Spot the Chairman

Corporates aren’t democracies. They have shareholders who employ (or are) managers, who set the goals and manage the performance of their teams. Corporates also aren’t free markets. Once you are hired, central decisions get made up the chain and strategies set. The most obvious exhibit to demonstrate this is salaries. If there was an internal market for skills and knowledge, then whoever needed something done would have to bid for their team. Instead, in most companies I know of, the bosses would be irate if a Spreadsheet of everyone’s pay got leaked. Like Chairman Mao managing the iron supply in a 5-year plan, the central powers need to trust the train of information about who is doing what. Layers of grades and metrics can be added to maintain the illusion of price (salary) and value bearing a relation. The beauty of free markets is the lack of pretence. Price isn’t value. It is a way of matching supply and demand. It is very noisy, but if both parties are happy, value is created. In Corporates, this falls apart because (1) the employee is full time, and (2) we don’t talk about pay. In some ways that is good. Imagine your pay moved like the markets? To cope with that you can’t live hand-to-mouth. To cope with noise (transparency and truth), you need to create space to breathe.

Can you handle the truth?

Not a Democracy

“This isn’t a democracy” was a common phrase in my corporate career. Although there are legal minority shareholder protections, the reality is that control is concentrated… even if you are a part owner rather than a work taking employee. But, there are checks on power. Arguably more than over democratic majorities. Companies can fail if run badly, or if competitors attract away their staff and clients. They can fail slowly, if they have Capital to eat through while paying Corporate Zombies lots of money to do bad work. They can fail fast, if they live hand to mouth. Democracies don’t have the competitive pressures of the four freedoms of movement (Capital, Goods, Services, Labour) because we still live in a system of Global Apartheid where your rights depend on where, and to who, you were born. Citizenship isn’t voluntary and with enthusiastic consent. A system that ensures that Countries don’t fail like Companies in a way that frees the people and capital. I am a “small a” anarchist. Decision making should have as few layers as possible, be voluntary, and we should hire our bosses. Should isn’t reality. Human rights are built in the same way as Capital. From scratch. If that is the world we want, we need to build it.

Hierarchy from the Greek hierarkhēs "president of sacred rites, high-priest"

Powering Decision Makers

People without money aren’t infants. They don’t need decisions made for them. They need money. Money is the fundamental unit of decision making in a market-based economy. Democracy shouldn’t be about making decisions for other people unless it absolutely has to be. Adding conditions to how people make their basic choices costs money. You have to employ pseudo-parents to question real life adults. To strip them of their agency. People who aren’t in poverty tend to have big ideas about how people in poverty should make their choices. Either from a moral or “quality” perspective. All businesses boil down to problem solving for people with money. Good businesses have direct relationships with decision makers. If you want to solve the problem of poverty, create more decision makers. Then watch how the problems get solved. Spontaneously. From the bottom up.

detail from a drawing

by Leonardo da Vinci

What is going on?

British East India Company

Before Capitalism, under Mercantilism, the lines were blurred between Companies and the State in the same way as they were blurred between the Church and the State. Given a Charter, a Company could raise an army and make laws. The British East India Company ruled India from 1757-1858. Things changed. Now there are concepts like Public Equity and Multi-National Companies. Public Equity democratises ownership. Shares of listed Companies are traded freely and can be bought and sold by people who aren’t Citizens of one competing tribe. Multi-National Companies have employees, customers, and owners, from all over the world. Stock Markets allow customers to own shares in the companies that make the products that they buy. You don’t “play” the market. You can invest in a real company, doing real things, for real people. The heart of Fundamental Investing is the question, “what is really going on?”.

Amsterdam Stock Exchange

The Right Approach

I am part of a group of men that meets twice a month to support and challenge each other. I don't have the colleagues a 9-5 job provides, and so this is similar to that.... but without the artificial work/life/play divide. We all think very differently, and there is always the risk that we end up in a talk shop where we are trying to sell our world view. We have recently overcome this by creating "cards" for what exactly it is we are trying to achieve in the discussion. 

