Bojan Radej: Movement 99%, Self-Organizing Complex Bodies

White Papers

“Movement 99%: Through Exclusion to the Community”
Slovenian Evaluation Society, Working paper 4/4(Nov. 2011), Bojan Radej

“Understanding and Self-Management of the Complex Society”
Slovenian Evaluation Society, Working paper 2/4(2011), 30 pp.

Bojan Radej is a methodologist in social research from Ljubljana. Master degree in macroeconomics, University of Ljubljana – Faculty of Economics (1993). Professional Experience Record: Governmental Institute of Macroeconomic Analysis and Development (1987-04; under-secretary to the government), areas of work: sustainable development (1998-04), chief manager of the modelling department (1993-5); initiator and the first editor of Slovenian Economic Mirror (1995-8); Co-Editor of IB journal (2001-04). Chairman of Slovenian Evaluation Society (2008-).

Below the line: abstracts and links.

“Movement 99%: Through Exclusion to the Community”

Slovenian Evaluation Society, Working paper 4/4(Nov. 2011), Bojan Radej

Emergence of the antisystem movement consisting of the 99% majority of globally excluded population indicates the increasing need to study social dynamics from the aspect of social exclusion. Systemic exclusion is the result of a persistently uniform implementation of universal values which has been perverted in the end into spectacular stage scenery behind which the concentration of power and influence of the socially irresponsible minority quietly takes place. This raise a question, already asked by Landauer a century ago, on how to produce autonomous antisystem sociality from the aspect of social exclusion. The paper proposes a new approach to these inquiries which is based on mesoscopic methodology of the theory of complexity. It begins with a review of social exclusion’s modalities. Its systematic nature induces the emergence of an antisystem sociality, which is internally diverse and favours unstructured interactions among participating antisystem actors. For this reason they are not capable of structuring their antisystem potentials on a more operational basis and to impose their demands more effectively and sustainably. Nevertheless, the paper emphasises that antisystem groups are not purely programmatic units with incompatible antisystem visions but also activist units. But there is usually an imbalance between programmatic and activist performance of antisystem groups. The paper suggests that it is exactly their program-activist »inconsistency«, not their programmatic ideals, which give rise to their coordinative and collaborative capabilities. The novelty approach is explicated in the mesoscopic perspective of »the unexcluded middle« (Wallerstein). This perspective requires us to reformulate the conventional antagonistic relation between the system and the antisystem. This shift in approach produces interesting implications and offers wide new possibilities for establishing the core of new sociality for the 99% of the globally excluded. Keywords: Social exclusion, incommensurability, antisystem, autonomy, shared sovereignty.

Older version of the paper (April 2009, the only one in English): http://www.generation-online.org/c/anti-systemic-strategy.pdf

“Understanding and Self-Management of the Complex Society”

Slovenian Evaluation Society, Working paper 2/4(2011), 30 pp.  

Abstract: Recognising that the society has become complex, means that the truth about social issues such as about identification of public interest or common good is not a single one, but there are a variety of well-founded and equally valid truths. The public management is complex, therefore different views do not share common denominator, they should therefore be regarded as incommensurable. The social phenomena should be seen in their duality. The realization that social matter has to be evaluated in a complex way simply means that it has to be evaluated in the golden ratio of its duality, stretched between the explanation of its primary meanings – which are constitutive for it, but in an incommensurable and deeply dividing way – and the explanation of its secondary meanings that are the only ones that lead to a holistic view, but merely in contents that are not of primary importance to anyone. (scroll down for English version). Here: http://www.sdeval.si/Publikacije-za-komisijo-za-vrednotenje/Primary-and-Secondary-in-Policy-Evaluation.html