> Thing is, I recall Zack's first posts regarding this "vision" on the
> coffeehouse list. He was carrying on about decentralized organic
> networks and reeds law and so forth... I could hear the eyes roll.
> But he got my attention because I see the cosmos as an "organic",
> adaptive, interconnected thing. A complex open self-organizing system
> so to speak. And
> the thing about open systems is that you start with some very
> simple ground
> rules and then you get out of the way. It'll make it's own rules from
> then on and if you try constrain it with boxes, or walls or straight
> lines it'll
> either overwhelm you or it'll die. But what it won't be is the same.

As Zack and I have already discussed, I've been carrying a similar vision
for a while. I've thought about it enough by now to realize that we get
there, not with something overnight/revolutionary, but with small steps.
Yes, in helping Dean we have to adapt to the practical issues of a
transitional campaign (i.e. transitional between traditional politics and
our stake in something more like the "emergent democracy" that Joi et al
have been trying to describe and work through). So I say we do what we have
to for Dean, and that might mean compromises, but we also think about a more
(inherently) independent set of initiatives as well, which can be spun off
from the same vision. There are already some other initiatives where these
kinds of tools would be a good fit, but first things first?

best,
Jon

Reply via email to