The number of Homo Sapiens on the planet, that is a finity. The number of countries on the planet, that is a finity. Among those countries, it is not exactly rocket science to identify countries that are not democracies. In democracies the people are the only source of state power - a truth validated in periodic elections - and human rights are respected and protected.
We start out by compiling a list of the target countries. That list will be sophisticated in that there will be a spectrum. Some autocracies are worse than others. And we identify individuals and groups in and from those countries that are working to establish democracy in their respective countries. I would bet each country has them, some small, some large, some more effective than others, but they are there. And we also need to bring together individuals and groups who are from other countries and would like to help the cause of spreading democracy. We need to bring all of them online and organize them into a blogalaxy.
A blog is one star. A blogalaxy is many stars. A blogalaxy has many individual and group blogs all interlinked to each other. There are three basic components to power for any democracy movement: money, message, organization. Blogs are great ways to marshall all three. Blogs also make possible politics at the speed of thought. You end up with armchair revolutionaries. One country group could learn from another, there would be much cross pollination in terms of learning strategies, techniques, message honing. Each country group will feel this enormous moral support. The blogalaxy would not be a registered organization, just a communication tool that positively impacts all three power tools, although there might be many registered organizations that are part of it.
The transparency of the blogalaxy will also make sure there is accountability on money matters. All book keeping would be online. This is key.
Chances are most people not living in democracies are poor, they do not have internet access, they are possibly illiterate. But internet access is more wide than we might believe. Nepal is one of the poorest countries on the planet, and it has internet access in all the towns, in most middle class homes in the capital city. Getting an email account is not that hard to do. But then not everyone has to come online, not everyone has to blog. There might be language barriers online. This is where Mary Joyce' concept of "bridge activists" comes into play. People and groups who can not, do not come online have access to "bridge activists" who are online and connected, inside and outside the country.
But then we also are trying to create a functional, egalitarian bridge between people and groups in those countries, and their diaspora in countries that are democracies. The diaspora might have the money, the internet access, and they might be so widely dispersed across the globe and in their adopted countries that the internet might be the only way to truly organize masses of them. It is so easy to organize discussions and fundraising online, point and click, point and click. And netizens do not face the traditional political and geographical barriers. Also the artificial barrier between academia and the "real world" goes out the window.
Then you have countries like China that seem to be able to manage even the internet, and they manage to bulley major league companies like Microsoft and Google and Yahoo to their nefarious designs. For them we would have the boundary concept. As in, we apply the open concepts for all organizing outside the boundary. If that organizing is fierce enough, and the temperature is raised, ultimately the boundary will melt. And we go in. In the mean time, we have clandestine concepts for inside the boundary. This might also apply to many other countries.
The appropriate mix of the open and the clandestine will depend on where a particular non-democracy is on our spectrum. Even people from those countries in the diaspora might prefer to work clandestine for fear of reprisals against those working inside the boundary. Individuals make their choice, if to work openly or in clandestine fashions. The online world is designed for clandestine work.
I think we are going to see a lot of tools emerge online for both open and clandestine work, and for all three components of money, message and organization. Cross pollination will speed up the process of tool generation and sharing.
In my model, most of the money is raised and spent by the respective diaspora organizations. For Nepal, for example, you are looking mostly at Nepalis abroad, and to some extent friends of Nepal.
The message. We have to get all the news out. We also have to report of all human rights abuses. People in the network who might get targeted by the state should feel the entire network knows when something happens to them. We have to engage the opponents of democracy in debate. When direct debates might not be possible, we go for indirect debates. We take on their publicly available words. We have to throw sunshine on all their arguments, and we have to counterargue. We have to have rapid response mechanisms.
Organization. We have to build political parties where they do not exist. We have to nurture and protect them where they exist. We have to create organizations and umbrella organizations among the diaspora. Right to peaceful assembly is just like the right to free speech, a fundamental human right. People should organize as they see fit. We should just help in the coordination part.
Once we have this basic infrastructure in place, we could really change gears. We could hope to "invade" countries. The goal would be to wage this one massive, decisive street demonstration like in Ukraine in 2004, which would culminate in either the autocratic regime stepping down, or the democracy movement unilaterally declaring the formation of an interim government to be recognized by the entire family of democracies. (5 Steps To Democracy) The interim government would be charged with organizing elections to a constituent assembly that would give the country a democratic constitution.
