Conversation Cafes and the 2004 Election

Tue Dec 16 02:35:33 PST 2003

Thank you Peggy!
I think I will make Toms pet vision to mine!

AND I will include short trainings in NVC (Non Violent Communication),
formulated (not invented!) by the american Marshall Roesenberg. This could
be done in a studycircle. At least in Sweden ;-) it happens now and then
that people with the best intentions are communicating in a contraproducive
way, not seldom unconcious about how they sound and  look. My experience of
using NVC, after very brief trainings, is that it helps me when strong
feelings are evoked, when my heart is beating and my cheeks are red. It
helps me to communicate in a way that helps people to listen to me, even if
they do not agree with me. And that helps me to listen to them...

AND I will also include studycircles in "The ABC of Democracy". I am member
of a swedish network called The Academy of Democracy. This network have
existed since early -90. I have been a small part in the creation of
studycicles building of the work of the old professor in Political Science
at Yale , the american Robert A. Dahl. He has worked all his life with the
problems, dilemmas and opportunities of the practice of Democracy. I think
he is seen as one of the living classics. The studycircle I talk about is
based mostly of "Democracy and its critics", Yale University Press 1989. The
over 400 pages book have been kind of sythesized into 4 pages, into a
folder, and workshops have been designed to make them into flesh and
blood...It gives people a common language dealing with aspects of the
democratic process. Of course people can choose not to use that language -
still, it gives something to start with.

So, this was my 2 (american!) cents from Sweden.
Agneta Setterwall, Uppsala

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peggy Holman" <peggy at opencirclecompany.com>
To: <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 10:13 PM
Subject: Fw: Conversation Cafes and the 2004 Election

