(87A) Reflections on blog post (87)
By Onno Hansen-Staszyński | Last Updated: 12 December 2025
In my previous blog post (eighty-seven), I returned to Interdemocracy basics. The whole concept started out as a facilitation of the self-creation and self-correction of individuals within a group setting. My wife and I stipulated that this autopoiesis on an individual level was a worthy goal in itself.
Partial dislocation
Confronted with the state of partial dislocation that characterizes many adolescents, we increasingly felt that this autopoiesis should not reinforce their withdrawal on little islands. We felt that the existing low level of societal resilience should not be bolstered by limiting the acts of autopoiesis within a small group, even if this group (the classroom) is wider than their default small group (some peers, some adults). So, we blueprinted a participation layer on top of the original conception.
Participation
Logically, our focus shifted to the participation layer, since it was new and connected our isolated conception with the world of policy-making. It opened up our hermetic blueprint to the wide world.
Blog post (87)
The previous blog post is an attempt to take back control. The Interdemocracy conception is not dependent on the bigger world. It is linked, for sure, and there are new dependencies that came along with the participation layer. But these dependencies do not have the power make or break Interdemocracy. Only individuals have.
While the new elements have made the original concept scalable and probably more understandable, it is time to reaffirm its original aspirations, with or without external efficacy.
Subscribe now &
Get the latest updates
Subscribe