[EM] Trees by Proxy
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
abd at lomaxdesign.com
Tue Mar 20 20:52:45 PDT 2007
At 06:01 AM 3/20/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>Thanks.
>
>While our thoughts on proxy are similar, I see what I am trying as
>being far from Free Association.
Think about it a while, you might come around.... :-)
I originally developed delegable proxy having governmental structure
in mind. However, I also had significant organizational experience in
what was the model for Free Associations. And I realized that the
combination could be extremely powerful and effective.
Free Associations are modelled after Alcoholics Anonymous, though
much of the theory also resembles anarchist and libertarian thought.
When Bill Wilson was putting together the Traditions of AA, which,
with the Concepts for World Service, formed the structural concept
for the organization, he had in mind a series of specific
organizational failures from history, and he was trying to create a
narrow-focus organization that would avoid these problems. He
succeeded brilliantly. AA might have been successful, maybe even very
successful, for a short time, without these limitations that he set
for the organization. But it is quite likely that it would by now
have been an obscure footnote in the history of alcoholism
treatement. As it happened, AA, with very little funding (and the
funding they had was almost irrelevant), rapidly expanded to become
practically ubiquitous. There have been a few efforts to start
competing organizations based on this or that alleged shortcoming of
AA, but those efforts are tiny compared to AA, which is *everywhere*.
I'm not an alcoholic, but if I were, I could walk out the door any
evening and find a meeting, probably within a short walk. When I
lived more out in the country, I might have had to select a
particular evening to find a meeting in my very small town. These
meetings are all autonomous, they are all self-supporting. The
central office, AA World Services, Inc., doesn't fund meetings or
local activities. Rather, they fund it, out of the excess
contributions coming from passing the hat, almost entirely. AAWS
won't accept large donations or bequests from *anyone*.
Among people familiar with AA and the other programs that sprang up
using the same principles, it has been common to think that there
might be some wider application for the Traditions, but there has
been little idea of how to scale the process, for AA really functions
at the local meeting level, where it is direct democracy with a
strong penchant for consensus.
(I mentioned that I had organizational experience in this .... I was
national conference chair for a different 12-step program, not AA.
There are *many* such programs. This one had a delegate conference
with maybe a hundred delegates, mostly from the U.S. but a few from
elsewhere. It was large enough to have problems of scale, which were
partly addressable through a committee system; I also learned a great
deal about the "persistence of inequities" effect throught his
experience. My work empowered the delegates in an organization that
had largely depended upon the elected Board; from what I now know, I
should not have been surprised to find a backlash.)
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list