I get the sense that that may be what is missing from the general noise of conversation that we see in politics and social media. We aren't sure, in advance, what it is we are trying to achieve. We aren't sure, in advance, what the conflict resolution process is. We end up throwing around the word Democracy like it has meaning that is agreed upon. "The People". All sorts of ideas when it doesn't even seem like we are playing the same game.

One example is feedback. There is a difference between just needing to say something aloud, and actually wanting someone to offer a solution. Sometimes articulating something to a sympathetic ear is all I want. I feel like I am equipped to deal with the challenges. I just want to scream. Or cry. I whine. I don't want someone to then "come to my rescue" with advice that they then expect me to carry out. We call this the "context card". The "advice card" is different. If I actually want to know what the others would do in the situation I am facing. If I feel there is something I am missing. The "challenge card", gives people free rain to throw in whatever judgements or projections they have.

The "UK Parliament" card is sometimes useful in Democracy. A combative Opposition and a firepit of people divided into teams. Sometimes it is exactly the opposite of what is useful. Sometimes marches are useful. Petitions. Sometimes it is useful to have a directly elected representative who can be fired representing a constituency. Sometimes Proportional Representation is useful to ensure minorities have a voice. To ensure that everyone feels their vote counts so they don't have to strategically bet on things that they don't want. Sometimes you need an expert. Like if you are having an operation. Sometimes you just need the crowd to cheer or boo. Like if you are at a Comedy Club.

The biggest lesson for me from the Brexit mess is how easy it is to be against something. Almost no one is taking responsibility. The other side is being pointed at and bad mouthed. The hard work of listening to everyone, and finding something that works is being kicked down the road.

Sometimes we have to step back from the game, and decide if the game we are playing even has any chance of delivering what it is any of us want.

Are the rules working?

God and Money

Words are chunky. The more time we spend together, the more layers of agreed meaning a work can have. Each word in a sentence can mean a sentence. Each sentence a paragraph. Each paragraph a book. If our worlds overlap enough. Like the difference between knowing how to get somewhere you go often, going somewhere often but still needing GPS, or going somewhere for the first time using GPS.

Growing up, I knew exactly what the questions, "Do you believe in God?" meant. God was a very old white dude who used to get rather angry sometimes till he had a son. God knew everything, was everywhere, and could do anything. If a friend and I both believed in God, we both believed in the same God. There were questions, but the questions had answers and we just had to continually do the work. If we both did the work, we would head in the same general direction as we ironed out our misunderstandings.

Increasingly, as Local has become more Global, and Global has become more Local... words have stretched. I don't believe in the God I grew up believing in, but that doesn't mean I am not heading in the same general direction as someone who does. A simple Yes or No doesn't carry as much information. You have to spend time together and dig deeper.

This is the same with other words. Like Capitalism. Like Neo-Liberalism. Like "The Establishment". I believe in all three of those things, but many of my closest friends and family use those words as swear words. I don't think we mean the same thing when we say them.

When I say Capitalism, I am talking about building Capital. The Capital in the "ism". I am talking about reinvestment rather than consumption, in order to build something of lasting and sustainable value. I am talking about being custodians who compound our wealth for future generations. I believe Capital is better placed to work for money than Labour is. Some things can be counted and monetised, some things can't. I believe in a world where we Labour for love.

When I say Neo-Liberalism, I am talking about compromise, best practice, and learning as we go. The new and liberal in the "ism". Where we change enough to Bruce Lee the world. "Accept what is useful. Discard what is not. Add what is uniquely your own". Liberal enough to allow change. Conservative enough to reward those who drive the change and protect the things we love. Constrained enough to restrict change to "win-win" sustainable wealth creation, rather than short-term extraction.

When I say "The Establishment". I am talking about our improving institutions, cooperation, and ability to communicate. I am talking about improving democracy, decreasing Global Poverty, infrastructure, and checks and balances on power. I am talking about the gradual empowerment of individuals and communities rather than being controlled by powers from above.

