[p2p-research] excellent contribution on flow money by Martien van Steenbergen

[Martien van Steenbergen]

Ryan,

On 27 May 2009, at 22:39 , Ryan Lanham wrote:

> Martien:
>
> No system should be advanced, in my opinion, that in any way alters  
> fundamental human rights such as those of a persons to have self- 
> determination, to advance their standard of living, and so forth.   
> The items in the International Declaration of Human Rights http://www.worldinbalance.net/agreements/1948-udhr.html 
>  are the basis for any radical political and social change in that  
> they should not be sacrificed and should ideally be continually  
> reaffirmed.

I fully agree and concur with this.

I am a bit surprised by your reactions. What have I said or done that  
you bring these points up? Please share your concerns or worries, so  
we can better understand each other.

My impression is that we are on the same wavelength, but that I've  
said something that nudged the frequencies a bit. Need to harmonize  
again.

> I hope you will flesh out your ideas on holarchy so that they can be  
> considered.

Please see http://www.holacracy.org/system/files/HolacracyIntro2007-06.pdf

Brian Robertson coined the term. He's an agile software guy who joined  
sociocracy and agilism at the hip. Since that is one of my backgrounds  
too, and because it resonates with me, I embraced it. It's just a nice  
combination of a number of succesful practices to evolve, dynamically  
steer, and organize a group of people. It culminates many of the  
practices that make the open source and internet developmenst so  
succesful. They focus mainly on business. TMO Holacracy (or elements  
from it) can be used at any scale organization.

But, please, I invite you to read the white paper and share your  
thoughts.

> Agilism worries me.  Speed and governance generally don't combine to  
> good effect in my experience.  Agilism as it is often used in  
> management theory (technocrats use the term) is criticized for being  
> elitist...a fault given to all technocracy.

I'd say, don't worry, be happy. Agilism's key things are courage,  
communication, simplicity, and feedback. Together: embrace change. In  
fact, everyone and every organization, and politics too, has to  
embrace and is embracing change. Agilism is a pattern language of  
proven practices to deal with that. To change the changes if you will.

Agilism is not a goal. It's just a very practical way to do things, to  
make progress while proactively and reactively absorbing meaningful  
external and internal impulses.

The speed is more in the capability to steer than in the speed of the  
car. You determine the car's speed. And the car stays nimble. It is,  
in fact, just like driving a car. Fixing the steering wheel will not  
get you at your goal. You have to continuously steer in order to make  
it there, fast enough and safe. And when you get there, you're in the  
right place (which often differs from the goal you had at the start of  
the journey).

Anyway, I'm just a big fan of many of the proven practices (patterns,  
pearls) of agilism an so. Oragnizations are picking these pearls up,  
too.

> One of the powers of democracy is that it assures an equal voice for  
> humans in basic expressions of public will.  I would hate to see any  
> system put forward that limits the voice of individuals or that  
> rewards the loudest, most active, most involved, most technical,  
> etc.  People have a justifiable suspicious of "vanguards" of anything.

I very much agree. That's one of the reasons I'm fond of sociocracy.  
Decisions there are made on the basis of consent (quite different than  
consensus). So, if someone proposes an idea, it is accepted unless  
there are grounded objections. If there are, each of these objections  
is addressed and reworked into a evolved proposal until no more  
objections exist.

The thumb protocol gives everyone a very simple voice: proposal  
accepted if at least one thumb up and none down.

Sometimes, the group cannot make a decision and progress slows down as  
a result. In that case, a benevolent dictator, elected by the  
community on the basis of trust, then makes the choice.

This way, solutions that are waiting to emerge, that want to emerge  
enyway, are facilitated to surface. And everyone has a voice. Very  
democratic indeed.

Holacracy includes and transcends democracy and sociocracy.

BTW, Sociocracy is more on the way a holarchy is organised. Please see  
whitepaper.

> Fundamentally the issue centers around eudaemonics.  If people (a  
> large number / majority) are willing to follow a plan because it  
> continues to make them more happy or because it can be shown in some  
> logical and open way to create happiness, I am for that plan.

Sure. One if the values is openness. The other thing is that it is an  
collaborative process. So, the plan is a result of the holacratic  
processes, made by, for, and with all stakeholders.

> But there are notorious problems with your ethics and my life  
> implementations.

I'm confused here. Don't understand what you say. Please elaborate.

>   In the end, people must choose.  Any systemic change where people  
> did not have a voice or the opportunity to raise a voice in protest/ 
> organization/legal rights, etc. cannot be considered an advancement.

Agree fully. Please see above. It is a fully collaborative people- 
oriented thing. As opposed to many current cracies.

> I would think some sort of simulation environment like Second Life  
> or another virtual or even systems-based environment would be the  
> best means of beginning to test whether your approach makes people  
> happy.

How did you get to know my dreams? Scary :-)

This is exactly what I'd like to see happen, yes.

Again, Ryan, please share your thoughts and concerns so we can better  
understand each other. Email is sometimes a very lousy medium and poor  
communication channel. I get the impression that I've put you on the  
wrong leg by the way I communicate. Curious.

Succes en plezier,

Martien.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090528/0772fb3b/attachment-0001.html>