> Friends,
>
> Having finally gotten current with list messages, I'm tapping into the
> current thread on civil conversation.  Seems, as the message below shows,
> this idea is being explored in a variety of ways.  Thoughts?
>
> from cool and cloudy Seatte,
> Peggy
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Atlee" <cii at igc.org>
> To: "Vicki Robin" <vmrr at earthlink.net>
> Cc: "Juanita Brown" <juanita at theworldcafe.com>; "Sandy Heierbacher"
> <sandy at thataway.org>; "Peggy Holman" <peggy at opencirclecompany.com>;
"Martha
> McCoy" <martham at studycircles.org>; "Ned Crosby" <benncro at usinternet.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 9:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Conversation Cafes and the 2004 Election
>
>
> > Dear Vicki,
> >
> > What a vision!  At the risk of seeming totally predictable, I have to
> > say it just kicks me into bigger vision!
> >
> > Lately I've been coming to the conclusion that the greatest potential
> > in public dialogue and participation efforts lies not in any practice
> > by itself ("Which is the best practice?"), but in synergies between
> > them when they are used together strategically ("What is the most
> > powerful role for this practice, and how might its impact be
> > magnified by coordinated use with certain other practices?").
> > Several months ago, in an effort to frame and advance this inquiry, I
> > wrote several papers about "Designing Multi-Process Public
> > Participation Programs"
> > http://www.co-intelligence.org/DD-MultiProcessPgms.html
> >
> > So as I read your proposal, I found myself drawn to modifying and
> > expanding the collaboration section.  In the case of groups that are
> > not process-specific (e.g., IONS and PFN), I would engage them as you
> > propose, to focalize the dialogues in target cities.  But in the case
> > of groups that ARE process-specific (in your list, The World Cafe,
> > the Commons Cafe and IAF), I would engage them to do what they
> > already do, but in a coordinated way in concert with your CC/2004
> > activities.
> >
> > My own pet vision of an experiment of this sort would include:
> > a)  Conversation Cafes (CC)
> > b)  World Cafes (TWC)
> > c)  Open Spaces (OST)
> > d)  Study Circles
> > e)  Citizens Juries or Consensus Conferences (CJ)
> >
> > Conversation Cafes would provide the ongoing hum of conversation in
> > the city, freely open to anyone, requiring little commitment.  More
> > intense, sustained inquiries could be pursued in World Cafes, Open
> > Spaces and Study Circles.  Really juicy TWC and OST events might last
> > up to 3 days, although TWC could be used in some 2-4 hour events as
> > well.  Study Circles would go on over 4-8 weeks, 1-2 nights a week,
> > with dozens of them woven into a program including several hundred
> > people from community groups.  Study Circles have the same grassroots
> > hosts and homey quality that CC's do, but involve a coherent group
> > more intensively over a period of time.  OST and, to a greater
> > extent, Study Circle programs tend to produce action outcomes by
> > participants, providing a stimulus and outlet for action that the CCs
> > specifically (and correctly, for their purpose) discourage.  OST is a
> > great place for sharing (marketting) detailed perspectives and
> > proposals, which again is (appropriately) discouraged in the CC
> > context.  TWCs can be used alongside OST, CCs and/or Study Circles to
> > allow otherwise disparate participants in these programs to access
> > each other's insights.  Etc.  This is just a taste of the kinds of
> > different functions filled by the diverse practices, and what they
> > have to contribute to each other and to a larger co-ordinated
> > multi-process public participation dialogue program.
> >
> > Finally, Citizens Juries or Consensus Conferences can provide the
> > full city with an archetypally powerful and media-visible citizen
> > conversation about issues being dealt with by the other dialogue
> > forums.  A CJ's findings and recommendations provide ideal grist for
> > all the other dialogues (there being no other information available
> > on the subject that is quite like it, as far as reflecting a coherent
> > sense of the common good and the general interest, from a diverse
> > citizens' perspective).  On the other hand, a community rich in the
> > other dialogues (CC, TWC, OST, etc.) produces engaged citizens whose
> > participation in a CJ is likely to elevate the quality of the CJ's
> > discourse.  There is incredible potential synergy between the broadly
> > accessible types of conversation and the "microcosm conversations" of
> > Citizens' Juries.
> >
> > The whole program could be organized such that participants in CJs,
> > OSTs and Study Circles end up having a profound and co-ordinated
> > effect on elections and policy-making activities, demonstrating real
> > empowerment through dialogue (a reality that could then be talked
> > about in further CCs etc., building the momentum!).
> >
> > My vision would be an arrangement in which several cities would be
chosen
> and
> > a)  You or someone from the world of Conversation Cafes would
> > organize CCs there to make everyone in the city feel welcomed into
> > meaningful conversation about significant issues;
> > b)  Juanita or someone else from the world of World Cafes would
> > organize WCs there to deepen the cities' inquiries and share
> > developing insights;
> > c)  Peggy Holman or someone else from the world of Open Spaces would
> > organize Open Spaces there to help people translate their passions
> > into connection and action;
> > d)  Staff from the Study Circles Resource Center would organize one
> > or more Study Circle programs to bring the cities' churches, temples,
> > schools, community organizations and other groups into the
> > conversation and action; and
> > e)  Ned Crosby or old staff of the Jefferson Center would organize
> > one or more Citizens' Juries there to evaluate candidates, election
> > issues or the democracy itself, and provide informed insights and
> > public judgments to all the other conversations involved in the
> > program.
> >
> > (There are many other methods that could be integrated into such a
> > broad program for public dialogue.  I think that practices like
