Hello I would like to make the following comments on recent emails:
1. Regarding Birgitt's exploration of democracy, I always defined it as "majority rule but minority rights protected." While OST clearly operates on many levels, the most fundamental one is participatory democracy. Participation leads to commitment and ownership, because it involves free will, people organise their own agenda and work where they want to go. People are disenchanted with representatives democracy, because it is too distant from the people. Worse yet there is a massive layer between the government and governed - the bureaucracy. Democracy is in crisis and needs to reinvent itself by promoting public involvement on a large scale. 2. Regarding Michael's "why vote," we were asked by the sponsor to seek priorities from four minority communities - Asian, Affrican & Carribean, Chinese and Asylum Seekers and Refugees. If we had the luxury of 2.5 days for people to work out detailed actions plans, of course we wouldn't need to vote. But all our events are one day or less and closure is needed to create a programme for post event implementation. On the other hand, we are moving towards consolidation, especially in large events. For example, the 31 May event on young people focused on schools and education, because most of the priorities were voted that way. It is immaterial if the top priority gets implemented or not, there might be several reasons why that is the case. What matters is that some outcomes go somewhere if they have the energy and support. But that's up to the Community, not us. We may want to see actions, because it values the event and our work, but that's not within our ken. 3. Regarding Peggy's remarks about voting and consensus, why bring people together if they can't exchange ideas and reach consensus about going forward to create a better future. People have to find each other and learn to work together. Not everyone has a paradigm shift, but most people recognise OST is a different way of working and appreciate it, because it enshrines values of equal participation and, yes, even one person one vote. I have seen incredible energy and movement in a six hour event with 60% or more participants signing up to implement priorities. There is nothing wrong with that. In fact, it's wonderful! 4. Regarding Judi's comment on voting, we find that energy rises when people get to the wall and vote. There is a big buzz and it neatly finishes the business of the day, setting up the closing ceremony. I believe voting is very appropriate in short events and acts as a positive bridge back to the organization, not a return to tired old ways. Regards Kerry Open Futures Edinburgh * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected], Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
