by Flemming Funch
I'm often torn between whether to be diplomatic or whether to say what I think. Or, we could say, I'm exploring the space in-between.
For example, in my de facto role as a facilitator, and sometimes mediator, in the NCN community, I think I'm expected to be impartial and diplomatic. I would sort of be representing the core principles of NCN, which involves the respect for different ways of being, and the open welcome for all sorts of people, as long as they align with a very minimal set of guidelines.
But as far as my own personal views and activities go, I certainly don't believe that everything is equally valuable. I'm quite discerning and have strong opinions about many things. Some things I'm passionate about, some things I could care less about, some things I think are bad.
And it is not that I myself am confused between my different roles. Rather that I'm trying to communicate more clearly what is what, and that I'm trying to not have to hide myself.
I originally split up my two main websites so that worldtrans.org was about the things that *I* care about, and where I might feel free to express my own views without having to be diplomatic. OK, I've hardly updated the site for several years, but that was the idea.
And newciv.org would not be my website at all, but would be a network, which I was only one part of, but which had a life and a mind of its own. And in whatever I did there, I found it important to be just a facilitator, neutral and diplomatic, mainly helping to present what was going on in the network and what different people were doing. You know, for years, the main organ for NCN was not the website, but the mailings I sent out to all members, which were compilations of what people had sent me.
But it gets more complicated the more different spaces there are in the online virtual community area, and the more I myself am participating in it. And, hey, I don't just want to stand by the sidelines. If there are swings and monkey bars, I'd like to try them too.
So, with this news log here, I would prefer to use my own news log as a place where I could think aloud freely, say what I want, and where my friends could keep an eye on what I'm doing. But, also, it is placed amongst the other news logs, and probably read most eagerly by the people who currently are active in the NCN member area. And no matter how much I'm trying to be just one of the guys, some people will think that what I'm saying must be some kind of official policy statement for NCN. It usually isn't. And even when it looks like it is, it is usually just that I try to interpret what I think we're doing. And it easily gets quite entangled if I happen to express some controversial opinion without softening it up in some diplomatic way.
One thought is that I might split things apart more. Put my own newslog outside the NCN member area, on another website, so I can speak freely without having to worry about the politics of keeping most people happy with what I say.
But another thought is that I should maybe be more radical and uncompromising about what I believe in, and not worry about it.
I initially didn't notice, and then tried to ignore, that the core principles of NCN are essentially things that *I* passionately believe in, and not everybody does. I think it is stuff that most intelligent and well-intentioned people would be aligned with, but I initially took it for being much more self-evident than it apparently is.
My vision of HoloWorld is an elaboration of the same principles that NCN is based on. But I deliberately distanced it from NCN as just being *my* vision, "and now I'd like to hear everybody else's". And, ok, in HoloWorld I go further than what I can reasonably ask everybody in NCN to agree with. I suggest that there should be no ownership of the land, or of ideas, that corporate privileges should be abolished, and other farout proposals.
But the key principles in HoloWorld are the same as in NCN: that you can essentially do what you want, as long as you don't stop others from doing the same, and as long as you don't pollute or deplete the common resources. You gain a say over something naturally by taking responsibility for it and working on it. And there's no top-down power structure, nobody with the inherent right to command you around. You are free and sovereign, but it would probably be a good idea to organize into teams and communities to get things done, and to agree on some rules for those teams as you go along.
For me those things aren't really open to negotiation. You can have any opinion you feel like, but if you think you have some inherent right to command other people around against their will, you're wrong. You can have any kind of personal preference you want, but if you plan on enforcing that preference on the rest of the population, even though they don't agree, you're wrong. You can organize whatever group you want, except for one that becomes a monopoly or dictatorship that will govern everybody else against their will.
Some people would call these things political views, but I think that's silly. Politics nowadays seems to be mostly a competition for who will decide what everybody will be forced to do or forbidden from doing. Which I think is wrong, almost whatever that thing is. Maybe I'm some kind of libertarian socialist, I don't know. I'm interested in how free people voluntarily organize into strong communities that take care of the whole.
I guess I'm still undecided on how to approach it. But I'm becoming more bored with being soft and yielding about it.
|
|