Last weekend I threw out a riff for a little analytic/intellectual improvisation, and the dKos jazzsters were true to form; a pretty amazing quintet came together around that riff and in a rather intimate setting an interesting little number emerged. Luckily in the world of Jazz there's no such thing as a repeat performance, so Armando won't have to chastise me for repeating diaries, but a recap of the themes for future listening/pondering pleasure seems well within the rules. I'm offering this up for a couple of reasons: 1) to introduce the idea of improvisation with other thinkers and doers on riffs of interest importance and 2) `cuz I got chastised by some for keeping it in the diaries and that's been sitting rather uncomfortably with me this past week. It's a quiet little nightspot, the dKos Improvisation House, and the intimacy is conducive to some powerful collaboration. But maybe you know someone who might like to come along.
Last week's performances centered around a riff of radical self-reflection. It began with a pretty basic point: (1) where (a), (b), and (c) weren't made explicit, but came out in the course of the discussion. Strong support and harmonies were supplied by MAJeff, hono lulu, presto, MJB to really enrich the basic riff. And Meteor Blades kept the mix of traditional and freeform in balance throughout.
1. A radical self-reflection is necessary for progressive politics to "work"
a. "radical" meaning collective not individualized
b. "radical" meaning opening up the critical process to even the most comfortable of convenient fictions about our culture/society
c. self-reflection in the sociological sense of reflexivity and self-reflexivity
d. MAJeff refers to this as "critical reflexivity".
Along with the group performance, some powerful solos by MAJeff and presto took the performances to another level:
2. MAJeff observes that collective actors are necessary for progressive politics to prosper and that in that formation a politics of radical self-reflection is possible.
a. The implication is that there is a collective actor, a "we" taking the action.
b. Self-reflection/criticial reflexivity needs spaces where it can develop (return to politics of the public sphere again).
c. The formation of collective actors is one of the ways that spaces for this reflection come into being.
d. DKos is one kind of collective actor that renews itself and reforms. This is what blogs do.
e. Blogs, then are important in considering "where" collective action moves, how we conceptualize collective actors, etc.
And MAJeff and hono lulu left the club determined to continue the improv sessions with other riffs and artists.
So, tune up your instruments and come inside from the cold. It is, unfortunately, a BYOB kind of place, 'til we get this off the ground. Tonight I wanted to introduce the idea of public sphere politics for all of us to riff on. More on the flip.
There are some pretty basic tenets of conventional wisdom that dKos folks traffic in when it comes to the problems of messaging: most folks agree that the Dems/progressives/the left need a unified message, a simplified message, better sound bytes and better packaging. I don't share these assumptions. In fact, I see the entire Dem "message system" problem from a fundamentally different angle of vision. I don't think it is about marketing and messaging, but about the larger terrain of discursive politics: the decline of the Democrats is very closely related to the diminished state of our public sphere. A diminished and impoverished public sphere leads to a deficit of democracy and progressives can never really flourish when there is a deficit of democracy.
A brief backgrounder (My own thumbnail sketch only):
There's plenty of hyper-theoretical writing available for folks wanting to bone up on the public sphere. I don't, for example, recommend this from Wikipedia. But in very basic and reduced terms, the public sphere refers to the amalgam of spaces and places where a society comes together to discuss (both literally and metaphorically) matters of public importance. In a democracy issues of inclusivity, access and equality of participation (i.e. no hierarchy or privileging of certain types of participation over others) are key, as the basic principle of democracy is contingent upon acts and processes of communication between and among the governed and the governing. Unless there are institutions, both formal and informal, where that communication consistently takes place then the foundational pillars for a democracy are not in place. These places are many and are multi-faceted. In contemporary society we too often make the mistake of substituting large sectors of the multi-faceted public sphere (like the internet or the media) for the whole, thus narrowing our focus and reducing our attention to those major players and institutional sites when (and if) we talk about the public sphere.