[Campaigns-l] 2: neutrality - humanity - int. structure and concept

[Chad Lupkes]

answers inline

On 8/17/06, VirtualOffice at gmx.net <VirtualOffice at gmx.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Chad, Seth, Janet, YYK, Jonathan,
>
> cordial thanks for your responses.
>
> I have found for me good ideas and thoughts in your emails, which also in
> no way scared my work for international humane campaigns.
>
> I like the words from Seth for such a plattform: "openness, fairness and
> non-exclusivity" and YYK`s paragraph about a "rule of order" like in some
> parliaments. I like Jantes hopefully words, "that the parties are an
> artefact of a different model of working" and I like Chads paragraph:
>
> "We can't pre-judge people or ideas. All are welcome. What we need are
> solid policies that will allow us to defend ourselves against destructive
> measures that come aganist us. There's a policy that MorePerfect.org has
> implemented that works very well. They call it Constructive, not
> Destructive."
>
> ---
>
> I personally think we could find a good way beyond the single languages,
> if we would continue this collaboration now and make a summarization after
> every week in all language sites, because without summarization we must
> start always new. So I would propose to make on every language site a
> central topic, which pooling the actual state of the international Campaign
> Wikia affairs, but which declare also, that nothing is finalize and all
> ideas welcome. So every people (also with less time) can see, where we are
> and can bring in good ideas. Many people have not the time to read all
> forums, Wikia topics, list emails etc. Me too. I mostly need summaries,
> because I work on several int. projects at the same time.


My first question on this is summaries of what?  What specifically are we
going to be tracking?  Can you give me an example of a 'central topic'?
There isn't really a central topic on English.  Are you referring to
something related to site development, or an actual issue that we can
discuss?

I have also think about your emails and I have personally make a retrograde
> step from my last email, but I can "unfortunately" not complete ignore my
> work for humane world campaigns. And I think it would be also very sad and
> no good signal, if I should do. :)
>
> I would like if we could try now together to find first guiding principles
> for a mission statement, also if this will be not the final version, but
> that we create together a first document we can work with language
> overlapping. Would you think this is possible?


Do you think we should come up with a mission statement separate from what
Jimmy wrote up?

---
>
> Here my new input for such a basic topic. Unfortunately I have now not the
> time to revise, because I must go sleep now. It`s 2.30 a.m. If I write "we
> should" in my emails, I mean always: it would be good from my actual
> personal view and my background of supporting 10 years int. campaigns for
> humanity. Its not egoism, its only my power and my conviction with which I
> work. My energy is "unfortunately" strong and insightful at the same time.
> :)
>
>
> Ingmar Redel
>
>
>
> ---
> 1. old modell of parties - new way of Wikia
> ---
>
>
> Is it possible to reach a int. agreement on fundamentals about this topic?
>
> The old modell of parties is coined from "TV politic" without
> collaboration with the people. This modell is mostly controlled by money and
> power interests (lobby work) and personal career interests, its not
> controlled by the people. The only people can do at this time: make a cross
> on the ballots every three, four or five years.


Actually, there is quite a bit that people can do between elections.  Too
many people believe that the vote is the definition of Democracy, and to me
that's just the bare minimum.  Party activism, issue activism, all the week
to week work that occurs between elections is just as important as the
election itself.

Informations from parties about important themes are mostly shrouded with
> trained rhetoric and image strategies, to win the next election. The most
> people are disappointed from all parties.


That I agree with.

I dont know who healthfully mind it say, but I thinks its right: "Its a
> different between a statesman and a politican. A politican think of the next
> election, a statesman think of the next generation."
>
> So we should not only copying this old modell of parties from the "TV
> politic" to a "internet politic". This would nothing makes better.


Agreed.  We should not be bound by the limits from broadcast media, we
should instead be exploring the frontiers of interactive and participatory
media.

I think we could conform, that we want to be a neutral position, which
> delete all rhetoric and image strategies or lobby works, so that we get
> together in the internatioanal Campaigns Wikia network the unvarnished
> informations parties, candidates or campaigns and try to get in a open
> dialoge with politicans.


I question whether we would be able to create unvarnished information
without at least allowing candidates and campaigns to put their material on
the table for us to look at and work on.  I think we need to develop a way
to easily link together points and counter points so that readers don't have
to search far for an alternative viewpoint.