> > community Listening Projects a la Fran Peavey and the Rural Southern
> > Voice for Peace; Mediated Dialogue a la Search for Common Ground; and
> > various multiple viewpoint drama activities like Anna Deveare Smith's
> > work, Theatre of the Oppressed, and Playback Theatre could all
> > provide remarkable stimulus to such a program.  As you know, this
> > list barely scratches the iceberg -- but it may give you an idea of
> > what fun you could have designing something like this...:-)
> >
> > In addition to the staff and activities listed above and in your
> > proposal, this vision would also include
> > f)  someone (perhaps associated with the National Coalition for
> > Dialogue and Deliberation) to coordinate it all, and to convene the
> > ongoing conversations among the practitioners/organizers in (a)-(e),
> > through which such an integrated effort could unfold;
> > g)  researchers to explore the synergies, the organizing methods, and
> > the impacts on the participants, decision-makers and the community as
> > a whole;  and
> > h)  videographers and journalists/authors recording it for current
> > news and subsequent research and publicity.
> >
> > Much of the same brilliant activities you used to bring CCs to
> > Seattle could be applied to this integrated program as well.  I
> > believe it is out of such efforts that a true culture of dialogue
> > would be able to grow, because such a culture is so much bigger than
> > any of us, so much bigger than any one practice.  Finally, doing
> > multi-process programs allows for diverse dialogue organizers to
> > present a united face to the public, and to point out the power that
> > is available to the citizenry through smart use of these processes,
> > so that the citizens will DEMAND more dialogue and deliberation in
> > all aspects of their community life.  This reaches beyond the
> > election to transform the internal and external life of democracy,
> > itself.
> >
> > Anyway, that's where your thinking and visioning took my thinking and
> > visioning.
> >
> > And here are a few comments on your proposal, made from within the
> > paradigm you started with!!
> >
> > 1)  Paragraph four seems to end mid-sentence:  "Two part-time
> employees...."
> >
> > 2)  Re Launch Questons:
> >
> > You write:  "Some say America is the place where anyone can get rich.
> > Others say American is the place where anyone can become President.
> > Which of these statements seem more true to you and why?"  I felt an
> > URGE to expand the options here -- especially since I want neither to
> > become rich nor President!  Perhaps inserting something like the
> > following:  "Still others say the America is a place where people can
> > fulfill their potential or make a difference or pursue happiness or
> > be free."
> >
> > There is nothing in these questions about foreign policy, war and
> > peace, global impact.  I realized this when I read the otherwise
> > excellent question "What is your essential definition of America...
> > it's a place where....?"  My partisan gut sense about America is that
> > it is a potentially catastrophic wild card in the world and has
> > systematiclly undermined the survival or emergence of life-affirming
> > cultures everywhere.  I think a lot of other things about America,
> > but that is my first gut-level response because of my rearing and
> > life experience.  And I couldn't give that response within the
> > framework of the question.  (I want to make clear, in saying all
> > this, that I'm not promoting my particular perspective of America.
> > I'm just offering it as what many progressives feel about America, a
> > strong feeling which is marginalized by the way that question is
> > phrased.)  You could expand that question to say (for example) "What
> > is your essential definition of America... it's a place where.... a
> > force for.... a country that....?"  And I'd suggest a whole cluster
> > of questions explicitly around foreign policy:  "What actions in the
> > world would (or do) make you feel really strongly -- either proud or
> > not -- about being an American?  What are some of the best things
> > America could do in the world?  Does America have some kind of
> > destiny in the world?  What is it?"
> >
> > I suspect questions should be specifically solicited from activists
> > and from reviewing candidates' websites regarding what issues they
> > are addressing (which, of course, would have to be translated into
> > good questions, deepening questions, for the purposes of the CCs).
> > Here are some I can imagine using:
> >
> > What would make a real difference in this country?  Why?  How would
> > you like to see the country changed over the next four years?  Why is
> > that important to you?
> > What do you feel is involved in being a citizen?  What helps
> > citizenship?  What makes it hard?
> > What role should leaders play in a democracy?  How much of a
> > leadership role should citizens play?  What would (or does) that look
> > like?
> > If democracy means governing the country according to the will of the
> > people, how should we find out what the will of the people is?  Does
> > that seem like enough to you?  What would make our country more of a
> > democracy?
> >
> > 3)  Re "A concerted effort to attract diverse points of view."  The
> > first step of that often involves talking to the kinds of people you
> > want to attract and find out what kind of conversations THEY would
> > find meaningful, and how they react to the CC's design and
> > guidelines.  As generative as that design and those guidelines may
> > seem to us, their very lack of control may be part of the thing that
> > keeps certain people (like Bush supporters) from attending.  Walking
> > into a conservative political campaign office and asking some folks
> > "What's wrong with our design for this public conversation program?"
> > (a la Dr. Karl Henrik Robert's initial process and some RSVP
> > Listening Projects) might produce some interesting insights.  Or ask
> > one of them to watch a CC from another table and, at the end of the
> > night, tell you whether they felt welcomed or not, and why.
> >
> > Thems m'thoughts, m'buddy.  I hope they're useful somehow.
> >
> > Coheartedly,
> > Tom
> >

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html