Click to return to AbbeNormalSecondSuperpower

Backup page - click on page title to return to current version
For the second superpower to be relevant to "the needs and dreams of all 6.3 billion people in the world", its principle(s) must be narrow as possible, and its proponents must trust that their other interests will be heard and included in the ongoing dialogue and action. Here's a working statement, in public alpha. I can imagine it getting a little longer:

Members of the second superpower have differing views on many subjects, but strive to live up to these ideals:

Respect for you, and for all people, including those who oppose us.

Persistence in expressing our experiences, our values, and exactly what we want.

These highlight the valuable learnings that so many of us have gained by sustained participation in off-line dialogue and on-line in bulletin boards, UseNet, or the more modern phenomena of WikiWiki and WebLog.

I considered dropping the second ideal, as it is a likely consequence of respecting oneself, but it seemed important enough to say explicitly. Another important consequence is that we strive to have respect even for those who are not respecting us. A third is that we strive to have respect for ourselves even when we are not living up to our ideals.

(Later) It needs something about taking action. ScriptingNews pointed me to Lee Felsenstein's How to Make a Revolution in Three Easy Steps, from which i have shamelessly summarized this amendment:

Members of the second superpower...

...join or start projects directed toward making things better.

...talk with everybody else about the projects.

...are willing to change the project based upon what you learn by communicating about it.

(That's "talks with", not just "talks to" or "talks at". This sets up a "field of communication", with information flowing in all directions.)

Please do comment, using the "Edit Text" link below.

Additional notes:

The quote about all 6.3 billion people in the world is from James Moore's essay on the second superpower, which with Andrew Orlowski's critique has spurred a sizeable discussion in the WebLog community.

The metaphor was as far as i know initiated by a Patrick Tyler article in the New York Times, Feb 17: "...the huge anti-war demonstrations around the world this weekend are reminders that there may still be two superpowers on the planet: the United States and world public opinion."

My purpose here is to help steer the term toward Moore's laudable goal of including all the people on the planet (and heck, even the few who are not :-) --JohnAbbe

Created 2003 Apr 11 Fri PM