The new forms appear all around us all the time. They bubble in and out of existence, and once in a while something takes hold and gets more and more concrete. There is nothing particularly destined about something like democracy - it just became the experiment that got a significant boost from power and mass at the right times. And of course it is practiced in many forms, none of which should ever be thought of as permanent.
Open Space (by which I mean the unbounded field of self organizing potential that is always around us) is the primordial ooze that provides the conditions for the birth of new structures. The methodology we all love so much is a formal expression of this ooze, deployed for useful strategic purposes. But it is only in the Open Space of everyday living that the real organizational forms arise and take shape. And for every single one that becomes standard practice, there are millions that die as unrealized ideas. Sometimes these ideas return as the time becomes right, sometimes they are lost to human memory. All governance is and will continue to be emergent. We can be fooled by the planning that goes into what it takes to concretize a over nance system, but we should never forget - with great hope - the kind of dynamics that allows such systems o emerge in the first place. Yay! Chris --- CHRIS CORRIGAN http://www.chriscorrigan.com +1 604 947 9236 On 2012-05-19, at 8:46 AM, Harrison Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Several days ago I had the unique pleasure of joining our friends and > colleagues (by Skype) in the Ukraine for their OSONOS. Given the state of the > Ukraine, to say nothing of the state of the world, the conversation > eventually got around to the subject of Leadership and Governance – and how > could all that work. That conversation seemed to meld seamlessly with one I > had had with a new friend here in the USA… Leadership and Governance. And > mixed in was a new thought (for me) all about Emergent Governance. As I said > to my US friend… > > You started me thinking – which ordinarily is a dangerous thing. I can’t > quite pin down the logical trail, but that is not surprising because I > usually find myself thinking in circles. But one point along the way was a > conversation I was engaged in yesterday. There is an interest group which has > monthly luncheons at my club with the vaporous name of “The Human Values > Group.” In truth we talk about whatever pleases and may or may not have > value. Anyhow the conversation yesterday drifted to a consideration of > various political forms. It seems that some of our members had just returned > from Cuba, so that was the start. Then we got on to dictatorships of various > sorts ranging from China to Singapore… and shortly we were arguing about the > “goods and the bads” – which quickly morphed into ideologies/political > systems, and you know where that one could go. > > As the folks headed into the stratosphere of abstraction – I found myself > thinking, wondering might be better – Has anybody ever done a natural history > of governance? Rousseau pops to mind, but he always seemed to me pretty > idealistic, and just as doctrinaire as anybody. For sure we have certainly > done histories of governance, tracing our way back from the present to > whenever. But how about the reverse? Two folks get together, Adam and Eve for > example. Relationships form and certain modes of behavior seem to work, > others don’t. It is not a function of laws, and certainly not legislation or > “idealized models.” Just very practical – and more to the point a natural > expression of that fundamental relationship which to the extent that it is > ever verbalized might be something like --- the way we do things around here. > Well that might be the beginning of a story, but before I got too far with > that one, my mind jumped. > > To Open Space. Funny thing. We have opened space 100,000’s of times in > multiple cultures, and the behaviors are almost identical (except for > superficials like language, dress, etc). And nobody ever specified the rules. > The Principles don’t count, and yes we do announce the Law of Two Feet – but > all of that is simply to acknowledge what will happen anyhow. So could we be > looking at emergent governance? We are definitely looking at the process of > self organization (I think). Could that be the root of governance? > > Big jump – here’s a thought. Rather than thinking about (working on, > creating) models of governance (autocratic, democratic, plutocratic, > sociocratic…whatever) which are then promulgated (you wrote a book, so did > Karl M.), and if implemented are almost inevitably laid on from the top > (wherever the top isJ)… how about starting at the bottom/beginning and see > what grows naturally? Emergent Governance! > > It would perhaps become necessary to clean things up a bit, regularize it, so > to speak – but that should be done, I suggest, all under the rubric of > finding the minimal level of structure necessary to sustain life. But all > that could only be done after the fact…of emergence. > > Just Thinking… > > Harrison > > > > Harrison Owen > 7808 River Falls Dr. > Potomac, MD 20854 > USA > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > Camden, Maine 20854 > > Phone 301-365-2093 > (summer) 207-763-3261 > > www.openspaceworld.com > www.ho-image.com (Personal Website) > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST > Go to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org > > _______________________________________________ > OSList mailing list > To post send emails to [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: > http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
_______________________________________________ OSList mailing list To post send emails to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
