“resilient, durable or agile”

Firstly, that of using subtraction as a design principle rather than addition (a theme that LA is well-placed to explore, having both an over-abundance of macro-scale infrastructure in the first place, which could be pared back in interesting fashion, as well as an endemic informal creativity at a micro-scale). This alongside an openness to accidents and informal improvisation (something I’ve explored over the years around the idea of adaptive design). Secondly, that we should “resist the recovery”, as ‘recovery’ necessarily implies going back to something, trying to recreate conditions which would then merely set us up for the fall again. So we need a new way of thinking about moving forward from this place, rather than looking backwards or thinking we are post- yet. Thirdly, that the political – including governance in all its forms – is something we cannot allow to simply disintegrate, but we must actively engage with, including (perhaps especially, though he didn’t emphasise this) from a design perspective.

Right now, I think that a lot of the cry for resilience is very rational: our civilization is hitting the wall in several areas. But what isn’t happening – yet – is a concerted cry for _better strategy._

We’ve just sat here for 30 years watching ecological collapse and global bankruptcy unfold around us as our leaders fiddled and covered up.

So, am thinking about this entirely differently from you?

In terms of how we present things, Mark Frazier makes a good comment on your previous post, “The idea of resilience is catching because people are looking for practical ways to survive and surmount the growing stresses.”

Which doesn’t negate the need to talk about the revolutionary nature of the changes we need.

Another thought: “Revolutionary” is the means, “resilience” is one of the ends.

Could this be another model of resiliance, in which resiliance proves to be a negative or destructive force?

Underneath the piles of discourse and poetic language, we’re left with a situation best expressed in a diverging cobweb model, in which a systemic (and “rational”) attempt to re-establish the normal state results in increasing extremes of reaction, with the system inadvertantly turning on itself.

I wonder if IFTF would host a round table online about this stuff.

Dmitry Orlov’s recent Long Now talk (”Social Collapse Best Practices”) http://is.gd/jOkx argued that Russia, used to dysfunction, adapted well to social collapse, but that the US will not. He says, in effect, that badly run systems have less far to fall when they fail, while an ostensibly tight civilisational ship is more capable of failing catastrophically.

Great to see your focus on the value of vision-centered adapation, in contrast to reaction-driven resilience.

As the Buddhist saying goes, “to get to the far shore, you need to come from it.”

Two overall comments/suggestions –

1. Visionary Adapation as a title may not be the best way to have your meme spread. Many people may discount the value of vision as their rising pain puts a premium on finding near-term, “practical” solution: hence the appeal of “resilience.” My guess is your vision-centered meme will spread more widely if it is branded as the core element of a new “Resilience Plus” or similarly-retitled package.

2. Your visionary adaptation model may well enrich the following:

- Koestler’s ideas on holons: http://www.panarchy.org/koestler/holon.1969.html

- The Viable System Model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_System_Model

- speculations on a triadic dynamic of consilience in evolution, which you’ll find in thumbnail at section 10.3 at http://tinyurl.com/transpecies .

Look forward to next postings here and on Twitter…

Mark Frazier
Openworld, Inc.
“Awakening assets for good”
http://www.openworld.com
Twitter: @openworld

Thanks for clearly showing the value of vision-centered adapation, rather than reactionary resilience.

As the Buddhist saying goes, “to get to the far shore, you need to come from it.”

Two overall comments/suggestions –

1. Visionary Adapation as a title may not be the best way to have your meme spread. Many people may discount the value of vision as their rising pain puts a premium on finding near-term, “practical” solution: hence the appeal of “resilience.” My guess is your vision-centered meme will spread more widely if it is branded as the core element of a new “Resilience Plus” package.

2. I’m hopeful that your Visionary Adaptation concepts can interact with and enrich the following:

- Koester’s ideas of holons: http://www.panarchy.org/koestler/holon.1969.html

- The Viable System Model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_System_Model

- speculations on a triadic form of consilience in evolution, which you’ll find in thumbnail at section 10.3 at http://tinyurl.com/transpecies .

Look forward to continuing to follow your postings here and on Twitter!

Mark Frazier
Openworld, Inc.
“Awakening assets for good”
http://www.openworld.com
Twitter: @openworld