All of these things have holes. I don't believe in extracting profits while not caring about anybody. I don't believe in short-term selling off public assets to shift wealth to a few corrupt individuals. I don't believe in a political class that controls everybody else.

As Global and Local irreversibly become enfuzzed, we need to be careful with our words and our ears. Like religion and money, the primary function is to build the kind of world we want. Not to divide ourselves into teams and throw rocks.

Gotta Serve Somebody

"What do you want to be when you grow up?" is an old question for a time when there was a set menu. In a more flexible world, any Business Model that starts with a product offering is doomed. The first question is "Who?". The second is what they need? Only then do you have an answer to what service or product you need to provide. It has more to do with them than you. The Who has to have money to be served. This is one of the reasons I support Universal Basic Income. Politicians tend to support their voters for the brief period before election day. They tend to focus on special interest groups that will get them their seat. The *U* in UBI means that everyone gets heard. They get heard because they have cash in their hands, and businesses will be trying to figure out what they need. What "The People" want isn't determined by having a vote where the words are determined by 51% of the voice. True Empowerment isn't listening once and then blocking your ears. "Who do you wanna serve?"

More Than a Whisper

Trev:

I got my British Passport a year before the Brexit Referendum. As someone who believes the C20th introduction of passport control was simply the physical role out of Global Apartheid, getting another passport has its ironies. Rather than burning Dompas like Madiba, I was collecting another one of the things I don't believe in. I came on a Migrants Program that gave me the opportunity because of my education, salary, language, age and work experiences. Kind of like a lottery for those who have previously won the lottery. Still, I was proud. Like a recovering Alcoholic, the description of Britain at my Citizenship Ceremony reminded me of the scene of Marcus Aurelius in the Gladiator. "There was a dream that was Rome. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish, it was so fragile." There were people from all over the world becoming citizens of a country that seemed to stand for so many things I believed in. Then 2016 happened and whispers became shouts.

More Than a Whisper

Alex:
The way you pitch it is as if the primary reason behind Brexit was closing the borders. You and I have very similar beliefs. We both want this "Rome" with an open society that is inclusive. We both believe in Freedom of Trade, Movement, Services, and People. I didn't see the Referendum as anything other than a vote of no confidence in the INSTITUTION of the EU. Not Europe. Britain can't physically leave Europe. It is a part of it. All the crying and gnashing of teeth makes out as if all Brexiteers are racists and xenophobes. What about the European border in Ceuta? You can't paint the EU as this Liberal Democracy. I was voting against a Brussels run by technocrats.

Paul: 
I didn't actually think the vote would go through. I have just been a Eurosceptic for years. I was undecided when I stepped into the voting booth, but I didn't feel it would be right to moan about the EU and then vote for them. I have business in Europe, but the European regulations make my life an absolute nightmare. I prefer hiring Brits. I really didn't think Brexit would actually happen, and even when it did, I didn't think there wouldn't be some sort of deal that allowed life to carry on pretty much as normal. It doesn't make sense for anybody for us to not be able to keep on doing what we do. Anyway, if things don't work out, I am okay. I'll just close up shop and go traveling.

Stewart:
I don't really follow all this nonsense. I have my own stuff to worry about. There is no point in worrying anyway. The people in London will do what they do and life will go on. It is not going to affect me. I voted for Brexit because the NHS is creaking at the seams with all the immigrants in the waiting rooms, and the jobs going to people who aren't even from here. Look after your own first I say. Don't have guests until you can afford to keep your house in order. You have to choose. If you want to have a Welfare State that looks after people, it is simple maths that you can't afford to look after everybody else too. Get rid of that stuff, and then sure... people who can afford to look after themselves are welcome to come.

Angela:
The reality is we are a small island. Environmentally, we can't afford to have more people here. 60 million plus is probably too many already. There aren't enough houses, which is why housing is unaffordable for the people who were born here. I am all for being accommodating to others, but there is the question of sustainability. The roads are clogged. The trains are clogged. The Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty are being filled with new housing that doesn't have the necessary schools and facilities. We may be a rich country in theory, but there are lots of problems we need to sort out. Leaving the EU is the only way we can do that.

Michelle:
There are fundamental political differences between the UK and the EU. You either believe in central decision-making technocrats, or you believe in devolved responsibility. In the UK, you hire and fire your political representatives directly. I can meet with my Member of Parliament, and it doesn't matter how much of a big wig they are, they have to serve their constituency. Nigel Farage certainly doesn't represent my views, and I resent being associated with him because I am against the EU. There is some irony that he has never ever won a seat in the UK, and his voice has been handed to him by Europe. Nigel is not the voice of Leave.

Trev:
The problem I have with these views is that they are mostly ideological. Much like my "I don't believe in Passports". The problem is Passports are a real thing. It doesn't matter if I believe in them or not. At the end of the day, I have to use them to move around. I am a deep pragmatist. What we do matters. Results matter. Yes, beliefs matter, but in the real world, we have to work with other people. The EU may have chosen Proportional Representation over "First Past The Post" seats. That has advantages and disadvantages. South Africa made the same choice. The inability of minority parties to get a voice in the UK is one of the disadvantages. Sustainability, Resource Allocation, and Regulatory Simplicity are all important... but we can't just vote for everyone to agree with us. The EU is much more likely to reform from within. It is better with the UK in it.

Andrew:
I have severe Brexit Fatigue. There are more important issues that which club different Rich countries belong or don't belong to. "Meanwhile in China" the world is carrying on while the Government of the UK grinds to a halt in this big talk shop. Whatever happens, won't change that much anyway. Like the Y2K "Crisis", the Global Financial "Crisis", the news always needs some Armageddon event to keep it entertained. Proper Crises like the World Wars, the resulting global flu pandemics, and the starvations in China and (now) Venezuela are proper things worth worrying about. Not how long it takes to fill in some bloody forms so you can sell your stuff or have to put another sticker on it. Britain "exiting" Europe is like a divorce where the spouses stay living in the same house. It's ridiculous, and we talk about it too much.

Alex:
I would probably change my vote now. I still believe I voted in good conscience the specific question that was asked. I wanted to leave the EU. I didn't want to end Freedom of Movement or any of the other nastinesses that get attributed to me because I think the EU is a bullying Leviathon. I think we have handled the negotiations terribly. Other politicians could have done a better job at negotiating with the EU instead of pandering to them. All the political parties are pretty weak at the moment, at a time when we needed strong leadership.

Trev:
I worry that the price of Brexit is simply a dismantling of the United Kingdom. The real world price of Britain leaving the EU, in my view, is that the UK will be dismantled. Ireland will reunify (I can't see any other solution to the "Backstop" issue) and stay in the EU. Scotland will then be left with a choice between the UK and the EU, and politically I think Scotland is more aligned with the EU. Andrew is probably right that "all will be fine". Relatively speaking, I do think there are bigger issues to worry about. It just makes me sad. I certainly feel that the first few sparks of seeing Britain as an "X years sober" alcoholic are at real risk of quite a few years of falling off the wagon. I am positive. I do think we can sober up again. It just didn't need to be this hard. 

[Alex, Paul, Angela, Stewart, Michelle and Andrew are fictional]

Hierarchy Hives

I am fortunately not allergic to any food that I am aware of. I don't like messy fruit, but that isn't an allergy... it is a childhood weirdness I struggle to shake. Something about the texture and ability to invade my space gives me 'n klein bietjie kots in my mond. What I do struggle with is Hierarchy. I have always had a chip on my shoulder. I hate being told what to do. I hate feeling like I am just a cog doing a job without any agency of my own.

This includes delegation of jobs. Not if it is "my turn", everyone is taking turns, and it inherently feels fair. I did a few Yoga Courses and we each had Karma Yoga. The hour I would spend washing everyone else's dishes was one of my favourite parts of the day. It isn't the menial side that brings out rashes. 

What I don't like is the disempowerment. My stock example is when a boss delegates a job to a subordinate that they haven't done before themselves. What can happen is that they don't know just how complicated it is. So the subordinate plugs away going down multiple garden paths unnecessarily. Pulling their hair and teeth out desperate to please. The Boss doing the same job would have a tool at their disposal that changes the game. The ability to stop. To say - nah, this is more complicated than it is worth.

It is why I am a strong believer in "Independent Thinking" in the sense of letting people make decisions. As many decisions as possible unencumbered by the really difficult task of having to explain themselves. Joint decision making is very hard. We all come at problems very differently. That is powerful. If people are empowered.

This only works for small decisions. Which is why I like the idea of Micro-ambition. The more a problem can be broken down into lots of little trials and errors, and the shorter the implementation loop, the more empowered a system it can be. If unintended consequences are small, then you don't have to push decisions up the uninformed food chain.

The challenge is that we don't live on islands. Even those who do, don't live on those islands by ourselves. We are connected to other people, and some decisions have to be made together. Joint decision making involves opening issues up. It involves exploration,  discussion, empathy, time, and the ability to bring people along the path with you.

In "The Democracy Project", David Graeber talks about how voting should really be the last rather than first resort of Democracy. If people are empowered, and included, it will seldom need people to split into teams. Entrenched Teams is the first sign of a failing democracy. The point shouldn't be for anyone to rule over anyone else. For any Team to be in power. The point should be to allow people to make as many decisions as they can for themselves.

Delegation requires trust. It requires us to accommodate, adapt, and adjust to other ways of doing things. It requires us not imposing the things we don't want to adapt from on others. Don't ask someone to do something for you if you aren't ok with them deciding how to deal with the ambiguity.

Through the Noise

Trev:

You don't have to commit a crime to enjoy the right to remain silent. Two urges I am working hard on are my "Righteous Indignation" and my "Drama Instinct". I have always been relatively easy to get a rise out of.  Looking at the wrongs in the world makes my blood boil. A "Choose Me Lord" religious response to putting myself in the way of injustice. The kind of guy that would have made an easy recruit for the Crusaders or the Saracens depending on where I happened to be born.  That has always made me good value tease. My Drama Instinct is the same as most people's too. The less meaningful stuff on the edges that makes more noise, gets a disproportionate amount of my attention. The boring, ordinary, beautiful bits of life often get missed.

Saracens

Kev:
It does seem like that is a more general challenge than a Trev challenge... but not for everyone. There are a lot of people who just crack on with things without making much fuss about it. "A little less conversation, a little more action please" style organising and doing. Isn't that the point of a Liberal Democracy? You don't have to actually waste any time convincing people of anything. Unless you actually plan on committing a crime, you just need to get willing people, with the skills you need, and do the job. Part of the problem with "The People" getting power from Rulers is they then expect the Representatives to do a better job *for* them than the Rulers. The point is that they have the power. The point is to get the Rulers out of the way, and get on with it.

Sarah:
It depends where you are in the world. Not everyone, everywhere, enjoys these freedoms you are talking about. The fight is not over. Even in Rich countries, there is a surprising level of poverty. The poverty looks different. The social relations look different. It isn't as simple as saying "just crack on with it". You'll probably find that the people who believe that, and have the nature to do it, have can-do cultures and mentors and social networks. It is very easy from the outside to think of what you would do in someone else's situation. Except, if you were in their situation... you wouldn't be having the same thoughts. You may not even know what is on the menu.

Rebecca:
You are right about the differences between different places. I find that a useful way to open up the questions that are swallowing us. I was a car wash in the UK yesterday. It was run by about 20 presumably Eastern European people. They descended on the cars and the whole process took only a few minutes. It was incredible to watch. I kept wondering what the reaction to this scene would be in South Africa. In SA, there is a lot of "fake work". Because of the structural unemployment, a lot of people do jobs which basically just kill time. Since time is an easy unit to pay someone by, and the more time the job takes the more you get paid.

