2 03. The Tyranny of Stucturelessness
mj-saunders edited this page 2022-03-31 08:29:29 +00:00
This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters!

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters that may be confused with others in your current locale. If your use case is intentional and legitimate, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to highlight these characters.

We aim to tick EVERY box on this list.

I think we do this, can people feedback on any issues?

The Tyranny of Stucturelessness

There are some principles we can keep in mind that are essential to democratic structuring and are also politically effective:

  • Delegation of specific authority to specific individuals for specific tasks by democratic procedures. Letting people assume jobs or tasks only by default means they are not dependably done. If people are selected to do a task, preferably after expressing an interest or willingness to do it, they have made a commitment which cannot so easily be ignored.

  • Requiring all those to whom authority has been delegated to be responsible to those who selected them. This is how the group has control over people in positions of authority. Individuals may exercise power, but it is the group that has ultimate say over how the power is exercised.

  • Distribution of authority among as many people as is reasonably possible. This prevents monopoly of power and requires those in positions of authority to consult with many others in the process of exercising it. It also gives many people the opportunity to have responsibility for specific tasks and thereby to learn different skills.

  • Rotation of tasks among individuals. Responsibilities which are held too long by one person, formally or informally, come to be seen as that persons “property” and are not easily relinquished or controlled by the group. Conversely, if tasks are rotated too frequently the individual does not have time to learn her job well and acquire the sense of satisfaction of doing a good job.

  • Allocation of tasks along rational criteria. Selecting someone for a position because they are liked by the group or giving them hard work because they are disliked serves neither the group nor the person in the long run. Ability, interest, and responsibility have got to be the major concerns in such selection. People should be given an opportunity to learn skills they do not have, but this is best done through some sort of “apprenticeship” program rather than the “sink or swim” method. Having a responsibility one cant handle well is demoralizing. Conversely, being blacklisted from doing what one can do well does not encourage one to develop ones skills. Women have been punished for being competent throughout most of human history; the movement does not need to repeat this process.

    • This is mediated [see Point 1] time will tell if its a TICK
  • Diffusion of information to everyone as frequently as possible. Information is power. Access to information enhances ones power. When an informal network spreads new ideas and information among themselves outside the group, they are already engaged in the process of forming an opinion without the group participating. The more one knows about how things work and what is happening, the more politically effective one can be.

  • Equal access to resources needed by the group. This is not always perfectly possible, but should be striven for. A member who maintains a monopoly over a needed resource (like a printing press owned by a husband, or a darkroom) can unduly influence the use of that resource. Skills and information are also resources. Members skills can be equitably available only when members are willing to teach what they know to others.

  • Point 1: we mediate the "Allocation of tasks along rational criteria" with tradition and workflow, yet people to fill roles are chosen by lottery from the pool of interested and motivated persons. We have a no-blame, easy "step down" workflow - the next person is immediately chosen from the pool. If a person who is clearly a troll or "trouble maker" holds a position they can easily be “recalled” by the group/body/consensus of the voices; a new person is then immediately chosen by lottery to fill the role.

  • Point 2: we have an option to aid/onboard new roles by having an overlap with the old roll-holder where they share the role.

  • Point 3: we have the option to stagger the sortition of body members so only a % are chosen each 6 months as onbording of new members.