|
Re: How would the Communities of Ideas function or operate?
Marielle JANSEN
Tuesday, 11 March 2003 20:52:53
ººº Abstract: In principle, all discussion groups around a certain theme can be considered to be 'communities of ideas'. This is where the basic material for a World Parliament can be found. Otherwise, Earth has to be nurtured back to health. This is where we need the nurturing female qualities, along with sound reasoning, which is considered a typical male quality. The members of this e-group are all members of at least a community of ideas, so these could be described, listed and declared active. Some basic posts could be defined in each community from now. We must be able to turn policy into action, so we need active participation. Linking WP21 and allies with the different UN agencies, rather than with the general assembly, and all participants in the Communities signing a common charter ººº
Dear Rob,
Starting off with the last question in your latest posting: * Perhaps building off of the existing Alliance Working Groups? * seems a good idea to me. In principle, all discussion groups around a certain theme can be considered to be 'communities of ideas'. This is where the basic material for a World Parliament can be found.
Making an inventory of all these ideas may seem a daunting task. However, if we allow organic principles to play a part, building a WP will become an activity of pleasure instead of sheer hard work.
In this regard I am glad you brought up the gender issue, because if there is a balance between the head and the heart, the left and the right brain, reason and feeling, there is 'peace within'. The head has played a domineering role in our western society for centuries and the result is that patient Earth is going to die of a broken heart if her heart's voice will not be heard.
Earth has to be nurtured back to health. This is where we need the nurturing female qualities
Earth has to be nurtured back to health. This is where we need the nurturing female qualities. But we also need sound reasoning, to make things work, which is considered a typical male quality. It is up to each individual to combine these qualities in their own person and thus develop personal integrity, which will lead to social integrity.
Combining the issue of inventory with an inventory of communities, all along organic lines, we could say that the members of this e-group are all members of at least one other community of ideas, outside that of building a WP. These communities could be described (with their consent), then listed and declared 'active'. They remain active as long as regular discussions on a specific theme take place and they carry proposals to the (embryonic) WP. The members of a listed community can start or spot another candidate-group for participation. From there, proposals are not carried directly to the WP, but to the next higher intermediate level. Each level carries its proposals one step upward, until they reach the top, if necessary. Proposals only have to go all the way to the top level if they fall beyond the 'domain of autonomous decision' of any lower level. All decisions that fall within the specific domain of a community do not need to be carried upwards, unless there is an objection from another level, be it up or down.
A distinction must be made between those communities of ideas who are actively involved in WP activities and those who have not (yet) linked up, because focusing on WP-active communities will make sure that there is a natural pace of growth, no matter whether this is quick or slow.
Each active community must have at least three functionaries: a leader, a secretary and a representative to the next level. Other functions can be defined as the need arises, e.g. that of a treasurer. Each function is allocated with consent from within the community circle, except for that of the leader, who is chosen (with consent) from within the next level up. This makes upward and downward delegation possible.
To Rob's question: *How can we ensure that all peoples can contribute to and participate fully in the development of the proposals and ideas and that the rule of the majority will not over ride the rights, needs, or preferred approaches of the rest?*, I would like to answer that application of the consent-principle guarantees inclusion of minority rights and views.
Vision, mission and aims of both WP and actively involved communities must be in line
Vision, mission and aims of actively involved communities must be in line with vision, mission and aims of the WP. It is never too early to define this threefold, because no aim without a mission and no mission without a vision. Clear goals are necessary for effective steering of implementation processes.
If there is freedom to join or leave communities of ideas, I do not see how they could restrain the liberty of ideas.
We must be able to turn policy into action, so we need active participation
The problem with ideas is that they keep on 'hanging in the air', as long as we do not take any action to make them become real. The most extensive lists of ideas are not going to feed hungry mouths, so accepted proposals must be implemented in their order of priority. The Global Agenda must be set, along with their local and regional counterparts. We must be able to turn policy into action, so we need active participation. Drawing up lists of target participants can be delegated to a smaller group, so that the e-mail discussions do not get side-tracked, away from the main task: realization of a structure for deliberation.
For the moment, the greatest challenge might be the linking up of WP21 and allies with the different UN agencies, rather than with the general assembly. The general assembly should have representatives from the agencies and from the continents, but not from the individual nation states. This would keep a lid on the number of participants in the general assembly, so that real deliberation can take place at that level.
So if we keep on taking the UN seriously, we must first look at the communities of ideas we find within the UN agencies, to get to implementation of the policies, that are set by * us, the people *. Each active contact in that field stands for another thread in the decision-making network, which can be extended to NGO's or local government, as opportunities arise.
I agree with the suggestion that all participants in the Communities of Ideas should sign a common charter (...) After reading Doug Everingham's relay on UN resolution 377 * Uniting for Peace *, it seems we already have * a protocol declaring solemnly illegal all war or armed violence; etc.*.
With kind regards, Marielle
WP21 Alliance Forum on a World Parliament for the 21st Century
E-mail : world-parl@forums.alliance21.org
Fax 1 717 264 5036
Information, inscriptions, désinscriptions: germa@alliance21.org
|
|
|
english ·original·
[FORUM]
[DISCUSSION]
[SYNTHESES]
[DOCUMENTS]
[CALENDAR]
[PARTICIPANTS]
[SUBSCRIBE]
[CONTACT]
[HOME]