December 03, 2013

Implementing a Weigh for Hope

   Sometimes, the depth of analysis can be remarkable, yet the author still manages to miss the point completely.  Henry A. Giroux of Truthout recited the ills of society in yesterday's essay  'Hope in the Looming Age of Authoritarianism'.  Even though the article is long, he points out many of the uberdestructive tendencies that our current putsch has produced.  Some lines are very insightful.

   There is more at stake here than saying no, making power visible and recognizing that our individual and collective experiences are not dictated by fate. There is also the challenge of confronting the actual with the possible, of pulling hope down to earth, of making sure that the possibilities we engage with address real problems and concrete expressions of domination and power. In addition, there is the need to translate our theoretical concerns into public action, lift up the level of discourse to connect our civic institutions and public spheres to the dynamics of everyday life and give worldly expression to critical work and necessary social change. Without the ability to see how each of our lives is related to the greater good, we lack the basis for recognizing ourselves as bearers of rights and responsibilities - the precondition of our being human - who can assume the task of governance instead of simply being governed. We lack the basis for raising questions about the goals and aims of our society and what we want our society as a whole to accomplish, especially in the context of the challenge of creating a global democracy. In short, we lack what makes a democratic politics viable.

    Giroux then procedes to attempt to solve the problem in the same space that it was created.  He calls schools a failure and then calls for more freedom for teachers - instead of discharging the thought of schools altogether and coming up with something different.  It seems like he calls for the group to assume a new hydra type head using the same hydra body form.  The idea of common thought has to be lowered to contain something less than 300 million people.

   He also takes the current political system "democracy" for granted.  I was taught that we lived in a republic - but this failed government system has to be tossed, not revised with a new set of leadership.  I would suggest that the preference for bigger, better, best be tossed completely - American nation states should be physically no larger than European nation states.  All services should be under local control and all over-structure bets should be completely off.

   Imagine if you will, a society where travel is local only - where all goods and services are locally produced and where you know all the people that are part of the population in your area.  Every representative in politics must have the physical proxy of every person they represent and the scale of the bodies is truly representative of the people.  I can think of at least ten weighs to do this and that is without applying any real thought.

   The trick is to be prepared to accept changes and roll with the best of what is available.  Evaluate your preparations, your infantry, the people that do things and the people that see that things get done.  Reevaluate the relative worth of all roles and decide collectively how to best support the group effort - at the scale of the very small first, then growing sequentially in Fibonacci units.  The borders of level are equalized as the collectives get larger - yet the balance is maintained naturally for both growth and shrinkage.  Size has no relation to value, unless you measure it that weigh.

   I can see the discussion evolving - as doc heads into travel mode.  Fewer postings, maybe more depth.  Always entertaining to zone howdt.   Namaste' ... doc

No comments: