Vincent Van Uffelen on Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:41:20 +0100 (CET)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Brexit democracy


I'm following this whole thread with great interest and feel that I could add a few synthesizing comments from a strategic designer's perspective. These designers are usually hired to be less concerned with the creation of the perfect, shiny object but more with shaping the structures culture enfolds upon, such as policies, laws, organizational structures, and sooner or later maybe even world views. To be able to do this they evolved a toolbox of practices that could also be very useful for the progressive causes. 

THE STRATEGIC DESIGNER'S METHOD
Look at the problem from as many perspectives possible by using different lenses (e.g. control/power, environment, material impact, capital or symbolic value), identify the desired outcome and the (contextual) leverage points that can be modulated to force the system to adapt to reach the outcome. Derive of your findings the guiding principles, strategies, and tactics. After the initial assessment apply an iterative process of build (implementation of tangible or non-tangible artifacts that should change the system), measure (observe the system's reaction to your artifacts), learn (reassess you strategies and tactics) until your system has reached your desired state. The active involvement in the implementation of the tangible artifacts (a sustainable chair, a co-op housing project, an advocacy group, an animal wellfare NGO, ...) and the conscious use of them as potential trigger for systemic change make out of a designer and a strategist a strategic designer.

WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?
We're facing a wicked problem, a complex system of systems that is at the brink of collapse, while none of this is directly experiential for individuals (also the system's response to individual actions is often not directly felt). We are bound to the path-dependency of the current socio-economic system, the capitalocene. No alternative cultural, sociological, political, or technological infrastructure on which a global system could run after a hard reboot (such as a revolution) is readily available (but partially working prototypes and a history of successful and failed "tests" are). Involvement of multiple stakeholders with different interests, involvement, power, or influence, which are deeply influenced by cultural, psychological, and physiological biases and therefore not necessarily act rational. A general feeling that general we are loosing control, that something needs to be done, that maybe event the end is nigh.

THE SOLUTION
??? ... There is probably not "one". But to find one, and as also voiced here on the list, we need to see our post-human, Anthropocene, climate changed, ... mess in a new light and that would require a paradigm shift. This new perspective would define the new normal, sets the cultural default values, and would be the base on which we derive all our laws, policies, and many of our unreflected daily actions. Paradigms don't shift suddenly, only the heavily biased post-hoc interpretation of the general awareness makes us often believe that, but are created with the hard work of many thoughts and hands. A paradigm shifts on mental and physical stepping stones, the critical infrastructure already built, the structures, patterns, and habits that are needed so an existing paradigm can tumble into to become a new one.

Following this list in the last month, and this conversation is a good example, I see that there are many good hearted specialists at work. Probably we are all most comfortable wearing our familiar spectacles (looking at things through the lens of control, affect, or the precariat) and ready to part with our analysis and offers of solutions. But in a world that more and more becoming a world of BOTH/AND not EITHER/OR single perspective and single perspective applications might not effect enough. It's a child's play for the powerful to let all those small scale fragmented actions run dry. It's too easy to loose the feeling of efficacy if you pull at one of the many loose threads of the knot and "nothing" happens.

What we need is a narrative that allows to get passionately involved into the "problem" of your choice but still let you feel to be part of a bigger project. A framework that allows to slot my own work in, or ideally even to provide enabling constraints. Something, one can let her imagination and his passions enfold upon. Something, that might even allow to let a potential failure/evaporation of the energy spent in our actions seem acceptable or provides a rough guideline what to do.

Looking from the designer's perspective here, I believe that there are two things that would be worthwhile to think about and work on.

1. The project to collectively design, tickle, foster, and implement the new paradigm.
Many, like the transition town movement are surely on that, but it might need to be a bit brushed up to become a "glamorous" mass compatible thing to do. Some of the progressives might have to bite their tongue or slow down their expectations to make not the stepping stones too slippery for others to dare to step on them. We are talking so much of the alt-right, the caustic environment the ctrl-left can create is often forgotten. I wonder if it would be not also important to look at the ones in the center? Who targets them? If the progressives don't provide agreeable, only mildly daring proposals, the conservatives/new labours will rake in their votes.

