But, we're absolutely clueless as to what this is or what it should be.

但我們絕對都不知道什麼是進步？我們應該做什麼才會進步？

It seems like we need to have a conversation about democracy in our day and age.

這就好比我們要討論現今的民主

Let's think about it this way: We are 21st-century citizens,

我們用這種方式來想，我們活在21世紀

doing our very, very best to interact with 19th century-designed institutions that are based on an information technology of the 15th century.

卻使用19世紀時，以15世紀的資訊科技設計出來的產品

Let's have a look at some of the characteristics of this system.

我們先來看看這個系統的特色

First of all, it's designed for an information technology that's over 500 years old.

首先，這是為超過5百年前的資訊科技所設計

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.

而最可行的方法就是將系統設計成大多數人每天都會使用到的名字

And the many get to vote once every couple of years. In the second place,

因為他們每兩三年就會投票一次。其次，

the costs of participating in this system are incredibly high.

選舉會花很多錢

You either have to have a fair bit of money and influence, or you have to devote your entire life to politics.

你只能選擇花合理的金錢及擁有較少的影響力，或是選擇投入一輩子的心力在政治上

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.

你必須從基層黨員做起，慢慢提升地位，直到坐上決策大位的那一天

And last but not least, the language of the system — it's incredibly cryptic. It's done for lawyers, by lawyers, and no one else can understand.

最後且最重要的是語系，這是非常隱密的事。假設是律師的事，只有他清楚整件事，其他人完全不了解

So, it's a system where we can choose our authorities,

所以我們可以用這種系統來選擇自己的主權

but we are completely left out on how those authorities reach their decisions.

但我們完全忽略了主權和抉擇要如何聯繫在一起

So, in a day where a new information technology allows us to participate globally in any conversation,

所以身在一個容許我們參與全球性對話的新資訊科技中

our barriers of information are completely lowered and we can, more than ever before, express our desires and our concerns.

不僅能輕鬆獲得資訊，還能表達我們的渴望及擔心

Our political system remains the same for the past 200 years and expects us to be contented with being simply passive recipients of a monologue.

政治系統和過去2百年一樣，期望我們能高興地接受長篇獨白

So, it's really not surprising that this kind of system is only able to produce two kinds of results: silence or noise.

所以我們真的不意外這個系統只有兩種功能：沉默或是吵鬧

Silence, in terms of citizens not engaging, simply not wanting to participate.

沉默，以沒有參與的公民來說，他們不想要參與

There's this commonplace [idea] that I truly, truly dislike, and it's this idea that we citizens are naturally apathetic.

我非常不喜歡這種司空見慣的事，因為這樣，公民就自然而然地變冷淡

That we shun commitment.

這樣我們就避免了該承擔的義務

But, can you really blame us for not jumping at the opportunity of going to the middle of the city

但你真的能怪我們不翹班去市中心嗎？

in the middle of a working day to attend, physically, a public hearing that has no impact whatsoever?

一場公聽會沒有絲毫影響嗎？

Conflict is bound to happen between a system that no longer represents, nor has any dialogue capacity,

衝突發生在系統間，而這個系統已經不再是一種代表，也不適合對話了

and citizens that are increasingly used to representing themselves.

公民逐漸成為自己的代表

And, then we find noise: Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico Italy, France, Spain, the United States, they're all democracies.

接下來，我們在智利、阿根廷、巴西、墨西哥、義大利、法國、西班牙和美國都會聽到吵鬧聲，民主的吵鬧聲

Their citizens have access to the ballot boxes.

公民有權利將選票投入票箱

But they still feel the need, they need to take to the streets in order to be heard.

但他們仍渴望走上街頭，讓大家聽到他們的心聲

To me, it seems like the 18th-century slogan that was the basis for the formation of our modern democracies,

對我來說，這就像18世紀的口號是現代民主的奠定基礎一樣

"No taxation without representation," can now be updated to "No representation without a conversation."

「無代表，不納稅」可以變成「無代表，不對談」

We want our seat at the table.

我們要有自己的席次

And rightly so. But in order to be part of this conversation,

當然應該要這樣，但為了成為對談的一份子

we need to know what we want to do next, because political action is being able to move from agitation to construction.

我們要知道下一步要怎麼走，因為政治行動可能是一種煽動，也可能是一種建設

My generation has been incredibly good at using new networks and technologies to organize protests,

我們這一世代善用網路資源和科技來發起抗爭

protests that were able to successfully impose agendas, roll back extremely pernicious legislation,

抗爭能成功強加議程、退回不好的法規

and even overthrow authoritarian governments. And we should be immensely proud of this.

