I have the feeling that we can all agree that we're moving towards a new model of the state and society. But, we're absolutely clueless as to what this is or what it should be. It seems like we need to have a conversation about democracy
Imam osjećaj da se svi možemo složiti da se krećemo prema novom modelu države i društva. Ali nemamo pojma što to jest ili što to treba biti. Čini se kao da moramo razgovarati o demokraciji
in our day and age. Let's think about it this way: We are 21st-century citizens, doing our very, very best to interact with 19th century-designed institutions that are based on an information technology of the 15th century. Let's have a look at some of the characteristics of this system. First of all, it's designed for an information technology that's over 500 years old. And the best possible system that could be designed for it is one where the few make daily decisions in the name of the many. And the many get to vote once every couple of years. In the second place, the costs of participating in this system are incredibly high. You either have to have a fair bit of money and influence, or you have to devote your entire life to politics. You have to become a party member and slowly start working up the ranks until maybe, one day, you'll get to sit at a table where a decision is being made. And last but not least, the language of the system — it's incredibly cryptic. It's done for lawyers, by lawyers,
u našem vremenu i dobu. Razmislimo o tome ovako: Mi smo građani 21. stoljeća, dajući sve najbolje od sebe da budemo u interakciji sa institucijama 19. stoljeća koje su bazirane na informacijskoj tehnologiji 15. stoljeća. Pogledajmo neke od karakteristika ovog sustava. Prvo, dizajniran je za informacijsku tehnologiju koja je starija od 500 godina. I najbolji mogući sustav koji je mogao biti stvoren za nju je onaj gdje mali broj ljudi donosi svakodnevne odluke u ime mnogih. I mnogi glasaju svakih nekoliko godina. Na drugom mjestu, trošak sudjelovanja u ovim sustavima je nevjerojatno visok. Ili morate imati popriličnu svotu novca i utjecaja, ili morate posvetiti čitav svoj život politici. Morate postati član stranke i polako se uspinjati u redovima dok možda, jednog dana, ne sjedite za stolom gdje se donose odluke. I posljednje, iako ne manje važno, jezik sustava -- nevjerojatno je kriptičan. Napravljen je za odvjetnike, od odvjetnika,
and no one else can understand. So, it's a system where we can choose our authorities, but we are completely left out on how those authorities reach their decisions. So, in a day where a new information technology allows us to participate globally in any conversation, our barriers of information are completely lowered and we can, more than ever before, express our desires and our concerns. Our political system remains the same for the past 200 years and expects us to be contented with being simply passive recipients
i nitko drugi ga ne razumije. Dakle, to je sustav gdje možemo birati našu vlast, ali smo izostavljeni iz toga kako ta vlast donosi svoje odluke. Pa, u vremenu kada nova informacijska tehnologija omogućava globalno sudjelovanje u bilo kojem razgovoru, naše barijere za informacije su posve spuštene i možemo, više no ikad prije izraziti naše želje i brige. Naš politički sustav ostao je isti posljednjih 200 godina i očekuje od nas da budemo zadovoljni kao pasivni primatelji
of a monologue. So, it's really not surprising that this kind of system is only able to produce two kinds of results: silence or noise. Silence, in terms of citizens not engaging, simply not wanting to participate. There's this commonplace [idea] that I truly, truly dislike, and it's this idea that we citizens are naturally apathetic. That we shun commitment. But, can you really blame us for not jumping at the opportunity of going to the middle of the city in the middle of a working day to attend, physically, a public hearing that has no impact whatsoever? Conflict is bound to happen between a system that no longer represents, nor has any dialogue capacity, and citizens that are increasingly used to representing themselves. And, then we find noise: Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico Italy, France, Spain, the United States, they're all democracies. Their citizens have access to the ballot boxes. But they still feel the need,
monologa. Tako da nije iznenađujuće da takav sustav može proizvesti samo dvije vrste rezultata: tišinu ili buku. Tišinu, u smislu da se građani ne uključuju, jednostavno ne žele sudjelovati. Postoji ta uvriježena [ideja] koja mi se nikako, nikako ne sviđa, i to je ideja da smo mi građani prirodno apatični. Da odbacujemo obvezu. Ali, možete li nas kriviti što ne skačemo na priliku da idemo u središte grada usred radnog dana da bi bili fizički prisutni na javnom saslušanju bez ikakvog utjecaja na išta? Sukobi se moraju dogoditi između sustava koji više ne zastupa, niti ima ikakav kapacitet za dijalog, i građana koji su sve više naviknuti da sami zastupaju sebe. I onda nađemo buku: Čile, Argentina, Brazil, Meksiko, Italija, Francuska, Španjolska i Amerika, sve su to demokracije. Njihovi građani imaju pristup glasačkim kutijama. Ali oni i dalje osjećaju potrebu,
they need to take to the streets in order to be heard. To me, it seems like the 18th-century slogan that was the basis for the formation of our modern democracies, "No taxation without representation," can now be updated to "No representation without a conversation." We want our seat at the table.