Once in power, the democrats should have the option to punish those elements who might have been repressive towards the democracy activists. Only that public knowledge beforehand might embolden the democracy activisits, and scare the autocrats in power to minimize untoward incidents. International laws can come into play, so can country tribunals.
Mary Joyce
Money, Message, Organization
Visitors
| 07:15 | Internet Thailand Co. Ltd., Thailand |
| 08:04 | Nepal (wlink.com.np) |
| 08:28 | PCCW IMS Netvigator, China |
| 08:47 | Energis Communications Ltd., United Kingdom |
| 09:51 | University of Missouri, Columbia, United States |
| 10:13 | Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany |
| 11:47 | National Internet Backbone, India |
| 14:35 | Smart Telecom Holdings, Ireland |
| 14:41 | Eastern Illinois University, Charleston, United States |
| 14:42 | Internet Qatar, Qatar |
| 15:19 | Canada (mountain-inter.net) |
| 15:22 | Road Runner, New York, United States |
| 16:19 | Verizon Wireless, United States |
Draft II, after feeback from Mary Joyce
The number of Homo Sapiens on the planet is finite. The number of countries on the planet is finite. Among those countries it is not exactly rocket science to identify countries that are not democracies. In a democracy citizens have ultimate control over the policies and actions of their government. We look at the list of non-democracies and lay them out along a spctrum: some autocracies are worse than others.
And we work to identify individuals and groups in and from those countries that are working to establish democracy in their respective countries, although the worse the autocracy, the harder the task. Each country has them, some small, some large, some more effective than others, but they are there. And we also need to bring together individuals and groups who are from other countries and would like to help the cause of spreading democracy. We need to help bring together the bridge activists of both the online and offline kinds. And the whole effort should be to enhance the ecosystem rather than to invent something new. Efforts have been made before we came along. We just hope to add to the effectiveness.
The blogalaxy concept can help. A blog is one star. A blogalaxy is many stars. A blogalaxy has many individual and group blogs all interlinked to each other. There are three basic components to power for any democracy movement: money, message, organization. Blogs are great ways to marshall all three. Blogs also make possible politics at the speed of thought. You end up with armchair revolutionaries. One country group could learn from another, there would be much cross pollination in terms of learning strategies, techniques, message honing. Each country group will feel this enormous moral support. The blogalaxy would not be a registered organization, just a communication tool that positively impacts all three power tools, although there might be many registered organizations that are part of it. The blogalaxy will be in the background. Screen time will always be secondary to face time. The most difficult work will be done in the organizing among those that might not even be online. An international digital democracy network will be more like an extensive, sophisticated support system than anything else, something important, but in the background.
The transparency of the blogalaxy will also make sure there is accountability on money matters. All book keeping would be online. This is key.
Chances are most people not living in democracies are poor, they do not have internet access, they are possibly illiterate. But internet access is more wide than we might believe. Nepal is one of the poorest countries on the planet, and it has internet access in all the towns, in most middle class homes in the capital city. Getting an email account is not that hard to do. But then not everyone has to come online, not everyone has to blog. There might be language barriers online. This is where Mary Joyce' concept of "bridge activists" comes into play. People and groups who can not, do not come online have access to "bridge activists" who are online and connected, inside and outside the country. These bridge activists act as a bridge between the international digital democracy network and the local activists.
But then we also are trying to create a functional, egalitarian bridge between people and groups in those countries, and their diaspora in countries that are democracies. The diaspora might have the money and the internet access, and they might be so widely dispersed across the globe and in their adopted countries that the internet might be the only way to truly organize masses of them. It is so easy to organize discussions and fundraising online, point and click, point and click. And netizens do not face the traditional political and geographical barriers. Also the artificial barrier between academia and the "real world" goes out the window. As does the colonial term "brain drain." The two megatrends of globalization and the internet mean expats can digitally play an active role in the political life of their home countries.
Then you have countries like China that seem to be able to manage even the internet, and they manage to bully major league companies like Microsoft and Google and Yahoo to their nefarious designs. For them, we would have the "boundary concept". As in, we apply the open concepts for all organizing outside the boundary. If that organizing is fierce enough, and the temperature is raised, ultimately the boundary will melt. And we go in. In the mean time, we have clandestine concepts for inside the boundary. This might also apply to many other countries.
