These lists showing the shift between a "standard politics" and a "politics reinvented" are illuminating and motivating
There is some great, clear work being done out there on what we call “democratic innovation”. This is the work of activists and experts that asks us, as citizens, to dwell on whether our political or participative process are good enough for these crisis-torn, complex times.
We found a very elegant example of this from our networks the other day - the website Politics Reinvented. It’s the portal site for the works of Elke Esders, who worked as an EU Parliament staffer for 25 years.
At one point Elke notes that, “with a widened perspective, I realized why the way we do politics cannot really be effective. Many of our existing political practices are diametrically opposed to what neuroscience says about how to achieve results” [see Elke’s book on that topic here].
What we’ve briefly sampled below - but there’s much more on her website’s page Common Themes - is a Old Model/New Model Politics set of columns. Cumulatively, as you read through them, you get a very strong feel for what one version of an “unbroken politics” might comprise.
Historical Perspective / Timeline
Common Themes New Models
Cooperation and collaboration is part of the system’s nature and considered as desirable.
Focusses on interconnectedness and togetherness
21st century level of consciousness
Common Themes Old Models
Division and separation is part of the system’s nature and considered as desirable.
Focusses on power and order
19th century level of consciousness
Beliefs and Attitudes
Common Themes Old Models
We are all responsible for our societies. Everyone’s expertise is required, that is, from politicians, civil servants and experts but above all from citizens.
Citizens can do more than cast the occasional vote
A large variety of views best represents the complex reality we live in.
The more diverse the opinions, the better-informed decisions will be – a prerequisite in a complex 21st century world
Hence diversity is a resource
Sharing knowledge and experience in decision-making means sharing responsibility for decisions. Group processes encourage openly addressing and dealing with opposing views and conflict.
We are in it together:
Group processes provide for experiential learning and feedback, allowing for both reaching mutual conclusions and personal development.
Common Themes Old Models
Responsibility for societies and political expertise lies with politicians. Governance is their job. For specific information they resort to civil servants, advisers and lobbyists.
Citizens can express what they want by voting every few years for a political party or a politician.
A political party should speak with one voice, not least for credibility’s sake.
Too many opinions lead to never-ending debates, which impede decision-making processes.
Hence diversity is an obstacle to good political process.
It’s up to the individual politician to cope with constant public negative feedback (political opponents, media)
You are on your own:
Personal development is a politician’s private matter. The burden of responsibilities and stress lies on the individual’s shoulders.
Consequences
Harvesting the views and experiences of many – politicians, citizens and experts – best represents the complexity of our century.
Cooperative decision-making between politicians taps into the emotional intelligence of all and supports citizens’ self-empowerment, creating trust and a high degree of social cohesion.
With citizens feeling heard and getting involved, the responsibility shifts onto everyone.
The energy released by burden-sharing allows for both finding solutions to challenges and pro-actively co-creating new initiatives.
A few dominant political party views and ideologies poorly represent complex realities.(Side note: How can you advocate diversity in society if diversity is not sought within your own tribe?)
Bearing the brunt of responsibility for governing societies, politicians attract all the blame.
The constant pressure and blame heaped upon politicians tend to push many to seal themselves off or to resort to self-protection. Defensiveness and distrust may result.
A lot of energy gets wasted by this, limiting politics primarily to constant fire-fighting.
More here (and here’s the Common Themes page).