When we introduced our new political project SPRING last week, we described it as a ‘soft’ launch. By this we meant it was somewhat early, even gentle, without the bells and whistles that come with a complete revelation – no logo, no political programme, no on-boarding campaigns.

But not soft as in undecided or lacking a plan: nothing in nature is soft in that sense.

The joy of saying less is that it creates more space for others to show themselves without suggesting conflict. Readers can reflect, bringing their own thoughts – often honed for years – on the central theme of Spring. Primarily how it makes them feel and what they too are yearning for at this time. And who they are.

This openness and invitation to imagine, re-create and co-create is core to the conditions within which Spring will germinate in neighbourhoods, towns, cities and bioregions in the future. While the old politics sees people as voters to be recruited for political programmes already formed, this new kind of politics sees people as the missing intelligence from the system. It is their waking up to their own relevance that we characterise as a culture of natality.

Direct Democracy needs Deliberative Democracy first

Of course, we can misrepresent the idea of people as the source of better democracy. Populism is the result of manipulating people’s emotions rather than giving them the conditions in which they can truly participate. It deploys the mechanisms of direct democracy where people might be offered limitless referenda with a Yes/No response.

Given the polarised public space, shaped daily by a media (digital and traditional) that uses division as a business model, there’s little likelihood that direct democracy on its own will change the political landscape. Indeed, it could easily make it worse, as mobilisation at the extreme ends of the spectrum of political views becomes more available.

On the other hand, deliberative democracy is a game-changer from the outset. The chance to take a subject – whether in the form of a problem to be solved or an idea to be explored – and talk it through with others before making a decision: this gives people agency. Instead of simply responding to the agenda of elites, deliberative democracy helps people generate their own programmes for change – after which a referendum can deliver more confident results.

Citizens Assemblies, where a group selected by sortition are paid to spend several days discussing a difficult subject (most notably, abortion in Ireland) are the forerunners of deliberative democracy. It’s a generous opportunity to request information from any expert, to try and challenge mainstream thinking. However, they have limitations in that the content is carefully controlled by government (see the inadequacy of the UKGov’s Citizens Assembly on the climate). In addition, only small numbers of people will ever get the opportunity to participate.

What we need more of now is the praxis of deliberation that is already slowly arising within communities – neighbourhoods, towns, cities. This is around ongoing issues, but also about new thoughts and ideas that can help them face our multiple crises. For too long ‘we the people’ have been alienated from the public space where decisions take place: we need to reclaim it, make it our own. Become response-able.

Most importantly, deliberation helps communities heal old divisions. There are many tools – Antidebate, people’s assemblies, empathy circles, world cafes, pol.is, Human Library and more – which create new social tissue, building bridges between old foes. Participation helps people get their emotional needs for belonging, connection, giving and receiving attention met. Often, this happens in ways that help them shift away from more addictive practices such as excessive consuming, casual aggression, self-denial. The collective experience also generates that very rare commodity: trust.

The deeper struggle

For all these reasons, the politics of Spring is as much about creating space and time for people to think independently while together—as it is about identifying the practical stepping-stones to better futures. Of course, intersectional struggle (embracing class, gender, diversity and all forms of exclusion) continues, and the struggle against corrupt governments does not stop. Yet in the age of the internet, the struggle with the self – overcoming addiction, resisting manipulation, developing the mental strength to exercise autonomy – becomes equally important.

For some the notion of this ‘human revolution’ might be too heavy: the prospect of ‘fighting’ to become more than one can be right now is an exhausting prospect. Yet “being” more doesn’t mean “doing” more. If anything, the practice of self-development tends towards letting unnecessary distractions and excessive busy-ness go. Like clearing the weeds away from struggling plants, when we take more space for the self and for our relationships, it can generate a new freedom.

The move away from the toxic experience of standard politics, the pursuit of democracy as a grim obligation, is crucial to the future. Given the energy we have for food, entertainment, friendship and love, why is it so difficult to bring energy to the vital discussions about how we live our lives together on the planet? Shifting the ‘feel’ of our gatherings from spaces of complaint to incubators of ‘natality’ – a constant giving-birth to possible futures – would change everything.

The kinds of spaces we need do require some form of facilitation so that people can listen to others in a respectful way. They also need some structure so that each meeting can create value and develop a direction of travel. Not through pre-defined agendas, but through good rules of the game so that energy remains constant. For that we need plenty of artists and gamers on board the design process. Imagine a political space that evokes beauty, energy, creativity, confidence?

More than talking

When a culture of deliberation starts to take shape, there is always the fear that nothing will come of it. When New Labour committed to a listening tour it led to very little visible change for the people – only more reports about how people responded to certain questions set by the party. Similarly, many communities have long had participatory processes which create local value but cannot shift power.

Some might say that such practices are prefiguring a better future, helping us get back in touch with our own ability to decide and promote solutions. In natural terms, this might correspond to a commitment to re-wilding the land – regenerating the capacity for healthy growth. Good, but maybe not good enough, given our circumstances.

In the face of the polycrisis, people need to believe they have traction with all the possibilities they are generating: that solutions are becoming operational. For this we need smaller containers, filled with integrated actions: where the whole regenerative system – I – We – World - can appear in microcosm. In turn, those containers – we call them community agency networks (CANs) -have to be able to communicate, share and build a commons with others doing the same. That commons supports what could be described as a 4th sector economy, a platform for many varieties of initiatives and good self-governance (aka democracy).

All of that requires developing technology—capable both of sustaining the deliberation taking place within the network of CANs, and capturing the datad generate independently of the wider system. Ownership of the CAN’s own data will be crucial to its ability to move outside of the orbit of old institutions. That same technology should also be generating the media system which shares the news and stories of change internally, and is capable of re-telling that news in ways that attract a wider audience. Alongside that should be programmed the music, sounds and images of a movement of regeneration.

To some extent that subtle tech is the holy grail that many – like Holochain, Hylo, DAOs, OneSystem – are chasing. But none have yet made a fully delivering service accessible or affordable. Artificial intelligence will certainly play a part in improving this.

Most importantly the collective actions of the CANs will tell a very different story about the deeply human potential of ‘the people’. This is not a bottom-up movement rising to meet the top-down policy and funding of government.

It is rather the holistic – mind, body, spirit - waking up of the 98% (meaning those who are not members of political parties and wholly subscribed to their narratives) to their own agency, their own gifts, insights and capabilities, operating in a cosmolocal way. They will be generating solutions to the crises in ways the government have not been able to. Much more than what is asked from them by the growth economy – enjoined to become endless consumers or cogs in a machine. Lives that pass through CAN structures will experience less of a sacrifice of their bodies and spirits to the market.

When that is happening, our thoughts about the future will be different. Like the shift from Winter to Spring, we will have more evidence that we have what it takes to handle the changes coming down the line. More energy and imagination to fix the roof while the sun is still shining. More capacity to enjoy what there is to enjoy.

Alternative Editorial: Springing Into Action