LOVERS OF DEMOCRACY
Guiding the Evolution of Information-age values:
A New Frame for Freedom, Liberty, & Democracy-consciousness
Technological innovation can enhance the quantity of available information and the speed of communications. This can have an important impact upon decisions. Nevertheless, decisions do not occur in isolation but only as a part of the evolving setting for decisions derived from the three pivotal components described below in table 1. It is the latter that guides the validity, coherence, and purposefulness of the information and knowledge that is used, and whether the outcomes will ultimately be "good" or "bad" for some whole environment and not merely for individual sectoral generators of the plan--be the latter a person, an organization, a city, a region, or a nation-state.
The values-gap between the "Current Situation" and the "Desired Future" illustrated in table 1, discloses the incongruities in the theories of actions, which are guiding the Information-age. These "rigged and lopsided" sets of theories are having an appalling impact on real-world outcomes, which confirm that it is not the mere availability or abundance of information that can lead to benefits for humanity from information technology (IT). For example, between 1980 and 1995 the US Federal Government spent as much as a quarter trillion dollars on IT, but reports to Congress by the General Accounting Office,1 and a finding by the US Senate Aug 4, 1995, states that much of this colossal public investment in IT was "thrown away."2
Moreover, IT innovations could, in the absence of enlightened design for the future, impose on the global people a new culture of virtual reality arising primarily from “technopoly” -- a technological imperative guided by opportunism and the politics of selfishness that social analysts believe is dangerous.3 For example, Fred B. Wood, (formerly) Project Director of the Office of Technology Assessment, observed in Congressional testimony, and a subsequent phone interview with FINS, "... we are at a crossroads, beyond the point of no return," in which "a volcano is going to go off and 25-foot waves are going to crash onto the shore." This is the probable result, Wood stated, of the "inequities" that are built into the structure of the emerging technological transformation, "in terms of expected changes in the structure of political power."4
All words are defined with respect to the frames with which they are associated.5 Conservative political advocacy that follows the theories of action defined by Bushites, drive progressives crazy. It is natural to think the language used by Bushites, for example, use of the word "democracy," in the context of the War of Aggression in Iraq, does not conform to the traditional meaning of the word. One can easily conclude that such contradictory usage is false and hypocritical but the conclusion is not that simple when the frame in which the word "democracy" is used gives the precise meaning that Bushites express. The war of words being waged by conservative groups is the dangerous battle ground of contemporarty politics.
When you think within a frame, you tend to ignore what is outside the frame.6 When the frame is defined with the use of a Technology of Democracy, authentic meaning is most likely assured. Lovers of Democracy who define the frame of the setting for decisions, described below, define the deep fixed meaning of the language of decision-making, and this meaning will in time most likely become "physically instantiated in your brain."7 However, when the frame is defined by Groupthink, meaning conveyed by the frame will not be perceived to be authentic,8 and may not become a fixed and permanent part of your vocabulary.
The politics that Ronald Reagan conveyed shows that it is not rational policies but metaphoric symbols that are most persuasive. While voters did not agree with Reagan's position on the issues, they voted for him based on four symbolic criteria conveyed by Reagan:9
Personal identification: They identified with Reagan.
Values: Reagan spoke about values rather than programs and they liked his values.
Trust: They trusted Reagan.
Authenticity: They found Reagan authentic; he said what he believed and it showed.
It is the symbolic, not the literal, that conveys power. For Ronald Reagan, when the symbolic could not be sustained under the weight of reality, all power collapsed. This is also the evident fate of the Bushites. The theories of action adopted by LoD, described below, are the driving forces of The Transformative Paradigm, which can most likely move society toward an existential state of democratic sustainability and Democracy-consciousness away from capitalist decadence, which cannot be sustained under the weight of reality.
