Ian Yorston just published a link to my Second Superpower piece from last May. Ian highlighted the opening paragraphs including:
“While some of the leaders have become highly visible, what is perhaps
most interesting about this global movement is that it is not really
directed by visible leaders, but, as we will see, by the collective,
emergent action of its millions of participants.”
Consider the evolution of the Internet community swarming around the Democratic
presidential race in this light. My original hypothesis was that
the Second Superpower does not favor convergence on particular
leaders. The Second Superpower converges–if this is even the
right word–around individuals and their progressive empowerment.
And then the individuals in turn share memes and dynamically coalesce to shape the
future.
Visualize wave after wave of individuals each taking their
own personal next step in electronic empowerment–starting a blog,
joining a list, contributing to an initiative, maybe hosting an
initiative. As populations of such individuals increase their
numbers and complexity and the density of their interconnections, new
industry structures are enabled and emerge on top of and within the
linked populations.
Prior to the presidential race heating up, there was a great swarm collecting on the web, around sites such as MoveOn.org,
as well as hundreds of list serves. The swarm was enabled by the
huge population that participates in email and, to some more limited
degree, blogging, as well as consumer willingness to invest/give money
online. The swarm was stirred up (think, kicking the bee hive) by
George Bush’s ruthless push for war.
The swarm moved onto Howard Dean’s site, and made it a success.
Members and sub-groups co-evolved with DeanforAmerica. A bit
later in time, the Draft Clark movement formed another center for
swarmers to converge.
But candidate sites do not seem to be the most stable and enduring of
places for swarms to land. There are reasons for this:
First, political campaigns are temporary and very goal oriented.
As such they may not be the best places to create ongoing platforms for
participation.
Second, political campaigns are autocracies, controlled by each
candidate and his or her inner circle. In part, campaign finance
rules force this to be so, because the candidate is personally liable
for the actions of the campaign. The financing of the campaign
must go through one gate, decided by the candidate.
Messages must be personally approved by the candidate. This
structure is not consistent with decentralized decision-making and
democratic responsiveness to donors and other members of the campaign’s
extended community.
Third, the current crop of candidates and their professional staffs do
not understand the web culture and the phenomenon of swarming.
They and their staffs come from traditional political backgrounds–what
less charitable observers talk about as “hacks and suits.” These
people see mailing lists and email lists as sources of money–as
“million dollar lists”–rather than as the personal addresses of
committed individuals. Given their ignorance, the suits can
inadvertantly take actions that offend, undercut, and finally kill
grassroots and web organizing. The Clark swarm was driven to
other
venues by the candidate’s professional (”suits”) campaign
leadership. The Clark campaign never recovered. Many of the
most creative swarmers regrouped on other sites, such as the DailyKos–now
one of the top independent political blogs and center of its own
online community hosted in its “diaries” as well as comments.
Similarly, suits may very well inherit DFA. We will
see. In any case the swarms that have been circling around
DeanforAmerica and its myriad sub-services–such as MeetUp–are looking
for new avenues of participation. Depending upon each
individual’s level of online empowerment, each member will consider a
range of creative options. Those who have been running grassroots
group sites are talking about the next generation of sites. Those who are
primarily bloggers are launching new blogs. Those who have
developed software and services are exploring ways to take next
steps. These individuals together constitute a vast, co-evolving free
ranging population of creators.
What this means for candidates is that they should not take themselves
and their email lists too seriously. Behind these lists are
empowered, evolving individuals. And this is a good thing!
The reality of the Second Superpower is that innovators are free,
sovereign citizens, who are every morning more cybernetically empowered and
interconnected than the day before. Innovation continues to accelerate,
proliferating across and transforming the landscape.