Paul:
That has caused tensions in and of itself. My experience is that immigrants, unlike some of the struggling local people, always work harder. They have a sense that no one owes them anything. They don't expect the state to provide for them as one of "The People" and so they graft. Most people don't want to leave their homes. They have to leave people behind. They go somewhere else in search of a better life, and with a sense of purpose. They are then outside their context. Whatever it was that was holding them back. That doesn't necessarily solve the issue for all the people still struggling. A lot of Eastern Europeans thought the opening up of Europe would lead to their countries becoming like the UK and Germany. Instead "The People" went there.

Peter:
This talk of Entitlement makes me feel very uncomfortable though. The most entitled people I meet are normally the wealthiest. They strongly believe that their success is through their own hard work, completely ignoring the massive investment they have normally had put into them. I have met so many people who talk about how they messed around at school. How they were naughty little scallywags. Then they went travelling or did something fun. Maybe picked up the odd bar job or whatever their English gave them access to. Then they suddenly decide to take life seriously, and doors open left, right, and centre. Even the ones who work hard from the start genuinely believe that their success is self-earned. Because they worked hard. As if people in poverty aren't working hard.

Norman:
The point seems to be that shouting about that Entitlement doesn't seem to make much of a difference? Does it actually change behaviours? These arguments are often among Champagne Socialists and Laissez-Faire Capitalists who both come from the same schools and whose lives don't actually reflect their convictions. It's just a public debate club. As it has become easier for anyone and everyone to have a voice, so the fringes have gained much more control of the conversation. They tend to detract from the people organising, building consensus, mediating, compromising, and all that other messy stuff that doesn't make for something that will get heaps of likes and retweets.

Amanda:
I would like to see more storytelling. Case studies in a "Humans of... " format where we start spreading real, practical, how-tos of options that people have. Bring these abstract debates down to the grassroots of how they affect real people's lives. Ideas and arguments are too big. We need to think smaller. Add back humanity into the conversation. I love Dollar Street from Gapminder. It shows real people's lives across the world. What they wear. Where they sleep. What they eat. How they eat. These are the real questions we should be asking. We get lost in all this ideological stuff. We need to be grounded in the realities of the stories of actual people. Not hand wavy The Peoples.

Mitch:
You are assuming people actually want a solution. I think most love the Drama. They are not actually looking for a solution. They love it when they find a troll as much as the troll loves finding them. I have seen really nice people I know in real life being complete gutter-dwellers online. Foaming at the mouth at people who probably think a lot like them. We love an enemy. Only a few years ago in the UK, everyone was moaning because of the sameness of politicians. You'll get the moaners, and you'll get the doers. The doers will have to drag the moaners along. That is just the way it is.

Trev:
Silence and action are powerful. I still think we need to engage in conversation. The destructive voices can't be allowed to grow like weeds. Equally, giving them a louder voice by over-reacting doesn't seem to be helpful either. I like the idea of a Daily Practice. Regularly being able to step back and ask what small actions are being taken? What is being built? What matters to us? What are the unintended consequences of our actions? It would be great if the conversation could shift to regularly improved questions. At the moment a lot of us seem to be coming at it aggressively with pre-packaged answers. More gaps. More silence. More questions. Less noise.

[Kev, Sarah, Rebecca, Paul, Peter, Norman, Amanda, Mitch are fictional]

Forced Choice

I believe in bottom-up empowerment. Rather than finding people to represent a theoretical "The People", I believe in empowering individuals and the holey communities of which we are a part. I find it too difficult to understand the personalities, values, and dynamics in my close friends and family to believe I speak for anyone. I find it hard enough to speak for myself. Living in Boaty McBoatface land, I don't put much faith in votes as being that meaningful.

I grew up in Westville, in Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa. I grew up during the last gasps of a dying Apartheid Regime, and the first cries of a newborn Democracy. I spent my first few years at mixed-gender schools, and my teenage years at a single-sex High School. I was an assistant teacher at a school in Chichester (UK), then went to University in Cape Town. I stayed in a single-sex residence (Smuts Hall), but shared meals with our sister residence (Fuller Hall). I then worked at three different companies. In South Africa, Bermuda and the United Kingdom... where I have also lived. All of these experiences mean there isn't a single other person I know who has gone on the same path. All my Communities are Holey. My friends and family scattered.

I had friends that were at Westville Boys' High with me, then I met up with at University. They were two years behind me at school because of the gap. I had friends that I was at University with, and then worked with, and then didn't. Even within companies, I had a friend that started basically the same job as me on the same day, and gradually our paths split.

I believe what makes being Conscious so powerful is its constraints. We forget things. We see differently. We make mistakes because there is so much we all know, that we don't individually know. One large pot full of tiny micro-experiments.

There is no "The People". There are just a bunch of people pretending to be more confident than they really are, stumbling beautifully in their own version of the dark. Hopefully learning from the sounds and bumps as they picture what it is they can never see.

A Little Winey

When I was 19, I went to Europe for the first time. I was in the UK for 18 months before that working, and did my traveling in one big binge. 45 days camping tour around Europe with £20 a day of squirreled away spending money. Some of those days were traveling days where we spent almost nothing, and a few of the days were "Cultural Experiences" which cost more. It was more like seeing the menu of Europe than experiencing it properly, because we weren't in any place very long and I was surrounded by Aussies and Kiwis. It was a cultural experience in learning about those characters.

One of our early realisations, as we arrived in various new cities, was to restrict the size of our day-tripping groups. Any more than 3, or maximum 4, people and you spent more time waiting for someone to get back from the toilet than actually seeing the place you were at. It was important to limit the quantity of Whine consumed. People want different things. That is fine. Let the people who want to visit coffee shops go there. The Museum people do their thing. The Foodies binge out. At some point, it is more worth empowering people than trying to gain consensus. 

Even "gaining consensus" among two people is really hard work. You need to pare back your ambitions the bigger the group is. Ask any two people working on their relationship, and even seeing the world from the perspective of the person you love is a real challenge.

Then come together for the things you love to do together. Big groups were easier for events like the Oktoberfest, where the options are simple. Beer.

Too much whine, and you don't get to do any tasting.

Joint Decisions

Empowerment isn't getting your own way. Democracy isn't majority rule. I am part of a generation that is getting married much later. This means there is a much bigger gap between when you are in the 'if you live under my roof, you obey my rules' stage, and the joint decision making of two people with no majority. This 'The People' nonsense makes me laugh, because I have never met a 'The People'. The only time anyone has ever used that phrase in my hearing distance has been when they have been trying to take the moral highground (their view patronisingly represents the underdogs), or when they have recently won an election. Where elections are the equivalent of turning up for an exam you hadn't studied for, and putting a cross next to a badly worded question. Marriage is the family you choose, and even then building a life together requires the hard work of making joint decisions.  Empowerment and Democracy are developing a co-operative understanding of each other's values, skills, knowledge, motivations and life. Empowerment and Democracy are walking together, and genuinely caring about the shared journey.

Make the Roof, Make the Rules

Herding Cats

I am a Soutie. One foot in South Africa, and one foot in the United Kingdom. These two places, where I have lived the longest, are full of cats. The one life lesson I have the most conviction in, is 'Don't try herd cats'. This idea of a 'the people' that agree is clearly pushed by people who forget the disagreements in their own families. At some point, we need to let go of the idea of visions and ideologies. Instead of selling a solution, we can get better at conversation and accommodation. Change starts from where things are. Not from where we want things to be. We don't need to convince people that we are right in Liberal Democracies. If you aren't harming anybody else, all you need to do is find people who agree with you, and crack on with whatever it is you think needs to be done. If you think cats need herding, you are are going to get scratched.

The Gipsy Hill Cat

Tongues and Ears

Before elections in the United Kingdom, political parties release Manifestos. These are supposed to detail the mandate they are given. In South Africa, the same happens and the party then chooses members of Parliament. In the UK, a Member of Parliament directly represents and is chosen by their constituency. The step I believe is missing is how each party, and MP, will incorporate the desires of the opposition. The current method is like a Utopia Sale followed by a fight. 'Us' gets a fat 'Them' carved out... and the carcass is left to bleed out. The heart of Democracy isn't the ballot box. It is consent. It is the feeling that the Government is about empowerment rather than control. Somehow we have empowered our tongues at the expense of our ears.

