December 20th, 2006
I posted a version of this on my own blog, but I think the sentiment is important to some recent discussion here.
Today’s Huffington Post included an entry by David Russell, in what appears to be his first Huff: “When the National is Really Local.” Russell is the writer-director-producer who was responsible for a couple of favorites, Flirting With Disaster and I Heart Huckabees. He has a new film planned for 2008 (The H-Man Cometh) starring Vince Vaughn as a radio personality who identifies too much with his listeners.
Russell briefly rants about the disconnect between the jet-setter interest in hobnobbing with politicians and political issues and the actual issues as they affect their own neighborhood, such as a six-month construction project to widen a highway. As Russell writes:
This is exactly the type of ‘quality of life’ issue that the Clinton administration focused on to great effect, ways that government can make people’s day to day lives better –precisely the kinds of things most politicians (and Brentwood liberals) find too small or boring to get into.
This post resonates with me for two reasons.
First, I wholeheartedy agree with the observation. I’ve clicked my share of insta-faxes from organizations like MoveOn.org in my time, but all it does is prevent a personal critical mass from forming. It is passive activism. The effects are nice for those whose local neighborhood access involves Congress. For the rest of us, it has the unintended effect of allowing individuals to be less involved than they might otherwise be.
The second point, though, is the nature of Russell’s post itself. It has a bit of griping and astute observation, but offers no solution. He doesn’t suggest action readers could take, instead implying that the Hollywood movers-n-shakers should make an adjustment in some non-specific manner. As any good Informatician knows, knowledge itself doesn’t change behavior.
So here, as I gripe about what’s missing in the Russell entry, I’ll try to to avoid a follow-up self-critique here by offering some ideas for local engagement:
- Figure out who your City Council representatives are, and ask for a meeting with one you don’t know. Or, if you know them all, introduce a councilperson to one of your friends who doesn’t.
- Look at an agenda from your County Council meetings, and Google up on the issues involved with one of their items.
- Find a volunteer organization and invest some time to understand the nature of a local need.
These actions aren’t going to make the Huffington Post anytime soon, but imagine what would happen if more people did them.
November 22nd, 2006
Last weekend, I concluded a two-month project called RootsCamp by sitting around various tables with a small group of locals, talking politics. There were some disappointments, of course, mainly tied to the lack of numbers filling the venues. But I’m glad I made the effort. In fact, there was strong support for continuing the idea, perhaps in January for a single session.
Some of the key lessons learned include:
- Like-minded people have a lot of disagreement. The dozen people who attended were all progressive-liberal types of some definition. No students. No Republicans. No cultural diversity. Still, everybody has her own agenda, his own way to make sense of the world. Diversity of any kind is needed for good conversation, and it will surface even in a vanilla group of ideologues.
- When recruiting, there is no substitute for face-to-face conversation. Time and money were big resource constraints for me, but I also recognize that getting out of my office and talking to people about this idea is uncomfortable. Yet, I was at my most effective in explaining the concept when I did so. Blogging, email, web sites … all very important in the process, but they should support the act of looking someone in the eye.
- People will talk about what is important to them. The strength of this self-organizing format is that people are empowered to fill the Big Board with what interests them. Choices and opportunity are key ingredients, and we should actively fight against our own impulses to dictate agendas.
- The web site was an obstacle to entry. The pbwiki site is a bit on the clunky side, as are most wikis. The registration process, which required people to edit a wiki page, was a hurdle (I also accepted email and phone calls). The site also notified all members of every page edit by default, which led to a lot of notification emails for people who didn’t want them. Technology should facilitate, not dictate or interfere.
- There is no “good” day to have a conference. Every day is contended in Bloomington. This particular weekend of RootsCamp had many conflicts … Men’s basketball game on Friday night … IU-Purdue football game on Saturday … parenting conference on Saturday … Last weekend before a major holiday … The release of Wii, which required some to sit in the cold for two days to pick up one of the 45 units Best Buy got Sunday. Advance notice and frequent opportunities can help overcome the hurdles to participation, but there will never be a “perfect” time to do anything.
- Every place, every person, has an embedded identity. I take some pride in the fact that I can stand in a conversation and have people wrinkle their brows trying to place me in an ideology. I am not a Democrat, nor am I Republican. I am progressive, but even that isn’t clearly defined. Still, the fact that I attend, or that I organize forces others to make the attempt to classify me. And in doing so, they react to that classification, whether it is accurate or not. RootsCamp’s national effort is definitely “progressive” in the Democrat sense of the word. Anyone going to the site from the other side of the fence might be chased off by that. Those in attendance are talking about getting local organizations to host a session every month or so. Any location we choose is going to have embedded in it some identity that invokes reactions. The best way to compensate is to identify with a philosophy that can withstand those biases.
What’s Next? … Well, it is difficult to imagine not leaning on these new connections to become engaged in the local political scene. The absence of conservative voices (Republicans were largely defeated in this area in November) makes me want to redouble my efforts to get those people coming to the tables, perhaps starting with a conservative-centered conversation. There are a few tech and research initiatives that came out of the conversations, so I see some tangible things I can do to contribute.
What’s this mean for 3rd Party? … This experience reinforces two central beliefs. First, the best way to engage is locally through establishment of personal connections. Second, diversity exists even within like-minded people. To improve the quality of our political thought, we need to get people with lots of different ideas talking to each other. Not to convince, but to validate their life experiences and make sure they are considered in the action that results from the conversation.