The appropriate mix of the open and the clandestine will depend on where a particular non-democracy is on our spectrum. Even people from those countries in the diaspora might prefer to work clandestinely for fear of reprisals against their collaborators, who might be working inside the boundary. Individuals make their choice, as to whether to work openly or in a clandestine fashion. The nature of the online world facilitates clandestine work.
I think we are going to see a lot of tools emerge online for both open and clandestine work, and for all three components of money, message and organization. Cross pollination will speed up the process of tool generation and sharing.
In my model, most of the money is raised and spent by the respective diaspora organizations. For Nepal, for example, you are looking mostly at Nepalis abroad, and to some extent friends of Nepal.
The message. We have to get all the news out. We also have to report of all human rights abuses. People in the network who might get targeted by the state should feel the entire network knows when something happens to them. We do not replicate the Amnesty International, the Human Rights Watch, and the Committee To Protect Bloggers efforts, but we do act as a magaphone. We make some serious noise. We have to engage the opponents of democracy in debate. When direct debates might not be possible, we go for indirect debates. We challenge whatever public statements might be available. We have to draw attention to their weak or fraudulent arguments, and then we have to counterargue. We have to have rapid response mechanisms. As soon as they say something, we respond immediately. They should feel surrounded.
Organization. We have to help build political parties where they do not exist. It is not possible to imagine democracies without political parties. We have to nurture and protect them where they do exist. We have to create organizations and umbrella organizations among the diaspora. Right to peaceful assembly is just like the right to free speech, a fundamental human right. People should organize as they see fit. We would not direct how people organize, rather facilitate their organizational activities by helping get the word out.
Once we have this basic infrastructure in place, we could really change gears. We could hope to introduce democracy into countries at rather rapid rates. The goal would be to wage this one massive, decisive street demonstration like in Ukraine in 2004, which would culminate in either the autocratic regime stepping down, or the democracy movement unilaterally declaring the formation of an interim government to be recognized by the entire family of democracies. (5 Steps To Democracy) The interim government would be charged with organizing elections to a constituent assembly that would give the country a democratic constitution.
Once in power, the democrats should have the option to bring to justice those elements that might have been repressive towards the democracy activists.Only if that knowledge is public beforehand might democracy activists be emboldened to act, and autocrats in power wary to openly persecute them. International laws can come into play, so can country tribunals.
Freedom is a birthright. It is sad some people don't have it. Those who don't have it deserve it, and those of us who are free are not truly free until all of us are free across the globe. Democracy will be born and will grow in each country in slightly unique ways, but there is no arguing with the fundamentals of democracy. Those are universal. 
February 13, 2006
Draft III
Global Democracy: The Future Is Now
The number of Homo Sapiens on the planet is finite. The number of countries on the planet is finite. Among those countries it is not exactly rocket science to identify countries that are not democracies. In a democracy citizens have ultimate control over the policies and actions of their government.
We look at the list of non-democracies and lay them out along a spctrum: some autocracies are worse than others. And we work to identify individuals and groups in and from those countries that are working to establish democracy in their respective countries. Each country has them, some small, some large, some more effective than others, but they are there, although the worse the autocracy, the harder the task, less vibrant that activist community might be.
We also need to bring together individuals and groups who are from other countries and would like to help the cause of spreading democracy. We need to help bring together the bridge activists of both the online and offline kinds. And the whole effort should be to enhance the ecosystem rather than to invent something new. Efforts have been made before we came along. We just hope to add to the effectiveness. The blogalaxy concept can help. A blog is one star. A blogalaxy is many stars. A blogalaxy has many individual and group blogs all interlinked to each other. There are three basic components to power for any democracy movement: money, message, organization. Blogs are great ways to marshall all three. Blogs also make possible politics at the speed of thought, blogs empower the individual. You end up with armchair revolutionaries. One country group could learn from another, there would be much cross pollination in terms of learning strategies, techniques, message honing. Each country group will feel this enormous moral support. The blogalaxy would not be a registered organization, just a communication tool that positively impacts all three power tools, although there might be many registered organizations that are part of it.
The blogalaxy will be in the background. Screen time will always be secondary to face time. The most difficult work will be done in the organizing among those that might not even be online. An international digital democracy network will be more like an extensive, sophisticated support system than anything else, something important, but in the background.