oni trebaju izaći na ulice da bi ih se čulo. Meni, to izgleda kao 18.stoljetni slogan koji je bio temelj nastajanja naših modernih demokracija: "Nema oporezivanja bez zastupanja," se sada može dograditi sa "nema zastupanja bez razgovora" Želimo svoje mjesto za stolom.
And rightly so. But in order to be part of this conversation, we need to know what we want to do next, because political action is being able to move from agitation to construction. My generation has been incredibly good at using new networks and technologies to organize protests, protests that were able to successfully impose agendas, roll back extremely pernicious legislation, and even overthrow authoritarian governments. And we should be immensely proud of this. But, we also must admit that we haven't been good at using those same networks and technologies to successfully articulate an alternative to what we're seeing and find the consensus and build the alliances that are needed
I sa pravom. Ali da bi bili dio ovog razgovora, moramo znati što želimo slijedeće, jer politička akcija je biti sposoban preći iz agitacije u izgradnju. Moja je generacija bila nevjerojatno dobra u korištenju novih mreža i tehnologija da organizira prosvjede, prosvjede koji su bili sposobni uspješno nametnuti agende, poništiti izuzetno opasno zakonodavstvo, pa čak i zbaciti autoritarne vlade. I trebali bismo biti neizmjerno ponosni na to. Ali, također moramo i priznati da nismo bili dobri u korištenju tih istih mreža i tehnologija da uspješno uobličimo alternativu onome što vidimo i nađemo konsenzus i uspostavimo savezništva potrebna
to make it happen. And so the risk that we face is that we can create these huge power vacuums that will very quickly get filled up by de facto powers, like the military or highly motivated and already organized groups
da se ona ostvari. I tako rizici s kojim smo suočeni su da možemo napraviti te velike praznine moći koje će vrlo brzo biti ispunjene de facto silama, poput vojske ili vrlo motiviranih i već organiziranih grupa
that generally lie on the extremes. But our democracy is neither just a matter of voting once every couple of years. But it's not either the ability to bring millions onto the streets. So the question I'd like to raise here, and I do believe it's the most important question we need to answer, is this one: If Internet is the new printing press, then what is democracy for the Internet era? What institutions do we want to build
koje općenito leže u ekstremima. Ali naša demokracija nije niti samo stvar glasanja jednom svakih nekoliko godina. Ali nije niti sposobnost izvođenja milijuna na ulice. Tako da pitanje koje bih voljela postaviti ovdje, a vjerujem da je to najvažnije pitanje na koje moramo odgovoriti, je ovo: Ako je Internet novi tiskarski stroj, onda što je demokracija za eru Interneta? Koje to ustanove želimo sagraditi
for the 21st-century society? I don't have the answer, just in case. I don't think anyone does. But I truly believe we can't afford to ignore this question anymore. So, I'd like to share our experience and what we've learned so far and hopefully contribute two cents
za društvo 21. stoljeća? Nemam odgovor, za svaki slučaj. Ne mislim da itko ima. Ali uistinu vjerujem da si više ne možemo priuštiti ignorirati to pitanje. Pa bih voljela podijeliti naše iskustvo i što smo do sad naučili i nadam se dodati svoja dva centa
to this conversation. Two years ago, with a group of friends from Argentina, we started thinking, "how can we get our representatives, our elected representatives, to represent us?" Marshall McLuhan once said that politics is solving today's problems with yesterday's tools. So the question that motivated us was, can we try and solve some of today's problems with the tools that we use every single day of our lives? Our first approach was to design and develop a piece of software called DemocracyOS. DemocracyOS is an open-source web application that is designed to become a bridge between citizens and their elected representatives
ovom razgovoru. Prije dvije godine, sa grupom prijatelja iz Argentine, počeli smo razmišljati: "Kako možemo potaknuti naše zastupnike, naše izabrane zastupnike da nas zastupaju?" Marshall McLuhan je jednom rekao da politika rješava današnje probleme s jučerašnjim alatima. Tako da je pitanje koje nas je motiviralo bilo: možemo li pokušati i riješiti neke od današnjih problema s alatima koje u životu koristimo svakodnevno? Naš je prvi pristup bio osmisliti i razviti komad softwarea nazvanog DemocracyOS. DemocracyOS je web aplikacija otvorenog koda koja je osmišljena da postane most između građana i njihovih izabranih zastupnika
to make it easier for us to participate from our everyday lives. So first of all, you can get informed so every new project that gets introduced in Congress gets immediately translated and explained in plain language on this platform. But we all know that social change is not going to come from just knowing more information, but from doing something with it. So better access to information should lead to a conversation about what we're going to do next, and DemocracyOS allows for that. Because we believe that democracy is not just a matter of stacking up preferences, one on top of each other, but that our healthy and robust public debate
da nam olakša sudjelovanje iz naših svakodnevnih života. Pa prije svega, da se možete informirati tako da svaki novi projekt koji se predstavlja u Kongresu odmah biva preveden i objašnjen u običnom jeziku na ovoj platformi. Ali svi znamo da društvena promjena neće doći samo od saznavanja više informacija, već od djelovanja s njima u skladu. Dakle bolji pristup informacijama bi trebao voditi ka razgovoru o tome što ćemo raditi dalje, a DemocracyOS omogućuje baš to. Jer vjerujemo da demokracija nije samo stvar slaganja preferenci, jednih preko drugih, već kako bi naša zdrava i snažna javna rasprava
should be, once again, one of its fundamental values. So DemocracyOS is about persuading and being persuaded. It's about reaching a consensus as much as finding a proper way of channeling our disagreement. And finally, you can vote how you would like your elected representative to vote. And if you do not feel comfortable voting on a certain issue, you can always delegate your vote to someone else, allowing
trebala biti, ponovno, jedna od njenih temeljnih vrijednosti. Tako da je DemocracyOS o uvjeravanju i o bivanju uvjerenim. Riječ je o postizanju konsenzusa jednako koliko i o nalaženju pravog načina da se izbistre naša neslaganja. I konačno, možete glasati kako biste voljeli da vaš izabrani zastupnik glasa. A ako se ne osjećate ugodno spram glasanja o određenoj temi, uvijek možete delegirati svoj glas nekome drugome, omogučujući
for a dynamic and emerging social leadership. It suddenly became very easy for us to simply compare these results with how our representatives were voting in Congress. But, it also became very evident that technology was not going to do the trick. What we needed to do to was to find actors that were able to grab this distributed knowledge in society and use it to make better and more fair decisions. So we reached out to traditional political parties and we offered them DemocracyOS. We said, "Look, here you have a platform that you can use to build a two-way conversation with your constituencies." And yes, we failed. We failed big time. We were sent to play outside like little kids. Amongst other things, we were called naive. And I must be honest: I think, in hindsight, we were. Because the challenges that we face, they're not technological, they're cultural. Political parties were never willing to change the way they make their decisions. So it suddenly became a bit obvious that if we wanted to move forward with this idea,
dinamično i iz društva nastajuće vodstvo. Odjednom je postalo jako lagano jednostavno usporediti te rezultate sa onime kako su naši zastupnici glasali u Kongresu. Ali, također je postalo vrlo očito kako tehnologija neće biti dovoljna da se to postigne.. Ono što smo trebali napraviti je naći čimbenike koji će biti sposobni zgrabiti to znanje raspodijeljeno u društvu i upotrijebiti ga da donose bolje i poštenije odluke. Pa smo posegnuli ka tradicionalnim političkim strankama i ponudili im DemocracyOS. Rekli smo:"Gledajte, ovdje imate platformu koju možete koristiti za dvostrani razgovor sa svojim biračima." I da, podbacili smo. Strašno smo podbacili. Poslani smo da se igramo vani kao mala djeca. Među ostalim, nazvani smo naivnima. I moram biti iskrena: mislim, gledajući unazad, bili smo. Jer izazovi s kojima se sučeljavamo nisu tehnološki, već kulturni. Političke stranke nisu nikad bile voljne promijeniti način na koji donose odluke. Pa je odjednom postalo nekako očito da ako želimo ići naprijed s tom idejom,
we needed to do it ourselves. And so we took quite a leap of faith, and in August last year, we founded our own political party, El Partido de la Red, or the Net Party, in the city of Buenos Aires. And taking an even bigger leap of faith, we ran for elections in October last year with this idea: if we want a seat in Congress, our candidate, our representatives were always going to vote according to what citizens decided on DemocracyOS. Every single project that got introduced in Congress, we were going vote according to what citizens decided on an online platform. It was our way of hacking the political system. We understood that if we wanted to become part of the conversation, to have a seat at the table, we needed to become valid stakeholders,
moramo ići osobno. I tako smo se odlučili vjerovati u to, i u kolovozu prošle godine, osnovali našu vlastitu političku stranku, El Partido de la Red, ili Net stranku, u gradu Buenos Airesu. I vjerujući još više, unatoč svim dokazima za suprotno, natjecali smo se na izborima u listopadu prošle godine s ovom idejom: ako dobijemo mjesto u Kongresu, naš kandidat, naši zastupnici će uvijek glasati u skladu s onim što građani odluče preko DemocracyOS. Svaki projekt koji se predstavi u Kongresu, glasali bismo u skladu s odlukom građana na online platformi. To je bio naš način hakiranja politčkog sustava.. Shvatili smo da ako želimo postati dio razgovora, imati mjesto za stolom, moramo postati valjani dioničari,
and the only way of doing it is to play by the system rules. But we were hacking it in the sense that we were radically changing the way a political party makes its decisions. For the first time, we were making our decisions together with those who we were
a jedini način da to postignemo je igrati po pravilima sustava. Ali koristili smo mogućnosti u tom smislu što smo korijenski promijenili način na koji politička stranka donosi odluke. Po prvi put, donosili bismo odluke zajedno sa onima na koje bismo
affecting directly by those decisions. It was a very, very bold move for a two-month-old party in the city of Buenos Aires. But it got attention. We got 22,000 votes, that's 1.2 percent of the votes, and we came in second for the local options. So, even if that wasn't enough to win a seat in Congress, it was enough for us to become part of the conversation, to the extent that next month, Congress, as an institution, is launching for the first time in Argentina's history, a DemocracyOS to discuss, with the citizens, three pieces of legislation: two on urban transportation and
izravno utjecali izvršavanjem tih odluka. To je bio vrlo, vrlo hrabar potez za dva mjeseca staru stranku u gradu Buenos Airesu. Ali dobila je pozornost. Dobili smo 22.000 glasova, to je 1,2 posto glasova, i bili smo drugi u lokalnim opcijama. Pa, iako to nije bilo dovoljno da osvoji mjesto u Kongresu, bilo je dovoljno da postanemo dio razgovora, u opsegu da slijedeći mjesec, Kongres kao ustanova, šalje po prvi put u povijesti Argentine, DemocracyOS na raspravu, s građanima, tri zakona: dva o urbanom prijevozu te
one on the use of public space. Of course, our elected representatives are not saying, "Yes, we're going to vote according to what citizens decide," but they're willing to try. They're willing to open up a new space for citizen engagement and hopefully
jedan o korištenju javnog prostora. Naravno, naši izabrani zastupnici ne govore: "Da, glasat ćemo u skladu s odlukom građana," ali su voljni probati. Voljni su otvoriti novi prostor za uključenje građana i nadajmo se
they'll be willing to listen as well. Our political system can be transformed, and not by subverting it, by destroying it, but by rewiring it with the tools that
da će biti voljni i slušati. Naš politički sustav može biti trasnformiran, i to ne obaranjem, ne uništavanjem, već preinakom uz pomoć alata
Internet affords us now. But a real challenge is to find, to design to create, to empower those connectors that are able to innovate, to transform noise and silence into signal and finally bring our democracies
koje nam Internet sada omogućuje. Ali pravi je izazov naći, osmisliti stvoriti, opunomoćiti te spojke koje su u stanju uvesti novine, promijeniti buku i tišinu u signal i konačno dovesti naše demokracije
to the 21st century. I'm not saying it's easy. But in our experience, we actually stand a chance of making it work. And in my heart, it's most definitely worth trying. Thank you. (Applause)
u 21. stoljeće. Ne kažem da je lagano. Ali po našem iskustvu, zbilja imamo priliku učiniti da radi. A u mom srcu, posve sigurno osjećam da vrijedi probati. Hvala vam. (Pljesak)