freecooperation mailinglist archive

 <

> 

Re: A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy (Clay Shirky)

John Hopkins

Oct 03, 2003 19:35 PDT

Hi Brian... some Friday nite musings...

 My own position is that those of us directly involved in the project
need to assert a level of questioning that will draw the whole
online discussion higher out of the general tidal dreck that free
narcissism so copiously produces. But there may be some other
opinions on that question, among a crowd as experienced as I expect
this one is. As I stated before, the object of the list I'mtalking
about is also that of remaining exposed to a life-potential that is
beyond any control. But for me, just accepting a level of chatter
punctuated by seemingly accidental moments of grace is not enough,
hardly a success. I think that pleasure in the sheer...

Well, something in the word "attention" applies to the 'success' of
these happenstance collective intersections. Where there is a
surplus of attention paid to the movements between the nodes, then
everyone walks away inspired. it's a rare phenomenon when mediated
by 20000 km of fiber and these incredibly archaic interfaces, but
ultimately possible despite any level of mediation. it comes down to
attention (and sustainable attention in the sense of a long-term
situation). That I worked some in identifying alternative energy
sources points to a conclusion that the issue of energy in the macro
geopolitical world reflects in a micro person-to-person scale as
well. It's all Thermodynamics...

 The other general question I have, which again has to do with the
enigma of equality, is this: I know very well that free cooperation
works among certain people who have a glint in their eye and who
recognize, for themselves, the value of collaborations that can't be
pinned down to money or hierarchy or sentimentality. But these kinds
of people are fairly rare, and soon saturated with projects. What is
most important: pursuing...

I have often reflected, after being in many countries, working with a
lot of different people, that there is a certain "kind" (I quote
that, because I'm sure there is a better English word that groups) of
person who thrives on social contacts of a disparate nature. When
discussing it, I use the term networker. Which, in my use, predates
widespread Internet use, (the cassette underground network, and the
Int'l Networkers Congress, let see, 14 years ago?), so, it's not
about the form of technological mediation between. In this
stereotype, the opposite "kind" of person is one who maps their
connections

Personally, and literally, I am a child of the military-industrial
complex, being the child of a father deeply involved in a variety of
secret military projects involving a variety of technological areas.
The alienation of existing in a social unit (family) that was
(merely) a resource to shuffled around (via the Interstate Highway
system) at the whim of the Cold War Machine included the problem of
human connection. Friends made in one location became remote when a
move came up. Connection had to be sustained remotely. Somehow, I
believe this is a factor in my own personal tendencies of
socialization at a number of levels. From being interested in new
physical and social situations and people, to being sometimes more
comfortable with remote connection than local f2f. Remote Presence
and sociable.

That's only a theory of self. The many other networkers that I have
had the pleasure to meet and break bread with over the last 20 years
are all different in some ways, sharing maybe only that curiosity and
basic interest in the Other. (something highly counter to the
constantly evolving National Paranoia in the US, where the Other is
often treated with disdain, or simply destroyed (shoot first, ask
questions later)).

often my encounters with future friends have been highly intuitive, but have

human connection. a vibe. it's all about the potential energy that
exists between any two humans who are open to encounter. the root
possibility of grace.

 a few such projects in the most efficient way, or working on strange
and even artistic forms of "pedagogy" that might give more people
the insight into how to make free cooperation something like art in
Filliou's phrase: i.e. that which makes life more interesting than
art? How, within a predominantly individualistic society, to make
free cooperation more interesting than uncooperative freedom? ...

if you include threads of individuality spirit in art (by
definition), it is easy to understand Filiou's dynamic -- that a full
sense of living includes spirited and inspiring exchanges with the
Other.

Cheers
John

 <

>