| Table 1. LoD VALUES CLARIFICATIION MATRIX Setting for decisions in the Information-age |
| PIVOTAL COMPONENTS | Current Situation<--values gap-->Desired Future Plutocracy<--transformation-->True Democracy |
A. A SYSTEM OF SOCIAL INTERACTION
| 1. Interpersonal Action 10 | Adversarialism: The Politics of Selfishness |
Synergy: The Politics of Collaboration |
| 2. Relationships 11 | Individualism: The Morality of the Marketplace |
Interpersonal Competence: The Morality of Sustainable Development |
| 3. Responsibilities 12 | Pluralism: Independence |
Holism: Interdependence |
| 4. Political Structure 13 | Plutocracy: Technopoly |
True Democracy: Participative/Integrative |
B. A SYSTEM OF INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE UTILIZATION
| 1. Philosophy 14 | Past-futures | Futures-creation |
| 2. Organization 15 | Evolutionary: Key Topic Index |
Purposive: Outcomes-oriented Categories |
| 3. Content 16 | Disciplinarity: Specialization in Isolation |
Trans-disciplinarity: Multi-level Coordination of Whole Systems |
| 4. Data Base 17 | Authoritarian: Unilatertal Control |
Participative: Free & Informed Choice |
C. A SYSTEM OF PSYCHOCULTURAL PERCEPTION
| 1. Purpose 18 | Opportunism: Maximize Winning & Minimize Loosing |
Principled: Assure a Life Sustaining Planet Earth |
| 2. End Values 19 | Materialism: Pursuit of Wealth & Power |
Enlightened Good Will: Pursuit of Economic Prosperity, Social Equity, & Ecological Integrity |
| 3. Psychology 20 | Means-centered | Value-driven |
| 4. Motivation 21 | Independence: Self-reliance |
Dualism: Individuality & Social Significance |
| DEVELOPMENT CHARACTER |
CAPITALIST DECADENCE |
DEMOCRATIC SUSTAINABILITY |
* Chris Argyris, Professor of Education and Organizational Behavior, Harvard University: theories of action, double-loop learning and organizational learning
1. Electronic Public Information Newsletter, "GAO Critical of Information Management by the Federal Agencies," Feb 10, 1995 (reporting loss of a quarter trillion dollars); Government Accounting Office, "Paperwork Reduction Act: Reauthorization Can Strengthen Government's Management of Information and Technology (Feb 1995) (GAO/T-AIMD/GGD-0/95-80); "GAO Confirms $200 Billion Information Technology Boondoggle," May 20, 1994, online in FINS at URL: http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Special_Report/Fins-SR2-16,txt; Government Accounting Office, "Improving Mission Performance Through Strategic Information Management and Technology," (May 1994) (GAO/AIMD-94-115).
2. 142 CONG. REC. S11389-92 (daily ed. Aug. 4, 1995) (statement of US Sen. Cohen (R-ME), "Computer Chaos").
3, N. Postman,Technopoly (1992); N. Bowie, "Equity and Access to Information Technology," in ANNUAL REVIEW OF INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION STUDIES 131-167 (1990) (discussing the problem of "information haves and have-nots").
4. Testimony of Mr. Fred B. Wood, Project Director, Office of Technology Assessment, Hearing of the US Senate Subcommittee on Regulation and Government Information, Dec 2, 1993, in FINS, "A New Fight for Democracy in Cyberspace," Mar 17, 1994, online in FINS at URL: http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Fins-NC2-06.txt.
5. George Lakoff, Professir of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, Whose Freedom? 9-11 (2006)
6. Whose Freedom? infra note 5, at 11.
7. Whose Freedom? infra note 5, at 10.
8. I.L. Janis, Groupthink - Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascos 9 (Boston: Mifflin, 1982)
9. Whose Freedom? infra note 5, at 252-253.
10. A.N. Christakis with K.C. Bausch, How People Harness thier Collective Wisdom and Power to Construct the Future in Co-Laboratories of Democracy (2006); A Technique of Democracy.
11. R. ACKOFF, CREATING THE CORPORATE FUTURE (1981); N. LANDE & A. SLADE, STAGES (1979) (reviewing the work of L. Kohlberg); M. BUBER, BETWEEN MAN AND MAN (1955); K.A APPIAH, COSMOPOLITANISM: ETHICS IN A WORLD OF STRANGERS (2006); A.N. Christakis with K.C. Bausch, How People Harness; but see, JAMES LOVELOCK, THE REVENGE OF GAIA: EARTH'S CLIMATE CRISIS & THE FATE OF HUMANITY 7 (2006) (discussing the author's findings and conclusions "(I)t is much too late for sustainable development, what we need is sustainable retreat." ).
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Sustainability; A.N. Christakis, A Retrospective Structural Inquiry of the Predicament of Mankind Prospectus of he Club of Rome, in J. MCINTYRE, EDITOR, RESCUING THE ENLIGHTENMENT FROM ITSELF: CRITICAL AND SYSTEMS IMPLICATIONS FOR DEMOCRACY IN THE C. WEST CHURCHMAN AND RELATED WORKS SERIES (2006); The Club of Rome, The Predicament of Mankind: Quest for Structured Responses to Growing World-wide Complexities and Uncertainties (1970); H. LÓPEZ-GARAY, DIALOGUE AMONG CIVILIZATIONS: WHAT FOR?, in INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON WORLD PEACE vol. XVIII No. 1 March 2001; K.A APPIAH, COSMOPOLITANISM: ETHICS IN A WORLD OF STRANGERS (2006); A.N. Christakis, “A People Science: The CogniScope (tm) System Approach," SYSTEMS-JOURNAL, 1996, Vol 1, No. 1 (Wroclaw, Poland), available online in FINS at URL: http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Technique_Democracy/Fins-TD-03.txt;; A.N. Christakis and W.L. Shearer, "Collaboration Through Communicative Action: Resolving The Systems Dilemma Through The CogniScope (tm) System Approach," manuscript prepared for, SYSTEMS RESEARCH (Mar 1997); MARY PARKER FOLLETT, THE NEW STATE 155 (1918), in Federal Information News Syndicate (FINS), online at URL: http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/ Mary_Parker_Follett/XVII.txt ; C. Argyris, "Actionable Knowledge: Design Causality in the Service of Consequential Theory," in JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, Vol. 32, No. 4, December 1996, at 390-406; P. SENGE, THE FIFTH DISCIPLINE (1990); J. WARFIELD, A SCIENCE OF GENERIC DESIGN (University of Iowa Press ed., 1994); A.N. Christakis, The National Forum on Nonindustrial Private Forest Lands, 2 SYSTEMS RESEARCH 189 (1985); U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, PUB. NO. E-39000, DESIGNS FOR THE FUTURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION (Warfield ed. 1981) (Xerox copy available from author).
