Re: <nettime> notes from Brexania in limbo...

[David Garcia <d.garcia@new-tactical-research.co.uk>]

Patrice, is completely right.. One of the amendments to May’s “deal" (sadly it will not 
succeed-it ay no longer be in play) is one to be put by Stella Creasy which would mandate 
more time by suspending article 50 not simply to delay the innevitable but of a final vote but 
a vote supported by the convening ‘Citizens Assemblies’ in a manner that mirrors the approach 
taken by the Irish abortion refferendum. This points to wider implications for how we might 
change how we change the way we do politics. 

When I first heard about Citizen’s Assemblies I had no idea about how they worked (sortation) and of 
how they are increasingly becoming an important addition the democratic process in a number 
of countries, particularly when facing issues that are highly contentious and divisive . As Patrice has 
pointed out they were very important part of how the Abortion referendum in Ireland was conducted.
As ever the Finton O’Tool essay is that Patrice provides a link to, is extremely illuminating. 
Among the many impotant observations for this list is the way in which this process appeared to undercut 
the use of polarising tactics and deliberate fake facts micro targeting facilitated by sophisticated 
data analytics. The anti-knowledge tactic of dismissing expertise completely failed inpart because Citizans fora 
changed the relationship between citizen and expert. It is vital and neglected aspect of what is being proposed 
and its future promise in addressing the much greater existential issues associated Anthropocene.
 
Brilliant as O’tool’s artcle is, he and other commentators need to pay more attention to is the importance 
to the evolution of the role of expert knowledge (ethics,medical, legal) played in the Irish forums. What is 
vital to comprehend is that they were not brought in as regulators. Nor as the voice of power and authority. 
They were a resource that citizens could draw on in the prcess of coming to their conclusions. We could look 
on this as the beginings of an important broadly based move towards a more dynamic, experimental and less 
defferntial relationship not only between experts and citizens. It could articulate a new relationship 
between citizens, the unelected regime of regulation (expertocracy), and the political class and the judiciary. 
This is the direction in which we must travel to take us beyond te epistemic crisis of the cybernetic era.




On 28 Jan 2019, at 06:15, Patrice Riemens <patrice@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> On 2019-01-28 03:39, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:
>> Am 18/01/19 um 16:48 schrieb James Wallbank:
>>> Thanks for this summary David, I'd suggest that it's broadly accurate.
>>> Some of you may have noticed that Brexit has pretty much incinerated
>>> my social media presence (which used to focus on the impacts of
>>> digital engagement and transformation on the arts, culture, and
>>> locality,(plus a smattering of green issues). Now its focus is almost
>>> exclusively the madness of Brexit, which I can only interpret as the
>>> national equivalent of a nervous breakdown.
>> For me the basic problem is direct democracy as in referendum. And
>> second referendum. It may be unpopular because direct democracy looks
>> like the non plus ultra of democracy but Brexit shows that the non plus
>> ultra of democracy is the sovereignty of parliament. Also as far as a
>> second referendum is concerned. All that is necessary for "remain" is a
>> decision by a simple majority of MPs.
>> "Direct democracy", is this a fashion of politicians without
>> responbibility or a principle of constitutional law of the UK? Like the
>> sovereignty of parliament. Maybe we should rethink democracy once more.
>> Is direct democracy good in all cases? Obviously not.
>> Best, H.
> 
> 
> Heiko's remarks completely bypasses the fact (sorry, it's a fact) that the British 'Brexit' referendum was a clusterfaktap of major magnitude (& probably 'deliberate by default') in terms of how a real, valid referendum should be prepared and organised, even if you don't have the Swiss experience in running one.
> 
> These two opinion pieces, highlighting the differences between the Irish abortion referendum ('in the end the people knew what they were voting for') and the British one (obfuscation central) should settle the score:
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/29/brexit-ireland-referendum-experiment-trusting-people
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/26/brexiters-never-had-a-real-exit-plan-no-wonder-they-avoided-the-issue
> 
> True democracy is direct democracy, difficult to handle as it is. Representative democracy, unless representatives are kept at a short leash by their constituents - never mind how representative a first pass the post system is - is a snapshot at best, and an elected dictatorship at worst.
> 
> Cheers to all, p+2D!
> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: