Re: decisions at wider levels

[Richard Moore <rkm(at)quaylargo.com>]

Doug Everingham wrote:

> > I don't see any of your principles as "silly".
> > On the contrary.
> > In advocating use of coordinated citizens' voting to
> > overcome
> > existing domination of governments by economic bullies I
> > am
> > not abandoning support for local efforts,
> > transparency,
> > answerability and experiment. The scenario you use as
> > an
> > example is a good argument for decentralized
> > initiatives.
> > However, you do not rejetc the need for eventual decisions
> > at
> > wider (national, even international) levels, for example
> > in
> > establishing education policy. I submit that this can only
> > be
> > made quicker,  easier and fairer by nested networks
> > of all
> > stakeholders (teachers' groups; parents' groups,
> > child
> > psychologists, students. local associations etc.) and
> > often
> > only achieved in coordination with elected
> > lawmakers.
> > Hence the critical usefulness of SimPol.

Hi Doug,

Within the context of hierarchical governments, and with power delegated to lawmakers, what you say makes a lot of sense. However, that is not the context I have been talking about.

My vision of a democratic society is based on the principles of local sovereignty and harmonization. Harmonization is a way of approaching problems based on taking all concerns into account. Local sovereignty means that each community can operate however it likes -- provided that it maintains internally an inclusive democratic process, and that it deals with its neighbors on the basis of harmonization.

In such a society, education policy would be determined locally. Many different approaches would be tried, around the world, and those that work best can be adopted by other communities. The rate of education-evolution would be much greater than in a centralized approach.

Other policies, such as dealing with fishing on the high seas, do require a large-scale policy-making process. I agree with you that this process needs to involve "nested networks of all stakeholders". In the society I am envisioning, however, this would be accomplished by means of temporary councils of delegates from stakeholder communities, meeting to harmonize all the concerns involved. This is more like a 'treaty' process than a 'legislative' process.

Whether or not such a society can be achieved, and by what means, is a separate issue that we can discuss if you like.

rkm