13. K.P. PHILLIPS, WEALTH AND DEMOCRACY (2002); N. POSTMAN, infra note 3; R.L. ACKOFF, THE DEMOCRATIC CORPORATION 99 (1994); M.P. FOLLETT, infra note 9, at ch. XVIII, “Democracy Not the Crowd: Our Popular Delusion” online in FINS at URL: http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Mary_Parker_Follett/XVIII.txt; Van R. Potter and R. Grantham, Scientists' Responsibility for Survibal of the Human Species, in The Scientist, Vol: 8, #10, May 16, 1994, online in FINS at URL: http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Sustainable_Development/Fins-SD-03.txt.
14. L. Lescaze, "The Trouble With Past Futures," The Washington Post, Sept, 1981, at C1, C3; H. Ozbekhan, infra note 7; Ozbekhan, Toward a General Theory of Planning, in PERSPECTIVES OF PLANNING 47-155 (OEDC Report, Jantsch ed. 1968); explained in A.N. Christakis, A New Policy Science Paradigm, FUTURES, Dec 1973; applied in Ozbekhan, The Future of Paris, in ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON, PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS SERIES A, at 287, 523 (1977).
15. E. Jantsch, "Inter-and Transdisciplinarity University: A Systems Approach to Education and Innovation," POLICY SCIENCES, Vol. 1, No. 4 (Dec 1970): pp. 403-28.
16. Id.; D. ZAND, INFORMATION, ORGANIZATION, AND POWER (1981).
17. U. Eco, "Eternal Fascism," in THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, June 22, 1995, cover story, at 12-15; M.P. FOLLETT, infra note 7; R.L. ACKOFF, infra, at note 10; R.L. ACKOFF, CREATING THE CORPORATE FUTURE (1981; B.R. BARBER, STRONG DEMOCRACY (1984); D. MALONE, JEFFERSON AND THE RIGHTS OF MAN 169, 2 JEFFERSON AND HIS TIME (1951); D. MALONE, THE SAGE OF MONTICELLO ch. XXIV, 6 JEFFERSON AND HIS TIME (1977).
I keep thinking of the Cook Island Maori woman
who stood up in a meeting in Vanuatu in 1991 and said that
her idea of an appropriate global order was one "where the
voice of a hummingbird was listened to with as much respect
as the voice of an eagle." ... is that a "theory of action" ???
E-mail message from Jacqueline Howell Wasilewski Ph.D.,
to A.N. Christakis, et al., 2007/05/07 Mon AM 11:16:42 EDT.
18. C. ARGYRIS, REASONING, LEARNING, AND ACTION ch 5 (1982); ; Warfield, 1981, infra note 9; United Nations, The World Summit on Sustainable Development, 2002; President's Council on Sustainable Development, vision statement ¶2 (Oct 1994), online in FINS at URL: http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/Sustainable_Development/Fins-SD-05.txt.
19. N. CHOMSKY, FAILED STATES: THE ABUSES OF POWER AND THE ASSAULT ON DEMOCRACY (2006); A.B. SCHMOOKLER, THE PARABLE OF THE TRIBES: THE PROBLEM OF POWER IN SOCIAL EVOLUTION (Houghton Mifflin ed. 1986); R. ACKOFF, infra note 10; R.D. PUTNAM, MAKING DEMOCRACY WORK: CIVIC TRADITIONS IN MODERN ITALY (1993); J.D. SACHS, THE END OF POVERTY: ECONOMIC POSSIBILITIES FOR OUR TIME (2005); United Nations Millennium Project.
20. H. LÓPEZ-GARAY, infra, note 7; D. YANKELOVICH, NEW RULES (1981); See also A. MASLOW, MOTIVATION AND PERSONALITY (2d ed. 1970); T. PETERS & R. WATERMAN, IN SEARCH OF EXCELLENCE (Warner ed. 1984).
21. T. PETERS & R. WATERMAN, infra note 17; E. BECKER, ESCAPE FROM EVIL (1975); E. BECKER, THE DENIAL OF DEATH (1973); E. BECKER, THE STRUCTURE OF EVIL (1968).