-
Not Synced
I have the feeling that we can all agree
-
Not Synced
that we're moving towards a new
-
Not Synced
model of the state and society.
-
Not Synced
But, we're absolutely clueless as to what this is
-
Not Synced
or what it should be.
-
Not Synced
It seems like we need to have
-
Not Synced
a conversation about democracy
-
Not Synced
in our day and age.
-
Not Synced
Let's think about it this way:
-
Not Synced
We are 21st century citizens, doing our
-
Not Synced
very best to interact with 19th century-designed
institutions
-
Not Synced
that are based on an information technology of the 15th century.
-
Not Synced
Let's have a look at some of the
-
Not Synced
characteristics of the system:
-
Not Synced
First of all, it's designed for an information technology
-
Not Synced
that's over 500-years-old.
-
Not Synced
And the best possible system
-
Not Synced
that could be designed for it
-
Not Synced
is one where the few make daily decisions
-
Not Synced
in name of the many.
-
Not Synced
And the many get to vote once every
couple of years.
-
Not Synced
On the second place, the costs of
-
Not Synced
participating in the system are
-
Not Synced
incredibly high
-
Not Synced
You either have to have a fair
bit of money
-
Not Synced
and influence, or you have to devote your entire
-
Not Synced
life to politics.
-
Not Synced
You have to become a party member
-
Not Synced
and slowly start working up the ranks
-
Not Synced
until maybe, one day, you'll get
to sit at a table
-
Not Synced
where a decision is being made.
-
Not Synced
And last but not least,
-
Not Synced
the language of the system--
-
Not Synced
it's incredibly cryptic.
-
Not Synced
It's done for layers, by lawyers.
-
Not Synced
And no one else can understand.
-
Not Synced
So, it's a system where we can
-
Not Synced
choose our authorities,
-
Not Synced
but we are completely left out on how
those authorities
-
Not Synced
reach their decisions.
-
Not Synced
So, in a day where information technology
-
Not Synced
allows us to participate globally
in any conversation,
-
Not Synced
our barriers of information are completely lowered
-
Not Synced
and we can, more than ever before,
-
Not Synced
express our desires and our concerns.
-
Not Synced
Our political system remains the same
-
Not Synced
for the past 200 years
-
Not Synced
and expects us to be contented being
simply passive recipients
-
Not Synced
of a monologue.
-
Not Synced
So, it's really not surprising, isn't it, that
-
Not Synced
this kind of system is only able to produce
-
Not Synced
two kinds of results:
-
Not Synced
silence or noise.
-
Not Synced
Silence, in terms of citizens not engaging, t
-
Not Synced
to simply not wanting to participate.
-
Not Synced
There's this common place that I truly,
truly dislike,
-
Not Synced
and it's this idea that we citizens are naturally
-
Not Synced
apathetic. That we shun commitment.
-
Not Synced
But, can you really blame us
-
Not Synced
for not jumping at the opportunity of going
-
Not Synced
to the middle of the city in the middle
-
Not Synced
of a working day to attend, physically,
-
Not Synced
a public hearing that has no impact
-
Not Synced
whatsoever?
-
Not Synced
Conflict is bound to happen between a system
-
Not Synced
that no longer represents, nor has any dialogue capacity,
-
Not Synced
and citizens that are increasingly used
-
Not Synced
at representing themselves.
-
Not Synced
And, then we find noise:
-
Not Synced
Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico
Italy, France, Spain, the United States,
-
Not Synced
they're all democracies.
-
Not Synced
Their citizens have access to
-
Not Synced
the ballot boxes. But they still feel the need,
-
Not Synced
they need to take on the streets in order
to be heard.
-
Not Synced
To me, it seems like the 18th century
-
Not Synced
slogan that was the basis for the formation
-
Not Synced
of our modern democracies, "No taxaction
-
Not Synced
without representation",
-
Not Synced
can now be updated to "No representation
without a conversation".
-
Not Synced
We want our seat at the table.
-
Not Synced
And rightly so.
-
Not Synced
But in order to be part of this conversation,
-
Not Synced
we need to know what we want to do next
-
Not Synced
because political action is being able
-
Not Synced
to move from a_____
-
Not Synced
to construction.
-
Not Synced
My generation has been incredibly good at
-
Not Synced
using new networks and technologies
-
Not Synced
to organize protests,
-
Not Synced
protests that were able to successfully
-
Not Synced
impose agendas,
-
Not Synced
roll back extremely pernicious legislation,
-
Not Synced
and even overthrown authoritarian governments.
