[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]

01079: Re: [WDDM] D3

From: "Ted Becker" <becketl(at)auburn.edu>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:36:34 -0500
Subject: Re: [WDDM] D3

Hi Mirek:

Good. What we're really saying here is that there seems to be two
parallel movements that are both gaining traction and not paying
attention to the other...which is complementary. It isn't just
semantics or verbal sparring. It's an attempt at synergy. Carson
reminded me of her impassioned attack on I+R being called DD in Pribram
when I was with her and Stuart White in Sydney last month. And that
Jiri and I seemed to be her only allies on this.

I want to use JPD to report on the developments in I+R....virtual
and/or otherwise. But there has to be some "delibertative" aspect to it
for me to have an "article" or "news" item. JPD's my present
contribution to democratic transformation globally and I'm trying to get
the "direct democrats" to be more specific about the "deliberative"
aspects so as to include developments in it.

Ted.

"M. Kolar" <wddm(at)mkolar.org> 04/20/07 6:01 PM >>>
Ted,
I am also all for D3, the combination of possible approaches to better

democracy. When I talk about DD, I mean it in this broader definition -
DDD.
Enitiatives.org have also some deliberation in it, in preparation the
text of an initiatives to a vote.
Le Parlement of another of our members I mentioned yesterday has even
more deliberation in it.
I am trying to collect the links to all such tools here:
http://democracy.mkolar.org/vote.html (first part). Welcome additions
to
this list.
Mirek

Ted Becker wrote:

Hi Nico:

Good to hear from you...and welcome to the movement...all parts of it
you mentioned....plus another part that I'm gonna inform you about
and
ask you to think of how to include it some way in your website.

When a number of us "global" DD types met in Pribram, near Prague in
1999 or 2000....I forget which....there was some debate and
disagreement
over the importance of adding some kind of formal "deliberation" to
the
I+R process....at one or more points.
The disussion revealed a fissure in the development of more and
better
direct democracy in the world and what has occurred is that there
really
are two movements, the direct democracy movement, which your website
is
part of....and a great addition I might add...and the delib dem
movement...which is growing beyond belief. For a view of that, look
at
www.auburn.edu/jpd

Some in Pribram, including myself, Ned Crosby, Lyn Carson and Jiri
Polak...all agree that what we really need is a combination of the
movements into what I call D3, or DDD, "direct deliberative
democracy."
What this does it to emphasize direct democratic components to rep
dem
systems that include either face to face delibs, online delibs, or
some
combo thereof.

I'd love to write about your website for the Journal of Public
Deliberation....but there is no option for deliberation on your
citizens
initiative system. One place that some have suggested a delib
section
can fit into the I+R process is to let citizens discuss and edit the
proposition...before it becomes the official petition that people
finally sign up for. Do you think this might be possible to do
within
your system....if you agree it might be a helpful addition?

Let me know. We have two parallel movements that need much more
intersection....and I'm in them both.

Ted.



"Nicolas Durand" <nicolas(at)enitiatives.ch> 04/19/07 2:40 PM >>>


That's a really good point, Ted!



........


[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]