David Garcia on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 15:44:31 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> No evidence of digital wrong-doing...

I agree Felix that it is probably too late for Brexit..but...

there remains a chance that the parliamentary log jam means that 
other options cannot gain a majority and there is enough of a realisation
that ‘crashing out without a deal’ would be a disaster to make another referendum 
least worst option left.. Perhaps May has just enough grasp of reality to
realise that a ’no deal brexit’ would keep her party out of office for a generation.  

Under those circumstances it would be likely that rather than repeat the 
polarising fiasco of the 2016 vote we would adopt a more thoughtful approach 
that would include Citizens Forums as part of the equation. 

This scenario although unlikely remains a possibility and so it is important to
be prepared for this eventuality.. 

To answer you question about Labour’s position: they have proposed a ‘softer version’
of Brexit which involves reamaining in a customs union which would make the Irish
boarder problem soluble and they called for a vote of no confidence in May which she won.
So no General Election likely unless May tries a last roll of the dice rather than going
down the other paths which are all unpalatable. So the brexit car is stuck deep in the
mud.. the wheels are spinning….. we are going no-where… except for sliding into 
fuck knows where… And that it is not so much a journey as a predicament and is why we 
can’t yet rule out another referendum not because anybody wants one but…well you know….
We are Sooo fucked! 


PS for the record below is Stella Creasy’s proposed amendment that may be considered tomorow but 
will almost certainly not be selected for consideration.

Labour MP Stella Creasy's amendment

Requires the government to ask the EU to postpone Brexit day for an unspecified period and give the public more say in the Brexit process through a 250-member "Citizens' Assembly".

 This would:

* comprise a "representative sample of the population" to make recommendations on the Brexit process after 10 weeks of consideration

* be supported by an "expert advisory group”

* require the government to respond within two weeks


On 28 Jan 2019, at 13:55, Felix Stalder <felix@openflows.com> wrote:

On 28.01.19 13:46, carlo von lynX wrote:
Even better when expert knowledge is in check by liquid
democracy rather than size-limited citizen assemblies.
We actually have a new technology that solves this
challenge but it is still being used too rarely.

As far as I know from the German Pirate Party, the use of liquid
democracy has been pretty problematic, to say the least. But anyway,
these are different things, as David said, no either or.

Citizens' Assemblies are for a smaller number of citizens coming
together multiple times over longer period of times (say one year),
discussing, in depth and with experts, contentious issues. The
advantages of a small number is that you can be more clear with the
selection process (ensuring a minimum of diversity) and you can
materially suppor the participants (again, important is you want to
include people who canno affort "free labor".).

The advantage of such assemblies really lies in the qualitative
dimension, people from different backgrounds being forced to listen to
each other, respond face-to-face to each other, and seeing where
agreements can be reached and were disagreement might be rephrased to
change the question into something more productive.

This is really hard to replicate electroncially and with large number of

But to iniate this process now for Brexit, it's really too late. This
takes a long time, and it would mean, in effect, to day inside the EU
until the process is finished, and then we will see again, depending on
the outcome of the process.

What I've always wondered by Labor hasn't come up with their version of
Brexit and then called for a new elections to make sure they have the
majority to bring it through parliament. At least, then people could
vote, even indirectly, for their prefered version of the thing, without
having to re-do the vote, which would be problematic, to say the least.


|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com
|Open PGP   http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x0bbb5b950c9ff2ac

#  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: