Comments on: Wiki politics http://www.wikinomics.com/blog/index.php/2007/01/26/wiki-politics/ Exploring How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything Sun, 28 Aug 2011 14:21:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Ian Ketcheson http://www.wikinomics.com/blog/index.php/2007/01/26/wiki-politics/comment-page-1/#comment-278 Ian Ketcheson Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:19:54 +0000 http://204.15.36.163:8080/blog/index.php/2007/01/26/wiki-politics/#comment-278 Hey Don, Check out http://politicopia.com It is an interesting little experiment in wikified politics coming out of Utah. Cheers. Hey Don,

Check out http://politicopia.com

It is an interesting little experiment in wikified politics coming out of Utah.

Cheers.

]]> By: Bruce Stewart http://www.wikinomics.com/blog/index.php/2007/01/26/wiki-politics/comment-page-1/#comment-204 Bruce Stewart Sat, 27 Jan 2007 20:15:55 +0000 http://204.15.36.163:8080/blog/index.php/2007/01/26/wiki-politics/#comment-204 It is precisely that sense of the "broadcast model" engaging us once every few years that makes me completely at ease with all the party switching that has been going on in Canadian politics of late. Whether it was Keith Martin (Canadian Alliance to Liberals), Scott Brison (Progressive Conservatives to Liberals), Belinda Stronach (Conservatives to Liberals), David Emerson (Liberals to Conservatives) or Wajid Khan (Liberals to Conservatives), to name but five recent ones, each of these represents a "between shows" opportunity to reach out to the public with the message that some issue or combination of issues mattered enough to that MP for them to stand up to the party system in some fashion and cross the floor. (I will be charitable and presume that no one crossed the floor solely to receive a Cabinet posting, although in at least three of the cases given a Cabinet seat was not long in coming.) We do need more issue-based and locally-based members, more members who will not take the whip and vote sheeplike with caucus and party. If this leads to a raft of Garth Turners (banished from the Conservative caucus to Independent status), then so be it. Big media loves the notion of the party; the party loves the notion of the leader. Is it any wonder that executive power continues to accumulate at the centre (Prime Minister's Office or Presidency, it matters not) regardless of who or what party gains power? Big everything likes knowing, in point of fact, who the "go to" person is. Where Web 2.0 technologies come into play is with the ease of setting up little corners. The MP, Congressman, Senator, etc. who truly does chart an independent course in the fashion of Edmund Burke today has far more opportunities to reach out to the community with her or his message. In turn, the attentive MP (etc.) who wants to pay attention to their constituency has thousands of inputs open to them. They need not, like Chuck Cadman (Independent MP for Surrey-North in the 2004-06 Parliament, who voted to uphold the Martin Government's budget in May, 2005), explicitly survey their constituents on everything, nor need they give precious hours of their life to interest group and special pleader after another - the voice of the community can be found in its blogs, wikis, etc. One outcome of these technologies that I do expect to emerge over time is that of subsidiarity: decisions will move to the lowest level of government that can make them. Why plead for attention for the city in the national capital - where rural ridings far outweigh the votes of city dwellers, and the city surplus is raked off? - when a city councillor's ability to tap into the zeitgeist of their community is as good as any MLA's or MP's? And so the parties will end not as policy formulators and great brokers of interests, but as brands tout court, as fragile as a dandelion gone to seed and waiting for the breeze - and with far less purpose. But not until they play out their string this last time in the "pretense" of consultation. It is precisely that sense of the “broadcast model” engaging us once every few years that makes me completely at ease with all the party switching that has been going on in Canadian politics of late. Whether it was Keith Martin (Canadian Alliance to Liberals), Scott Brison (Progressive Conservatives to Liberals), Belinda Stronach (Conservatives to Liberals), David Emerson (Liberals to Conservatives) or Wajid Khan (Liberals to Conservatives), to name but five recent ones, each of these represents a “between shows” opportunity to reach out to the public with the message that some issue or combination of issues mattered enough to that MP for them to stand up to the party system in some fashion and cross the floor. (I will be charitable and presume that no one crossed the floor solely to receive a Cabinet posting, although in at least three of the cases given a Cabinet seat was not long in coming.)

We do need more issue-based and locally-based members, more members who will not take the whip and vote sheeplike with caucus and party. If this leads to a raft of Garth Turners (banished from the Conservative caucus to Independent status), then so be it.

Big media loves the notion of the party; the party loves the notion of the leader. Is it any wonder that executive power continues to accumulate at the centre (Prime Minister’s Office or Presidency, it matters not) regardless of who or what party gains power? Big everything likes knowing, in point of fact, who the “go to” person is.

Where Web 2.0 technologies come into play is with the ease of setting up little corners. The MP, Congressman, Senator, etc. who truly does chart an independent course in the fashion of Edmund Burke today has far more opportunities to reach out to the community with her or his message. In turn, the attentive MP (etc.) who wants to pay attention to their constituency has thousands of inputs open to them. They need not, like Chuck Cadman (Independent MP for Surrey-North in the 2004-06 Parliament, who voted to uphold the Martin Government’s budget in May, 2005), explicitly survey their constituents on everything, nor need they give precious hours of their life to interest group and special pleader after another – the voice of the community can be found in its blogs, wikis, etc.

One outcome of these technologies that I do expect to emerge over time is that of subsidiarity: decisions will move to the lowest level of government that can make them. Why plead for attention for the city in the national capital – where rural ridings far outweigh the votes of city dwellers, and the city surplus is raked off? – when a city councillor’s ability to tap into the zeitgeist of their community is as good as any MLA’s or MP’s? And so the parties will end not as policy formulators and great brokers of interests, but as brands tout court, as fragile as a dandelion gone to seed and waiting for the breeze – and with far less purpose.

But not until they play out their string this last time in the “pretense” of consultation.

]]>