Occupy: Grand Strategy vs Self-Organization
Posted by nowisthetimeus on February 4, 2012
There are unprecedented global events taking place and the Occupy movement continues to evolve.
People are calling for planning of Grand Strategy. There are disadvantages to this.
The new rules of the new context of global revolution demands that we first develop a process of adaptation to ongoing changes. My suggestion is that a method be developed for evaluating the outcome of all proposed actions/events. That way, whatever tactics are used, however the event progresses, the evaluative learning can be maximized to apply to future strategy.
Basically, until there are actions planned with specific goals in mind and then a measuring of how successful the action was in reaching said goal, the movement will continue going in circles. Not that circles are bad…this kind of organizational progress can be good at creating momentum and participatory skill-building. Imagine a flock of swifts spiraling out of their roost.
The need for an evaluative approach trumps the need for a grand strategy for several reasons, the most important being that part of Occupy’s success has been due to a lack of centralized planning. A Grand Strategy could limit self-organizing and spontaneous evolution.
Thinking more through the lens of complexity theory than chess will allow a greater flexibility of application and prevent the development of a static hierarchy that is easily disrupted.