Jimmy Wales seeking more intelligent politics

Posted on by

From his Mission Statement – Central Campaign Wikia…

Broadcast media brought us broadcast politics. And let’s be simple and bluntly honest about it, left or right, conservative or liberal, broadcast politics are dumb, dumb, dumb.

Campaigns have been more about getting the television messaging right, the image, the soundbite, than about engaging ordinary people in understanding and caring how political issues really affect their lives.

Blog and wiki authors are now inventing a new era of media, and it is my belief that this new media is going to invent a new era of politics. If broadcast media brought us broadcast politics, then participatory media will bring us participatory politics.

One hallmark of the blog and wiki world is that we do not wait for permission before making things happen. If something needs to be done, we do it. Well, campaigns need to sit up and take notice of the Internet, take notice of bloggers, take notice of wikis, and engage with us in a constructive way.
The candidates who will win elections in the future will be the candidates who build genuinely participative campaigns by generating and expanding genuine communities of engaged citizens.

I am launching today a new Wikia website aimed at being a central meeting ground for people on all sides of the political spectrum who think that it is time for politics to become more participatory, and more intelligent.

This website, Campaigns Wikia, has the goal of bringing together people from diverse political perspectives who may not share much else, but who share the idea that they would rather see democratic politics be about engaging with the serious ideas of intelligent opponents, about activating and motivating ordinary people to get involved and really care about politics beyond the television soundbites.

Together, we will start to work on educating and engaging the political campaigns about how to stop being broadcast politicians, and how to start being community and participatory politicians…

A good start

Posted on by

There’s a nice saying in Irish –“tosnu maith leath na hoibre”, which basically means “a good start is half the labour”. Every writer knows that in his/her bones: if you can figure out how to start a piece, then you’re half-way there.

I thought of this today when reading Steve Shapin’s lovely opening to his London Review of Books review of Don’t You Have Time to Think?: The Letters of Richard Feynman. Here it is:

Should you win the Nobel Prize in physics, a lot of people will get in touch. Some of them will be former students (wishing you well); some will be colleagues (saying they wish you well). Presidents and prime ministers, who have no clue what it is you’ve done, will write, expressing the nation’s gratitude for whatever it is you’ve done. Childhood friends will write, saying they knew that nerdiness presaged Nobelity. Old schoolteachers will write, basking in reflected glory and taking their share of credit. The in-laws will write, implicitly retracting their former low opinion of their child’s choice. From all over the world complete strangers will write, requesting photographs and autographs and asking for validation of a totally original unified field theory that somehow escaped Einstein’s attention. Fathers of miserably lonely adolescent geeks will write, wondering whether it will turn out all right. And so too will the adolescent geeks themselves, asking what you were like at their age and whether you think they’ve got a genuine vocation for science…

Nice, isn’t it?

Thus Ate Zarathustra

Posted on by

Woody Allen, on The Nietsche Diet Book…

No philosopher came close to solving the problem of guilt and weight until Descartes divided mind and body in two, so that the body could gorge itself while the mind thought, Who cares, it’s not me. The great question of philosophy remains: If life is meaningless, what can be done about alphabet soup? It was Leibniz who first said that fat consisted of monads. Leibniz dieted and exercised but never did get rid of his monads—at least, not the ones that adhered to his thighs. Spinoza, on the other hand, dined sparingly because he believed that God existed in everything and it’s intimidating to wolf down a knish if you think you’re ladling mustard onto the First Cause of All Things…

The Long Tail

Posted on by

Just back from the Institute of Contemporary Arts in London where I interviewed Wired Editor, Chris Anderson, about his new book, The Long Tail. He’s a voluble, intelligent, persuasive talker and he gave a polished performance to a packed house.

Two interesting points.

  • Anderson wrote his book ‘publicly’ — by publishing chapters on his Blog and inviting comments. So he harnessed the power of Eric Raymond’s motto, “with enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow”.
  • He’s also harnessed the blogosphere by offering to give a free copy to any blogger who will review it. Smart thinking.

    • Just deserts

    Posted on by

    Lovely column by Richard Williams. Sample:

    In the aftermath of a punishing defeat, no man should be called to account for his impromptu remarks. But when Frank Lampard said on Saturday night that England had “deserved” to win the match in which defeat had just eliminated them from the World Cup, he was inadvertently exposing the problem at the heart of the team’s consistent inability to scale the highest peaks.

    David Beckham had used the same word earlier in the campaign. England would get to the World Cup final, the captain said, because they “deserved” to be there. Since no deeper analysis was forthcoming, his listeners were left to infer that the evidence in support of his contention might have included any or all of the following: England’s historic role as the game’s mother country; the vast popularity of the Premiership at home and abroad; the inflated pay and celebrity status of its players; and the attention lavished on the public appearances of their wives and girlfriends…

    Williams has been consistently accurate and detached about the reality distortion field which surrounded the England team from the outset.

    Those crafty Germans…

    Posted on by

    … leave nothing to chance. In fact they will stop at nothing. For example, they even used database technology to brief their goalie. You think I jest? Well, read this:

    The full story of Lehmann’s preparation emerged yesterday. He won the 1997 Uefa Cup with Schalke against Internazionale after making a penalty save. His manager at Schalke was Huub Stevens, who is responsible for a personal database of 13,000 penalty kicks. Lehmann used this archive against Inter and, prior to the Argentina game, he telephoned Stevens.

    The 36-year-old goalkeeper already had the benefit of the German FA’s database – they had copied Stevens’ approach – and having collated the information about who takes Argentina’s penalties and how they take them, Germany’s goalkeeping coach Andreas Kopke wrote it on a piece of paper ripped from a hotel notepad. On it was written details such as “[Julio] Cruz – stand tall, don’t move, dive right”.

    For Argentina’s second penalty-taker, Roberto Ayala, it said: “Ayala – look at shooting foot, left low.” Sure enough, Ayala placed the ball low to Lehmann’s left and it was advantage Germany.

    When Maxi Rodríguez walked up to strike the third, Lehmann knew it would be “hard, right”. He went the correct way and was unlucky not to make the save. But after Borowski had made it 4-2, Esteban Cambiasso had to score to keep Argentina in the tournament. Lehmann’s notes said: “Wait, stand tall, left corner.” He duly made an impressive stop to his left.

    Honestly — databases! It’s just not cricket.

    Editorial fatuity

    Posted on by

    It grieves me to say it, but my newspaper has an exceedingly silly leader today about England’s exit. It concludes:

    The consolation, if there can be any, is in the performance that brought us so close to victory. When the squad come back from Germany, for all their flaws, they deserve to be greeted as heroes. We salute them.

    In the old days, one would be left fuming at this fatuous sentiment. But there then follows a long stream of critical comments from readers (and this is at 10am on the morning of publication) taking the editorial apart.

    “Are you on the same planet as me?”, inquires Grazman. “We should salute these underperforming, overpaid, useless brats? What are you thinking? The only player with any credit is Owen Hargreaves. The rest should be ashamed of themselves.”

    Here’s another:

    How on earth do they deserve to be greeted as heroes? They were absolutely rubbish. Limped out of one of the weakest groups in the tournament, just about got past mighty Equador, then fell at the first proper test: a depleted Portugal squad without one of their key players. Utterly embarrassing performance. With one or two exceptions, the entire team should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. Beckham’s time is up, Gerrard & Lampard looked a shadow of their club selves etc etc etc. Absolute rubbish…

    There’s a lot more in the same vein, and of course outbreaks of the usual infighting that goes on in Blog comments — e.g. a Scotsman complaining that the Observer, as a UK newspaper, should talk about “England” not “us”, followed by people taking the Scot to task. But what’s interesting about this is that it is happening. Newspapers used to be one-way channels of communication. Journalists rarely knew what their readers thought. No longer.