甚至能推翻執政黨，我們應該為此感到非常驕傲

But, we also must admit that we haven't been good at using those same networks and technologies

但我們也要承認其實我們並不是那麼成功地利用網路資源及科技

to successfully articulate an alternative to what we're seeing and find the consensus and build the alliances that are needed to make it happen.

表明我們所看到的事情，然後找出輿論並互相合作，以達成目標

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 that generally lie on the extremes.

所以我們面臨的危機是我們製造了龐大的空虛感，這種空虛感會因為實際的權力而增加，就像那些依靠極端主義的軍人、激進組織及有組織的團體

But our democracy is neither just a matter of voting once every couple of years.

但我們的民主不是只是每幾年就投票一次這種小事

But it's not either the ability to bring millions onto the streets.

也不是帶領百萬人上街頭的能力

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:

所以我想要提出一個問題，而且我相信這會是我們需要回答的最重要問題，

If Internet is the new printing press, then what is democracy for the Internet era?

如果網路是新的印刷機，那民主在這個網路時代中到底是什麼呢？

What institutions do we want to build or the 21st-century society?

我們想要建立什麼樣的制度，或是什麼樣的21世紀呢？

I don't have the answer, just in case. I don't think anyone does.

我不知道答案是什麼，我想也沒有人能回答得出來

But I truly believe we can't afford to ignore this question anymore.

但我真的覺得我們不能再忽略這個問題

So, I'd like to share our experience and what we've learned so far and hopefully contribute two cents to this conversation.

所以我願意分享我們的經驗及所學，貢獻我對這場對話的個人想法

Two years ago, with a group of friends from Argentina,

兩年前，我和阿根廷的一群朋友

we started thinking, "how can we get our representatives, our elected representatives, to represent us?"

開始想：「我們該如何選出代表，為我們發聲呢？」

Marshall McLuhan once said that politics is solving today's problems with yesterday's tools.

Marshall McLuhan曾說政治是用過去的方法解決現今的問題

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?

這個問題激發我們的是，我們能用這些常見的方法解決現今的問題嗎？

Our first approach was to design and develop a piece of software called DemocracyOS.

首先，我們設計並發展出一套軟體，稱為DemocracyOS

DemocracyOS is an open-source web application that is designed to become a bridge between citizens and their elected representatives

DemocracyOS是一種網路公開的應用程式，它成為公民與代表之間的橋樑

to make it easier for us to participate from our everyday lives.

讓我們更輕鬆參與每天的活動

So first of all, you can get informed so every new project that gets introduced in Congress

你會得知各種新計畫，因為國會會採用這些計畫

gets immediately translated and explained in plain language on this platform.

並利用這個平台快速翻譯並轉換成白話

But we all know that social change is not going to come from just knowing more information,

但我們都知道改變社會的主因不光只是要知道更多資訊

but from doing something with it.

還要從中學習

So better access to information should lead to a conversation about what we're going to do next,

所以最好獲得資訊的方法應該是引導話題進入我們下一步該做什麼

and DemocracyOS allows for that.

然後DemocracyOS就會照著規則走

Because we believe that democracy is not just a matter of stacking up preferences,

因為我們相信民主不該只是大家的偏好所集結出來至高無上的東西

one on top of each other, but that our healthy and robust public debate should be, once again, one of its fundamental values.

而應該是以強健的公開辯論成為民主最基本的價值

So DemocracyOS is about persuading and being persuaded.

所以DemocracyOS是一套說服與被說服的系統

It's about reaching a consensus as much as finding a proper way of channeling our disagreement.

它會像帶領我們反對的意見到明確的目標一樣，盡力達成共識

And finally, you can vote how you would like your elected representative to vote.

最後，你可以依照意願投票選出代表

And if you do not feel comfortable voting on a certain issue,

如果你不喜歡投票決定一個特定的議題

you can always delegate your vote to someone else, allowing for a dynamic and emerging social leadership.

你可以把選票委託給其他人，選出一個積極又會做事的領導人

It suddenly became very easy for us to simply compare these results with how our representatives were voting in Congress.

這種方法簡單地呈現出該系統與國會所選出的代表的差異

But, it also became very evident that technology was not going to do the trick.

但是，它也明顯顯示出科技不能奏效

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.

我們應該要做的是找出能蒐集分散的社會知識參與者，藉此進步並做出更公正的決定

So we reached out to traditional political parties and we offered them DemocracyOS.