Chances are most people not living in democracies are poor, they do not have internet access, they are possibly illiterate. But internet access is more wide than is widely believed. Getting an email account is not that hard to do in most town on the planet. But then not everyone has to come online, not everyone has to blog. There might be language barriers online. This is where bridge activists comes into play. People and groups who can not, do not come online have access to bridge activists who are online and connected, inside and outside the country. These bridge activists act as a bridge between the international digital democracy network and the local activists.
But then we also are trying to create functional, effective, egalitarian bridges between people and groups in the countries without democracy, and their diaspora in countries that are democracies. The diaspora might have the money and the internet access and the intimate knowledge of the local conditions. And they might be so widely dispersed across the globe and in their adopted countries that the internet might be the only way to truly organize masses of them. It is so easy to organize discussions and fundraising online, point and click, point and click. Netizens do not face the traditional political and geographical barriers. Also the artificial barrier between academia and the "real world" goes out the window. As does the colonial term "brain drain." The two megatrends of globalization and the internet mean expats can digitally play an active role in the political life of their home countries, in many cases more actively than if they were in their home countries.
Then you have countries like China that seem to be able to manage even the internet, and they manage to bully major league companies like Microsoft and Google and Yahoo to their nefarious designs. For them, we would have the boundary concept. As in, we apply the open concepts for all organizing outside the boundary. If that organizing is fierce enough, and the temperature is raised, ultimately the boundary will melt. And we go in. In the mean time, we have clandestine concepts for inside the boundary. This might also apply to many other countries.
The appropriate mix of the open and the clandestine will depend on where a particular non-democracy is on our spectrum. Even people from those countries in the diaspora might prefer to work clandestinely for fear of reprisals against their collaborators who might be working inside the boundary. Individuals make their choice as to whether to work openly or in a clandestine fashion. The nature of the online world facilitates clandestine work.
I think we are going to see a lot of tools emerge online for both open and clandestine work, and for all three components of money, message and organization. Cross pollination will speed up the process of tool generation and sharing.
Money. In this model, most of the money is raised and spent by the respective diaspora organizations. To some extent you are also looking at the floating bands of democracy activis who chip in small amounts when they can. The transparency of the blogalaxy will also make sure there is accountability on money matters. All book keeping would be online. This is key.
Message. We have to get all the news out. We also have to report of all human rights abuses. People in the network who might get targeted by the state should feel the entire network knows when something happens to them. We do not replicate the Amnesty International, the Human Rights Watch, and the Committee To Protect Bloggers efforts, but we do act as magaphones. We make some serious noise. We have to engage the opponents of democracy in debate. When direct debates might not be possible, we go for indirect debates. We challenge whatever public statements might be available. We have to draw attention to their weak and fraudulent arguments, and then we have to counterargue. We have to have rapid response mechanisms. As soon as they say something, we respond immediately. They should feel surrounded.
Organization. We have to help build political parties where they do not exist. It is not possible to imagine democracies without political parties. We have to nurture and protect them where they do exist. We have to create organizations and umbrella organizations among the diaspora. Right to peaceful assembly is just like the right to free speech, a fundamental human right. People should organize as they see fit. We would not direct how people organize, rather facilitate their organizational activities by helping get the word out.
Once we have this basic infrastructure in place, we could really change gears. We could hope to introduce democracy into countries at rather rapid rates. The goal would be to wage this one massive, decisive street demonstration like in Ukraine in 2004, which would culminate in either the autocratic regime stepping down, or the democracy movement unilaterally declaring the formation of an interim government to be recognized by the entire family of democracies. (5 Steps To Democracy) The interim government would be charged with organizing elections to a constituent assembly that would give the country a democratic constitution.
Once in power, the democrats should have the option to bring to justice those elements that might have been repressive towards the democracy activists.Only if that knowledge is public beforehand might democracy activists be emboldened to act and autocrats in power wary to openly persecute them. International laws can come into play, so can country tribunals.
Democracy is possibly the best gift the dollar a day crowd can get. Freedom is a birthright. It is sad some people don't have it. Those who don't have it deserve it, and those of us who are free are not truly free until all of us are free across the globe. Democracy will be born and will grow in each country in slightly unique ways, but there is no arguing with the fundamentals of democracy. Those are universal.
You have the power. The future is now.
No comments:
Post a Comment