Then the people can inform themselves realy and can start campaigns for a
> topic, if they have better ideas and want to make things better like the
> parties or candidates. For this the people can use than the int. structure
> of Campaigns Wikia.
>
>
> ---
> 2. the freedom of speech and lunatic fringe
> ---
>
>
> Is it possible to reach also here a int. agreement on fundamentals about
> this topic?
>
> I think we could conform, that Campaigns Wikia is definitive for the
> freedom of speech? But we should found also a rule against lunatic fringe.


The 'lunatic fringe' (I like the phrase, btw) has it's place.  I don't think
responding to content placed by people we strongly disagreement by deleting
it is a constructive answer.  Instead, I believe we should be working to
define our terms and frame our position as a piece of the media so that when
fringe positions are placed on the site we can identify where they come from
and perhaps where the logic goes if those positions are followed without
further thought and consideration.

I`m sure you know as example the history of germany. We are here very
> sensitive opposite some people. Very sensitive. And we know what if such
> people penetrate our society and we know how disturbing they act on the
> society. In some sections of germany we have a real problem. The total
> freedom of speech can also bring bad things.


I can understand the sensitivity surrounding this issue.  And while I don't
have the same historical instincts, I wonder if pointing out that extreme
points of view come from a small minority and that they will not lead down a
path that our global society really wants to go would help minimize their
effects.  I won't go into detail, but let's just say that certain political
parties would probably jump at the chance to create a platform on our space,
and we should instead encourage them to create their own wikia site, like
the Libertarian Party did here in the United States.  Then they can do
whatever they wish (within the rules of wikia if hosted here, or with no
rules if they choose to host it elsewhere) and all we will have is a link
saying "If you want to learn more about the positions of this party, click
here."

So we should find after point nr. 1 also a rule, which decline informations,
> which are visible from lunatic fringe. The most polities prohibit such
> informations from lunatic fringe and we would be well advised to do this too
> - or we will become later great problems with groups of such people. If they
> have once a step in the door, we will never get rid of. Such people
> understand no fun.
>
>
> ---
> 3. new ethic in political affairs
> ---
>
>
> This is a milder point as my last email. I understand, that we can not say
> that humanity should be the aim of all political affairs (unfortunately;
> also if this should be), but we should admit and work for a new ethic in
> political affairs.


I usually break down the effort to get people involved in political activism
into three levels.  Engage, Educate and Empower.  I think Campaigns Wikia
can be used to educate us all on what the issues are and what the various
positions are within that issue.  Then let people make up their own minds
based on good information what they want to do.

Some points which fall in this category are also named in the first point:
>
> - clean political informations from money and power interests (lobby
> work), personal career interests, trained rhetoric and image strategies to
> geth the clean statement and the clean aim of a candidate, partie or
> campaign
>
> - giving the people the chance to work with this informations to give the
> right people the voice or giving the people the chance to make things better
> together with own proposals or campaigns
>
>
> But we should also help to change the old political thoughts in parties
> with a new political ethic. We should not ignore thousands of people, which
> try since many years with hard work to give political affairs a ethical base
> to conquer the burning problems for our future as humankind. Thats many
> older statesmans like Michael Gorbatschow or people like Kofi Annan, thats
> hundreds of known intellectuals, artists, entrepreneurs, clergymans,
> scientists, politicans, moderators and journalists from all over the world
> and from all parties.
>
> Thats prominent organisations or campaigns like the UN Millennium
> Campaign, Make Poverty History, Global Marshall Plan Initiative,
> Earth-Charta, World Wisdom Council, Parliament of the World Religions, World
> Future Council Initiative, Global Ethic Foundation, Club of Rome, Club of
> Budapest, Association of World Citizens, Committee for a Democratic UN, GOI
> Peace Foundation, International Simultaneous Policy Organisation, Inter
> Action Council...


Campaigns Wikia should support this aim, to get a ethical base for political
> affairs for the future of the humankind and our planet. Campaigns Wikia
> should not say: "We are ethical neutral and we have not to do with this
> evolution."
>
> Campaigns Wikia enters no new space and it could understand wrong from
> such impressive people and projects, if Campaigns Wikia would as new project
> in this room ignore this important work from the above projects and
> organisations for the evolution, which is in full swing.


I think the most important thing we can do is get people informed about the
existence of the site(s).  As people come, it will build itself.

_______________________________________________
> Campaigns-l mailing list
> Campaigns-l at wikia.com
> http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/campaigns-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikia.com/pipermail/campaigns-l/attachments/20060819/01b1d995/attachment.html