所以我們給傳統的政黨DemocracyOS

We said, "Look, here you have a platform that you can use to build a two-way conversation with your constituencies."

我們告訴他們：「你可以利用這個平台和選民建立雙向的對談」

And yes, we failed. We failed big time. We were sent to play outside like little kids.

但我們失敗了，我們錯失了好時機，我們被看成搗蛋的小孩

Amongst other things, we were called naive.

我們被說太天真

And I must be honest: I think, in hindsight, we were.

我要誠實地說：以後見之明來看，我們的確太天真了

Because the challenges that we face, they're not technological, they're cultural.

因為我們所面臨的挑戰，不是科技，是文化

Political parties were never willing to change the way they make their decisions.

政黨永遠不會願意改變他們的決策方向

So it suddenly became a bit obvious that if we wanted to move forward with this idea, we needed to do it ourselves.

所以很明顯地，如果我們要用這個媒體來進步，我們就要自己來

And so we took quite a leap of faith, and in August last year,

我們要放手一搏，所以去年八月

we founded our own political party, El Partido de la Red, or the Net Party, in the city of Buenos Aires.

我們在布宜諾艾利斯找到我們El Partido de la Red，又稱Net Party的代表

And taking an even bigger leap of faith, we ran for elections in October last year with this idea:

我們做了更大的挑戰，去年十月帶著這樣的信念參選：

if we want a seat in Congress, our candidate,

如果我們想要有國會的席次，我們的候選人

our representatives were always going to vote according to what citizens decided on DemocracyOS.

我們的代表就應該照DemocracyOS系統上，公民的決定來投票

Every single project that got introduced in Congress, we were going vote according to what citizens decided on an online platform.

每一項計畫都引進國會，我們要以公民在線上平台的決定來投票

It was our way of hacking the political system.

這是我們駭入政治系統的方法

We understood that if we wanted to become part of the conversation,

我們知道如果想要成為對談的一份子

to have a seat at the table, we needed to become valid stakeholders, and the only way of doing it is to play by the system rules.

想要擁有國會席次，我們就應該成為令人信服的賭金保管員，而唯一的方法就是按照系統規則玩下去

But we were hacking it in the sense that we were radically changing the way a political party makes its decisions.

但我們駭系統的概念是我們徹底改變傳統政黨做決策的方式

For the first time, we were making our decisions together with those who we were affecting directly by those decisions.

第一次，我們和那些直接影響決策的人一起做決定

It was a very, very bold move for a two-month-old party in the city of Buenos Aires.

這對一個在布宜諾艾利斯成立兩個月的政黨來說，是非常勇敢的行動

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.

但我們的行動受到矚目，我們得到2萬2千票，這是投票率的百分之1.2，我們成為當地的第二選擇

So, even if that wasn't enough to win a seat in Congress, it was enough for us to become part of the conversation,

所以即使我們的能力還不足以贏得一個國會席次，但能成為對談的一份子就已經足夠了

to the extent that next month, Congress, as an institution, is launching for the first time in Argentina's history,

下個月，國會將打破阿根廷的歷史

a DemocracyOS to discuss, with the citizens, three pieces of legislation:

用DemocracyOS和公民討論三項法案

two on urban transportation and one on the use of public space.

兩項有關城市交通、另一項有關公共空間

Of course, our elected representatives are not saying,

當然，我們選出的代表不會說：

"Yes, we're going to vote according to what citizens decide," but they're willing to try.

「對，我們會按公民的決定來投票」，但他們願意嘗試

They're willing to open up a new space for citizen engagement and hopefully they'll be willing to listen as well.

他們願意為公民開放新的空間，也希望他們願意傾聽

Our political system can be transformed, and not by subverting it, by destroying it,

我們的政治系統會改變，不是推翻它，也不是破壞它

but by rewiring it with the tools that Internet affords us now.

而是用現在網路提供的工具來改寫

But a real challenge is to find, to design to create, to empower those connectors that are able to innovate,

但真正的挑戰是要找出這些工具、設計、創造，並授予連結者創新的能力

to transform noise and silence into signal and finally bring our democraciesto the 21st century.

以改變吵鬧、沉默變成標誌，最後，將我們的民主帶入21世紀

I'm not saying it's easy. But in our experience, we actually stand a chance of making it work.

我認為這不是件簡單的事，但以我們的經驗，我們確實有機會實現

And in my heart, it's most definitely worth trying. Thank you.

而且在我心中，這是最值得嘗試的事情，謝謝