Re: Epistemological Revolution (Chris et Al)

["John Baker" <bakerjohnj(at)hotmail.com>]

Mirek, I believe our thinking patterns are dictated by our politics. The
struggle for power turns us from cooperative beings into confrontational
ones. The solution is to fix the system so as to guaranatee everyone is
equal. This is the beauty of global DD that I think eludes most people, even
here.

Of course, there is no guarantee outside of our faith in the theory.
However, it seems to me that demonstarting any lack of faith makes the
argument weaker and thus weakens its potential. So the question is clearly a
faith based argument as well as a scientific argument.

In other words, the only way to test the theory is to make it happen. The
only way to make it happen is to have faith in it. The less faith we show in
humanity the weaker the argument or DD is.

If this is in fact a place where people will debate the value or timing of
DD then I believe you should change the name to something else besides WDDM.
Perhaps
World-Wide-Maybe-Someday-If-The-World-Is-Ready-For-Direct-Democracy-Movement
?




----- Original Message -----
From: "M. Kolar" <wddm(at)mkolar.org>
To: <wddm@world-wide-democracy.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 7:16 AM
Subject: Re: Epistemological Revolution (Chris et Al)


> > Once a global DD constitution is established I believe NMT will take
>  > care of itself.
>
> John I am not so sure it would be so simple. How can one establish (and
have
> respected and observed) a DD constitution without a new way of thinking?
Both
> will most probably have to be done gradually, simultaneously.
>     Our experience from this WDDM forum only proves that. We are supposed
to be
> a group of DD advocates, but we have not managed in the past 7-8 months,
since
> we started this latest experiment in trying to establish a meaningful
WDDM, to
> make any tangible progress in self-organizing ourselves.
>     Mirek
>
>
>
> John Baker wrote (Dec. 6):
>
> > Yes but..
> >
> > I thought this was a DD advocacy forum. Discussing NMT as a prerequisite
> > for DD seems off-topic to me. Personally,  I believe the majority can be
> > trusted more than a minority. This means I am more afraid of anything
> > less than a democractic decision.
> >
> > I do not know what the best decision is for the whole, therefore I ask
> > each individual for their honest opinion. The only way to do that is via
> > a democratic vote. Therefore, I support DD, unequivacably. I ave no
> > doubt that DD is better for everyone as a whole for this reason and
> > therefore I am not concerned about NMT.
> >
> > Once a global DD constitution is established I believe NMT will take
> > care of itself.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> > JB