Что связывает нас

Король Георгий, Кайзер Вильгельм и Царь Николай были первыми кузенами. Их бабушка была королева Виктория. Когда мы говорим об Восточном Весте, легко забыть, что это в основном относится к холодной войне. «Западный» не белый. Большие идеологические разногласия прошлого века вызвали кровопролитие и беспорядки во всем мире. Должны ли мы иметь монархов? Должны ли мы иметь диктаторов? Должны ли мы придерживаться правила большинства? Должны ли мы дать людям возможность самостоятельно выбирать? Должны ли потребности общин быть поставлены выше потребностей отдельных лиц? Что происходит, когда сталкиваются потребности разных сообществ и отдельных лиц? Государства-нации создали историю, в которой разные места были принципиально разными, с «народом». Стоит разгадать эти подразделения, чтобы увидеть, что нас связывает.

Холодная война

Evolution v Revolution

The English Civil War tore England apart. Thomas Hobbes was 64 years old when the conflict began. He became one of the leading thinkers arguing for evolution rather than revolution. The War pitted Parliament against the King. Charles I lost his head in 1649, 140 years before the French Revolution. Hobbes argued that chaos and bloodshed were more dangerous than obeying (even unjust) authority. He argued for slow change. He also argued for a Social Contract. He argued the rule of Kings couldn't be justified by Divine Right, but by representative consent. Charles II was restored to the throne after Cromwell's death, but gradually the Crown became a Constitutional position. Constitutions are built up by slow, difficult discussions and agreement. Agreements are messy, emotional, and open to change. A recognition that we don't need to play the same way, but we do need to agree on some basic rules. Us doesn't start with a vote, it starts with an agreement that there is an us. It starts with common ground and something worth building together.

Thomas Hobbes

Bubble Bursting

Part of the Cambridge Analytica outrage was due to the realisation that we were being manipulated. That other people were trying to do to us, what we try to do to others. Namely, change people's opinions to match our own. We are all marketers. If you have something you care about, and feel the world is not exactly the way you want it to be. If you are in any way an Activist. The more you signal your beliefs, and surround yourself by people who agree, the easier you are to manipulate. Someone who listens more than they speak has inbuilt protection. Someone who may agree with the person on the left, or on the right. Tribes are particularly easy to manipulate. Particularly if the individuals don't think for themselves, and merely fall in line with the majority. '50% + 1' rule is salt, fat, and sugar to the Gravy Train. Popularity is easy. Empowerment takes ears. If you want to empower yourself, burst your bubble. 

Popularity is Easy

Chile

Chile is on the long, narrow strip between the Andes and the Pacific Ocean. Squeezed in, the Spanish colony (after 1541) had fierce resistance from indigenous Mapuche to the South, a desert to the North, and attacks from other European rivals. In 1808, Napoleon installed his brother as Spanish King. A National Junta (board) declared independence in loyalty to the heir to the deposed King. This was a catalyst for a move for full independence, which came in 1818, and was recognised in 1844. Sovereignty was strengthened by military might (an arms race), economic strength (discovery of silver ore), and populating contested areas with European immigrants. Periods of oligarchy, military coups, and political polarisation followed, with socialist democracy then deposed by a right-wing military dictatorship (1973-1990). Today, Chile is a high income economy with high living standards.

The five presidents of Chile since transitioning to democracy in 1990

Every Action is a Vote

The world is noisy. Once you accept that it is not particularly fair, you still have to treat it as if it is. Even though there is so much that is not under our control, cumulatively things we do add up. No individual vote matters, but if no one votes... that matters. Every action is a vote.  Every day. Democracy isn't a ballot box, it is a conversation. Kant's 'Act only in a way that you can at the same time will that it became a universal law'. We have to crack on. We can't be overwhelmed. We have to carry on having hard conversations. We have to carry on trying not to get triggered by the things that irritate us. Breathe. Ask another question. Take another step. We have to treat each other kindly. There is no towel to throw in. This is all we have.

We vote every day