Here's the premise.
Fair, thriving communities need fair, thoughtful self-governance structures.
Elinor Ostrom talks of the 8 principle requirements for a fair sharing of the assets, the divvying up and care of the pooled resource. Silke Helfrich and David Bollier et al talk of the need to understand the commons in order to husband it, enable it to regenerate, and to be able to rely on its fruits for our own thriving.
Both need a system of governance. A set of simple and (importantly) agreed rules to ensure we remain fair, and thriving; that we understand we are flawed, as a species - that we make mistakes, and are sometimes driven by less noble desires than selflessness and the wellbeing of us all; and that that needs managing.
So if we agree that the human is flawed; and that self-governance is key to manage that imperfection: the next logical thought is that we need to make sure that those self-governign structures are the right ones, as the world around us changes. That we need to check them. And given that one of our other many flaws is the tendency to followership, to seeking comfort, the path of least resistance, of compliance, even complacency - then we need to manage for that, too.
Cue (the need for) transgression. It's a deliberate kicking of the tyres of the societal vehicles we create for our self governance, our rules, our laws, our stories and our discourse. It's a making sure we're still on the right route, in the right sort of car, even as the landscape and weather around us changes. It's a yelling for snow chains when required, for adding or taking out seats, for insisting on checking the map, the route, the speed and the direction, and it's at the heart of making sure all passengers are ok, the journey is what's required and the destination what we all hope for. It cannot be designed out. It's much too dangerous to design out the learning, the critical thinking and the reflection that can only come from daring to break the rules.
Fair, thriving communities need fair, thoughtful self-governance structures.
Elinor Ostrom talks of the 8 principle requirements for a fair sharing of the assets, the divvying up and care of the pooled resource. Silke Helfrich and David Bollier et al talk of the need to understand the commons in order to husband it, enable it to regenerate, and to be able to rely on its fruits for our own thriving.
Both need a system of governance. A set of simple and (importantly) agreed rules to ensure we remain fair, and thriving; that we understand we are flawed, as a species - that we make mistakes, and are sometimes driven by less noble desires than selflessness and the wellbeing of us all; and that that needs managing.
So if we agree that the human is flawed; and that self-governance is key to manage that imperfection: the next logical thought is that we need to make sure that those self-governign structures are the right ones, as the world around us changes. That we need to check them. And given that one of our other many flaws is the tendency to followership, to seeking comfort, the path of least resistance, of compliance, even complacency - then we need to manage for that, too.
Cue (the need for) transgression. It's a deliberate kicking of the tyres of the societal vehicles we create for our self governance, our rules, our laws, our stories and our discourse. It's a making sure we're still on the right route, in the right sort of car, even as the landscape and weather around us changes. It's a yelling for snow chains when required, for adding or taking out seats, for insisting on checking the map, the route, the speed and the direction, and it's at the heart of making sure all passengers are ok, the journey is what's required and the destination what we all hope for. It cannot be designed out. It's much too dangerous to design out the learning, the critical thinking and the reflection that can only come from daring to break the rules.