what's the best way to start the process?

let's say that democratic communities are 100-150 people and that that they could possibly federate together through a 'spokes' system of 50-100.

what's the best way to start the process?

i think one good approach is to split up into areas of about 15,000 (borough wards are about this size) and find a group of people who are interested in starting out, then over time try to find people in each of the 100 or so communities and gradually build the capacity of what will eventually make these the sovereign communities. This approach gives a context for activists and residents that may live close by, but not live in the same street or block to make a start, they will be able to engage people from the whole community and then help to build core communities when numbers start to grow.

maybe we should aim to start by identifying and supporting a small group of ward size areas with a good concentration of interested people / campaigns / resources?

obviously this is all for discussion at the first meeting, but these are just a few thoughts


--

why previous attempts at communes or intentional communities fail / succeed

answer to one of the questions and problems in bringing about real democracy

"One of the sticking points i had with intentional community was a sense that at its very core, it was all about control. If you just get the right people, the right place, the right leadership, the right processes, the right economy, and so on, you can have the nirvana-esque community experience of your dreams. Those folks who failed, well, they just made mistakes in judgement--poor planning--bad personality mix...you've heard it. I propose that the reason most intentional communities fail, is that the meaning of intentional, implies at its deepest (unconscious) level the belief in control. And anybody who has taken a look at living ecologies of relationship can see that they are complex systems whose order emerges organically out of chaotic conditions always present at some level. It is the confusion of harmony with changeless bliss. Harmony is NOT static. It is the dynamic tension within healthy ecologies of relationship."

http://wordgravity.blogspot.com/2007/09/beyond-intentional-community-conscious.html

i believe that this is quite important - so much is put into building perfection, but this is unattainable and anyway - a group of people each of whom almost certainly have a slightly different view of what perfection is, which will change over time, means that these communities are brittle. communities that are diverse to start with and focus on pragmatic needs first are more more likely to thrive and last.

20(ish) questions and problems in bringing about real democracy

1. why previous attempts at communes or intentional communities fail / succeed
   
2. how do we make real democracy something useful to groups working on local campaigns
3. how do we move from democratic single issue campaigns where everyone essentially agrees, to geographically based democratic communities (DCs).
   
4. should DCs be geographically based at all, what are the alternatives
   
5. what size should DCs be
   
6. how can DCs claim legitimacy when only a small proportion of people in an area are involved
7. what can DCs do to try and be representative of people that are not yet involved
   
8. how do DCs encourage people to get involved.
   
9. how do DCs interact with existing structures (especially those that call themselves 'democratic')
10. what can DCs actually do for their members and wider society rather than being talking shops
    
11. how can we answer the critics who see small communities as backward looking, tribal, inefficient etc
12. wont people be spending their whole life doing meetings and administration - leaving no time for productive work?
    
13. should DCs aim for complete self sufficiency
    
14. how do we prevent DCs coming into conflict with neighbouring communities
15. what structures can we build to help democratic communities work together, without these larger scale structures becoming like current hierachies
16. when we have truly DCs what's to stop them doing the things we criticise current states for (aggression, repression etc)
17. who is a member of a community - residents, visitors, family/friends of residents - what rights should they have (IE should visitiors be welcome but denied the right to block) how do we define that?
18. do all members have instant involvement (should people who move in have equal rights straight away, can new born babies block motions !?)
    
19. how should DCs deal with dissent - should they exclude people (from processes or in extreme cases completely exile them) what alternatives might there be to this
20. should decisions be binding
21. how can people be 'accountable'
    
22. how should communities deal with immigration, when more people might impede or eventually prevent consensus decision making)
23. should democratic communities allow themselves to divide / combine - (surely combining could lead to building state or large corporation type structures)