-
Not Synced
And we should be immensely
-
Not Synced
proud of this.
-
Not Synced
But, we also must admit that we
-
Not Synced
haven't been good at using those
-
Not Synced
same networks and technologies
-
Not Synced
to successfully articulate an alternative
to what we're seeing
-
Not Synced
and find the consensus and alliances that are needed
-
Not Synced
to make it happen.
-
Not Synced
And so the risk that we face
-
Not Synced
is that we can create these huge power vacuums
-
Not Synced
that very quickly get filled up by de facto
-
Not Synced
powers, like the military or highly
-
Not Synced
motivated and already organized groups
-
Not Synced
that generally lie on the extremes.
-
Not Synced
But our democracies is neither
-
Not Synced
just a matter of voting once every
-
Not Synced
couple of years.
-
Not Synced
But it's not either the ability to bring millions
onto the streets.
-
Not Synced
So, the question I'd like to raise here,
-
Not Synced
and I do believe it's the most important
question we need to answer,
-
Not Synced
is this one:
-
Not Synced
If internet is the new printing press,
-
Not Synced
than what is democracy for the internet era?
-
Not Synced
What institutions do we want to build
-
Not Synced
for the 21st century society?
-
Not Synced
I don't have the answer, just in case.
-
Not Synced
I don't think no one does.
-
Not Synced
But I truly believe we can't afford
to ignore this question anymore.
-
Not Synced
So, I'd like to share our experience
-
Not Synced
and what we've learned so far
-
Not Synced
and hopefully contribute two cents
-
Not Synced
to this conversation.
-
Not Synced
Two years ago, with a group of friends
from Argentina,
-
Not Synced
we started thinking, "how can we get our representatives,
-
Not Synced
our elected representatives,
-
Not Synced
to represent us?".
-
Not Synced
Marshall McLuhan once said that politics
-
Not Synced
is solving today's problems with yesterday's tools.
-
Not Synced
So, the question that motivated us was:
-
Not Synced
can we try and solve some of today's problems
-
Not Synced
with the tools that we use every single
day of our lives?
-
Not Synced
Our first approach was to design and develop
-
Not Synced
a piece of software called Democracy OS.
-
Not Synced
DemocracyOS is an open source web application
-
Not Synced
that is designed to become a bridge
-
Not Synced
between citizens and their elected representatives
-
Not Synced
to make it easier for us to participate from our everyday lives.
-
Not Synced
So first of all, you can get informed so every new
-
Not Synced
project that gets introduced in Congress
-
Not Synced
gets immediately translated and explained
-
Not Synced
in plain language on this platform.
-
Not Synced
But, we all know that social change
-
Not Synced
is not going to come from just knowing
-
Not Synced
more information,
-
Not Synced
but from doing something with it.
-
Not Synced
So, better access to information
-
Not Synced
should lead to a conversation
-
Not Synced
about what we're gonna do next,
-
Not Synced
and DemocracyOS allows for that.
-
Not Synced
Because we believe that democracy's
-
Not Synced
not just a matter of stacking up
-
Not Synced
preferences, on on top of the other,
-
Not Synced
but that our healthy and robust public debate
-
Not Synced
should be, once again, one of its fundamental values.
-
Not Synced
So, DemocracyOS is about persuading
and being persuaded.
-
Not Synced
It's about reaching a consensus
-
Not Synced
as much as finding a proper way
-
Not Synced
of channeling our disagreement.
-
Not Synced
And finally, you can vote how you
-
Not Synced
would like your elected representative to vote.
-
Not Synced
And if you do not feel comfortable
-
Not Synced
voting on a certain issue,
-
Not Synced
you can always delegate your vote
-
Not Synced
to someone else, allowing
-
Not Synced
for a dynamic and emerging social leadership.
-
Not Synced
It suddenly became very easy for us
-
Not Synced
to simply compare these results
-
Not Synced
with how our representatives were
-
Not Synced
voting in Congress.
-
Not Synced
But, it also became very evident that
-
Not Synced
technology was not going to do the trick.
-
Not Synced
What we needed to do to was to find
-
Not Synced
actors that were able to
-
Not Synced
grab this distributed knowledge
-
Not Synced
in society and use it to make better
and more fair decisions.
-
Not Synced
So, we reach out to traditional political parties
-
Not Synced
and we offer them DemocracyOS.
-
Not Synced
We said, "Look, here you have a platform
that you can use to build
-
Not Synced
a two-way conversation with your constituencies."
