RE: Toward a new US-World dialogue

From: Lawrence DeBivort (debivort@umd5.umd.edu)
Date: Wed 11 Dec 2002 - 17:34:37 GMT

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "RE: Toward a new US-World dialogue"

    Hi Grant, Yes, of course, so far, it is 'just talk.' And to goal is to create a way of talk that leads to the influencing of ideas and actions....but it does start with talk. The trick is to not let it end with talk.

    Anyway: Thank you for the good starting questions. I've interpolated my ideas in them.

    > Taking first things first, a) where would we meet?
    On the Net, via email, to begin with. Maybe later a list. Invitational, I suppose, with emphasis on getting participation from thoughtful people around the world.

    > b) what kind of agenda does anyone propose?

    I haven't proposed an agenda, but perhaps a good key launching question might be:
            - discussion of the emerging role of the US today in the world (social, economic, political, cultural, technological and military). What are these roles? How do they impact the world? What does 'the world' (with all its differing views!) see in the US, and want of it? What does the US see and want of the world? How are these views on target, and not on target?

    > c) What do you think we could realistically accomplish?

    At a minimum, it would be a fascinating and enlightening discussion. Beyond that, I think we could assume that it would, depending on who was participating in the dialogue, have a real effect on the thinking and actions of some people in positions to make a difference in some countries. Beyond that, it might give rise to projects, networks, and organizations that are concerned with how things are going. I can easily see this happening in the US, simply by piggy-backing on the efforts of existing projects. And, if it all were to work extraordinarily well, we might even see emerging from the dialogue views that were so profoundly useful that they spread beyond the participants and affected the thinking and actions of large systems, for the better. This does happen, from time to time, and it is not impossible that we might contribute to such a result.

    d) How should we go about it?

    Off-list discussions about how to organize this, how to proceed. The immediate question is that of critical mass amongst ourselves. The response on this list was minimal, so in our off-list discussion, we should include the question of who might participate in the seed organizers of the dialogue. Of course, within this seed group, we want some participation from a variety of societies.

    > May the nitty get gritty

    Agreed!

    What do you think?

    Best regards, Lawry

    >
    > Grant
    >
    >
    > >Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:13:48 -0500
    > >
    > >Greetings, Steve,
    > >
    > >Yes, the world seen pessimistically has its many advocates and
    > >practitioners, and a ton of examples to demonstrate the reasonableness of
    > >seeing it that way.
    > >
    > >But the counter-examples are as numerous, and, to me, more indicative of
    > >the
    > >true potential of things.
    > >
    > >Pessimists too often will aim low and achieve little. Optimists give
    > >themselves and their children a chance for much better. Optimists can
    > >become
    > >dispirited, of course. But, I think, better a transient dispirit than an
    > >ambient one.
    > >
    > >Supposing there is only a small chance to build a better chance for our
    > >species and our kids. Is it not worth attempting? Where is the
    > benefit in
    > >a
    > >preemptive foreclosure of hope?
    > >
    > >The dialogue that I foresee need not require nor first seek a
    > common ground
    > >for all. I have spent many a useful hour with people with whom I have
    > >little
    > >in common, or little in common that we could both openly acknowledge.
    > >Sometimes these hours were poignant and gentle; other hours were
    > brutal and
    > >angry. Sometimes they were with declared enemies, and yet
    > through the pain
    > >understanding and the initial flickers of respect emerge. From
    > such small
    > >steps, undertaken by as many as are hopeful, great sea-changes
    > can emerge.
    > >Perhaps, this time, they won't, and perhaps our species will fail its
    > >coming
    > >tests, and see its potential frittered away. That is possible.
    > But as long
    > >as it may not be so, it seems to me worth the effort to swing the
    > >probabilities a bit further our way....
    > >
    > >I do understand and sympathize the feelings that can lead to
    > pessimism, and
    > >the things we do to protect ourselves from hopelessness. There is always
    > >hope, sometimes hidden, sometimes occluded by the black heaviness of
    > >today's
    > >headlines. So sometimes we have to search for that flicker, and let it
    > >gently come to full life. It is, I feel, part of our human
    > heritage -- and
    > >genius -- that we can everyone of us do so, alone and with others.
    > >
    > >Best regards,
    > >Lawry
    > >
    > > > -----Original Message-----
    > > > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    > [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
    > > > Of Steve Drew
    > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:07 PM
    > > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > > Subject: RE: Toward a new US-World dialogue
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > > Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:28:20 -0500
    > > > > From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
    > > > > Subject: RE: Toward a new US-World dialogue
    > > > >
    > > > > Jeremy, greetings,
    > > > >
    > > > > I would not characterize the discussion here on this list as
    > > > anything close
    > > > > to the dialogue that is needed, for several reasons:
    > > > > 1. There is no participation from third-world folks
    > > > >
    > > > > 2. There is little true listening and questioning. This may be
    > > > a weakness of
    > > > > email, and it has a lot to do with the interactional dynamics.
    > > > Sometimes we
    > > > > are better at it than at other times!
    > > > >
    > > > > 3. The subject of this list is memetics; the subject of the proposed
    > > > > dialogue would be the issues that divide the species, and the
    > > > exploration of
    > > > > a view of the species that allows sub-components to avoid
    > destructive
    > > > > relations with other parts.
    > > > >
    > > > > The levels of pessimism that those who responded to the
    > > > proposal expressed
    > > > > saddens me. There is so much potential for participation and
    > > > contribution.
    > > > > I hope that this pessimism is transient. There is a big and
    > > > wonderful world
    > > > > out there (despite the negatives that so easily capture our concern
    > >and
    > > > > energy), full of resources and potential capability, of
    > learning and
    > >of
    > > > > joining with others to build better things than we can alone.
    > > > It is to this
    > > > > world that we should be engaging ourselves.
    > > >
    > > > There is indeed a big and wonderful world out there, and the (to my
    > >mind)
    > > > problem is that the number of divisions between peoples seems
    > (?) almost
    > > > insurmountable, hence some of the negativity you have
    > encountered. Most
    > >of
    > > > mine stems from my encounters with the world and people, and the
    > >repressed
    > > > desire to bang some peoples heads together :-)
    > > >
    > > > I might add a no. 4 What are the commonalities between people
    > > > irrespective
    > > > of culture, religion etc? Find what unites and the thing that divides
    > >can
    > > > sometimes look damn silly. Presume you are familiar with Needs Theory
    > >etc?
    > > >
    > > > BTW have you read the Mote in God's Eye By Niven and
    > Pournelle? SF that
    > > > dwells on pessimism big time.
    > > >
    > > > Regards
    > > >
    > > > Steve
    > > > >
    > > > > Best regards,
    > > > > Lawry
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > ===============================================================
    > > > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > > > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > > > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > > > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >===============================================================
    > >This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > >Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > >For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > >see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
    > http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >

    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed 11 Dec 2002 - 17:27:03 GMT