2. More pragmatically to make sure to very consciously aim to make your very local action to become a potential trigger of systemic change.
This means to familiarize yourself with the work of strategic designers. I'm serious they are handsomely paid by all the powerful to produce systemic change to their liking. It might be really worth to learn their tools and use them consciously to progressive's favors. I don't know about you but, I've done too many "installs" of well intended things/organizations that effected near to nothing. I've missed my chances to link them with others (working in the same area) to gain more weight. I've missed my chance to challenge the system/institutions/organisations. I've flapped enough with my wings without either knowing aim not being able to actually lift off.

I've go my aim. I will try to consciously engage in the process of scratching on the surface of the new paradigm. And a diamond headed scratchy pain, eh, pin I want to be!

On 13/11/2017 13:02, David Garcia wrote:

On 13 Nov 2017, at 09:21, Alex Foti <alex.foti@gmail.com> wrote


The problem of the revolutions of 2011 is that they failed to produce durable organization and to use their term institutions of the common, save for limited success on the municipalist front. Now that nazi-populism is successfully using movement tactics to growing popular consensus, the need for a new dual labor and political strategy and organization is more needed than ever.


While in the old anglo-saxon center of neoliberalism, socialism works as a political strategy and social unionism as a labor strategy (labor markets are tightening and wage increases and union wins are becoming more frequent), e.g. corbyn's new old labor and sanders' dsa, in continental europe the official left is disappearing and there is no ready alternative at hand against national populism ….


In Brighton (September 2017) The World Transformed- https://theworldtransformed.org/ is a kind of political fringe festival of art, media and activism that runs in parralel to the annual Labour party conference. It tookplace in multiple venues across the city. The point here is that it was organised by Momentum the pro-Corbyn pressure group. And the event was absolutely packed with radical ideas were being tested and protyped. It even included a session on how to deal with “capital flight” from the UK in the event of a Corbyn victory that was being trialed by none other than the shadow chancelor himself on the panel! This would have been inconceivable under the centrism of the past and it certainly made headlines. TWT was where the real action was happening not in the conf itself. Even though Momentum had a bespoke app to mobilise its Labour party members in an instant to shuttle to the main conf ensure the votes went Corbyn’s way. So here we see tactical media "folk politics” working hand in hand with institutional power. 

Obviously it connects to Alex’s comments because if one dared to be optimistc the Momentum model suggests that something might have been learned since  “the failure of the revolutions of 2011 to produce durable organisation..” (Alex). as Momentum is connected to the Labor Party but not PART OF the Labour party. Its a classic grass roots social movement (what Srnicek and Williams) call disparagingly “folk politics” whilst also being willing to engage with institutional power and so able to scale up and consolidate its acquired advantages. Of course this only works because Corbyn himself is someone who mirrors these developments as he is someone who has for decades been commited to protest based social movements as well as being a conscientious (and rebellious) MP. Its this genuine and rare hybridity that connects the movement to the individual and is one of the things we might mean by “authenticity”.. 


---------------------------------
- foot-note- The Labour/Momentum election campaign of 2017 learned a lot from the tactics of the Alt.righ/Bannon's tactics for Trump. In terms of connecting an on-line grass roots social movement to the aim of capturing of institutional power and creating ideological change in a political party. They both deploy hyper-partizan social media tactics to bypass what was seen as a mainstream media that would never give either Trump or Corbyn a hearing..(Let Corbyn be Corbyn worked as it did for "let Trump be Trump") Also both campaigns re-imagined the old fashioned political rally as a “media event” and far more… 
 







#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:


-- 
DE: +49 (0)160 9549 5269
UK: +44 (0)75 0655 0520
 
http://vincentvanuffelen.com
http://transmit-interfere.com 
http://deepmediaresearch.org
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: