow opt-in or opt-out on any particular issue.
b) Regional groups connect online to national and international groupings and movements. Lower holons (individuals, affinity groups, local groups) retain the ability to interact with any other level online. The workload begins to increase! Who will control the regional hubs? Who has editorial control of the media? The need for organisational models, standardised interactive platforms, universal education in collective decision-making modalities begins to come to the fore.
|4:Open-source access to best-practice resources in: organisational models, standardised interactive platforms, universal education in collective decision-making modalities.
Bounded ideational ecosystems develop further internal sub-structure of different groups.
Special interest news/investigation/solidarity nodes.
|5:a) National groupings – political parties?
Crowd-funding businesses and organizations to roll out innovations, actions, technology, platforms. National media hubs to parse and highlight the most important developments, fed upwards from lower holons.
- Presumably all party / org / company decisions are ultimately crowd-sourced, but even with new technology, still a time-sink. Time to start crowd-funding our own newspapers and television, to report and investigate the external news we want to know about as well as covering internal correspondence, issues and debates from the movement; include selected news and editorial content from regional hubs to reinforce bottom-up / localised dynamics.
- Mass organisation = procedural metastasis. It's at this point that most people walk out of political organisation! How can we avoid this? The problem generally with online life [outdrift] – every new portal has its own procedures, passwords, demands the same information off you. Procedural homogeneity (at least for the basics) – how best to balance ongoing evolution of e.g. websites, GUIs, voting procedures, with the desire for stability and continuity? How much can we standardise things without losing flexibility, responsiveness?
- At this stage, we should start our own political parties. What usually stops people doing this? “There's no point”; the existing party machines have everything locked down. Everyone would vote for the LibDems (or would have done, pre-2010...) but only if they had any chance of winning, i.e. only if everyone else was definitely going to vote for them too - a lack of collective faith, or solidarity, or just ability to communicate. A new party would have even more trouble in this regard. Actually, its probably easier for us all to just join the LibDems en masse, overwhelm the existing members and convert the brand-recognisable party shell to our own policies...
- Policies created and critiqued and fine-tuned through the online connective collectivity. Wiki-consitutions suffer from the possiblity that a small group of people (that tech-savvy elite for whom the electronic world is as real as the material) will create it, and the rest accept it when presented as a fait accompli. But, in this model, there are existing channels for ongoing dissemination of information & stimulation to engagement through holarchic infrastructure of lower real-world groupings – people meeting in real-world groups to discuss, to be nudged to discuss - this could counter the problem?
b)National groups connect to wider realm of international discourse. Where to start? - Since other national groups are similarly chunked, we can start with their national media hubs, which are helpfully precis-ing events and issues in that country; interested in specifics? Go one level down to connect to their intra-country regional hubs. - Retake global academia. All those journals, all that output, why couldn't that energy and effort be plugged back in to a single purpose? To an extent, it already is. Many fine academics advising government select committees, making a difference. But knowing how much of their efforts are lost in the drag coefficient of governmental sclerosis. We are all seeking cognitive tensegrity! Reduce wastage, replication.
|3: Online movements continue to subdivide, proliferate, coalescing [around shared nationhood? language? belief?] as bounded ecosystems of highly recognisable ideational nodes.
Structure, procedures, tactics, funding of structural elements are informed and respond to the creative cross-fertilisation of individuals from within the country, and from wider online community beyond.
Online resources for organisational procedures, constitutions, online primers in the basics: reasons for democratic governance, civil liberties, environmentalism. Rebuttals to common canards. So simple a child can understand it, and stand up for it.
Open source technology. Self-empowering medical information. How-to guides on organic farming. Free education. NVC. Feminism 101. Anarchism 101. HEAPs / Critical Infrastructure Resilience Plans.
|6:a) Collective political alliances across international regions, e.g. Europe, Southern Africa: Solidarity and cooperation influencing national policies of governments, creating basis for genuine collective action at the state level. Cross-scrutiny and oversight between nations to block corruption and governmental suppression of truth. International people-owned and operated journalism.
b) Global regions have access to global co-owned media. Also internal regional discussion, information, e.g.“Article: Account of Internal Deutsch-region online congress on nuclear power. 'CSJ' and 'Hosenzeit' groups' proposals adopted.” Globally crowd-source funding for television, internet and print media to replace economically and politically compromised existing outlets. As in, everyone who would like to read a more radical, reality-connected version of the Guardian without the weak-willed obeisence to the celebrity/lifestyle/consumption features model, raise your hands now. If we own it, we can collectively vote on its editorial policy. Holarchic, as with internal geo-regional sub-groups; multiple outlets, i.e. not Pravda; still an internal market of attention and interest. Rule of 3. Reputational currency: “Anarcho-Euro News”, “GreenMedia.org”, “Christian Socialist Times (European Edition).” Cross-fertilisation of material blocs and ideational blocs to produce specific clusterings of interest, policy, intent.
|2: Online idea-space is territorialised
by different movements, banners – ideological ferment feeds in to political / tactical debate at any level. An ecosystem of multiple Grand International Ideational Movements.
Global ideational groupings inform, critique, vivify geo-regional blocs' positions and policies. International consensus on e.g. rights of the child feeds down to local level, overcoming engrained unthinking localised cultural dysfunctions. Increasing awareness of global and transregional trends, ideas, concerns, tactics, visions.
Online ideational ecosystem develops distinct geo-regional sub-spaces, issues, conversations, vocabularies, influencing:
- the politics of geo-regional groups, by increasing awareness of global and transregional trends, ideas etc.
- the selective crowd-funding and ongoing resourcing of mass-owned media. Non-localised internal discussion helps develop geo-regional consensus: As a collection of 100s of millions of individuals, wouldn't really work. But what of an internal holarchic architecture of discourse?
[“Today on Europenet - Your collective online forum for European progressive politics: “Level 1 report: Following recent developments in Latin America, Europe GJM debates commitment to Ecuadorian Rights of Earth legislation. Green-bloc suggests adoption, Anti-Hunger-bloc and European Knights of Justice agree, Societe de la Vie says some details may be problematic. Click here for details. “Level 2 report: How and why Green-bloc sub-groups 'Red Greens' and 'Treehuggers' finally agreed to support Ecuadorian proposal. Video; click here.” “Level 3 report: Account of internal dissension within 'Treehuggers' sub-group – some claimed Ecuadorian bill of rights didn't go far enough.” “Plus our special report on the new techno-democratic innovations the 'Treehuggers' developed and used in coming to an agreement.”]
|7:a) Top-tier organisation:
“The Global Justice Movement”. Lower levels of holarchic organisation give genuine potential for collective intent, cooperation, interaction.
b)Global media platform. Likely more of an aggregate of national media content. Rotating regional editorial policy. Relatively stable platform – global triannual(?) votes on media platform governance and policy. Informed by ongoing holarchic discourse of different levels of media hubs. Or specialist outrider 'grey' media channel for discussion of meta-issues regarding holarchic media governance and structure?
|1: A Global Conversation:
“The Global Justice Movement”. Humanity becomes conscious of itself.
- A space to report on the fact of the GJM.
- Broadcasting basic reinforcement of our ethical roots: tolerance, truth, freedom, solidarity, ecology.
- Restating the situation we find ourselves in: ecological crisis, peak resources, hunger, poverty, war, population increase, gender/race/religious/sexual animosity. (holotext: sub-levels of further resources).
- Disseminating the best innovations, trends, leading-edge ideas and inventions from around the world.
A global wiki containing: Integrated theory of Global Justice. Evolving, holarchic account of thinking and plans; from top level of simple statement of values down through all the details, sublevels mapping the arguments and resolutions and reasons for decisions. So any child in the world with access to the internet can understand, argue, contribute. State in a box. Open source constitutional and adminstrative packages ready to replace any power vacuums in they instant they arise. Nested information on how and why it was designed the way it was, to better enable location-specific customisation. Show the Code. Universal education. Humanities, technology, sciences, food production, healthcare, comparative religion, open-source meditation.