-
Not Synced
And yes, we failed.
-
Not Synced
We failed big time.
-
Not Synced
We were, you know, sent to play
outside like little kids.
-
Not Synced
Amongst other things, we were called naive.
-
Not Synced
And I must be honest, I think, in hindsight, we were.
-
Not Synced
Because the challenges that we face, they're not
-
Not Synced
technological, they're cultural.
-
Not Synced
Political parties were never willing
-
Not Synced
to change the way they make their decisions.
-
Not Synced
So, it suddenly became a bit obvious
-
Not Synced
that if we wanted to move forward
with this idea,
-
Not Synced
we needed to do it ourselves.
-
Not Synced
And so we took quite a leap of faith,
-
Not Synced
and in August last year, we founded
-
Not Synced
our own political party.
-
Not Synced
El Partido de la Red,
-
Not Synced
or the Net Party, in the city of
Buenos Aires.
-
Not Synced
And taking an even bigger leap of faith,
-
Not Synced
we ran for elections on October last year
-
Not Synced
with this idea:
-
Not Synced
if we want a seat in Congress,
-
Not Synced
our candidate, our representatives
-
Not Synced
were always going to vote according to
-
Not Synced
what citizens decided on DemocracyOS.
-
Not Synced
Every single project that got introduced
-
Not Synced
in Congress, we were gonna vote
-
Not Synced
according to what citizens decided
on an online platform.
-
Not Synced
It was our way of hacking the political system.
-
Not Synced
We understood that if we wanted
-
Not Synced
to become part of the conversation,
-
Not Synced
to have a seat at the table,
-
Not Synced
we needed to become valid stakeholders,
-
Not Synced
and the only way of doing is to play by the
system rules.
-
Not Synced
But, we were hacking it in the sense that
-
Not Synced
we were radically changing the way a political party
-
Not Synced
makes its decisions.
-
Not Synced
For the first time, we were making our decisions
-
Not Synced
together with those who we were
-
Not Synced
affecting directly by those decisions.
-
Not Synced
It was a very, very bold move for a two-month-old party
-
Not Synced
in the city of Buenos Aires.
-
Not Synced
But, it got attention.
-
Not Synced
We got 22,000, that's 1.2 percent of the votes,
-
Not Synced
and we came in second for the local options.
-
Not Synced
So, even if that wasn't enough to win a
-
Not Synced
seat in Congress, it was enough
-
Not Synced
for us to become part of the conversation,
-
Not Synced
to the extent that next month,
-
Not Synced
Congress, as an institution, is launching
-
Not Synced
for the first time in Argentina's history,
-
Not Synced
a DemocracyOS to discuss,
-
Not Synced
with the citizens, three pieces of legislation:
-
Not Synced
two on urban transportation and
-
Not Synced
one on the use of public space.
-
Not Synced
Of course, our elected representatives are not
-
Not Synced
saying, "yes, we're going to vote
-
Not Synced
according to what citizens decide",
-
Not Synced
But they're willing to try,
-
Not Synced
willing to open up a new space
-
Not Synced
for citizen engagement and hopefully
-
Not Synced
they'll be willing to listen as well.
-
Not Synced
Our political system can be transformed,
-
Not Synced
and not by subverting it or destroying it,
-
Not Synced
but by rewiring it with the tools that
-
Not Synced
internet affords us now.
-
Not Synced
But, a real challenge is to find, to deisgn
-
Not Synced
to create, to empower those connectors
-
Not Synced
that are able to innovate, to transform
-
Not Synced
noise and silence into signal
-
Not Synced
and finally bring our democracies
-
Not Synced
to the 21st century.
-
Not Synced
I'm not saying it's easy.
-
Not Synced
But in our experience, we actually stand a chance
-
Not Synced
of making it work.
-
Not Synced
And in my heart, it's most definitely
-
Not Synced
worth trying.
-
Not Synced
Thank you.
-
Not Synced
(Applause).
HAST Junho Kim
i would like to translate this into korean since no one had tried it
how can i start it?
there is no choice to make subtitles on korean for this video
plz tell me how
Adrian Dobroiu
In the current version (number 20), the paragraph splits are in the wrong places. Please fix.
Adrian Dobroiu
10:17 if we want a seat in Congress,
That should be "if we won a seat in Congress". The speaker talks about the promise of her party in case they get a seat the Argentinian Congress, not about what they need to do in order to secure a seat.
Adrian Dobroiu
10:20 our candidate, our representatives
> candidates