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

01201: Re: [WDDM] Achieving True Democracy 200705-04

From: "M. Kolar" <wddm(at)mkolar.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 10:03:16 -0700
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Achieving True Democracy 200705-04

Dear Eric,
I think that you gave in your message below a very good summary of the
situation. I especially agree with:

At this juncture, some members may ask why must WDDM itself be truly
democratic so long as it could lead the world to true democracy. The
simple answer is that an undemocratic WDDM has no credibility even to
talk about democracy, let alone to lead others.

But I beg to differ with your claim that only 6 members participated in
the deliberation and approval of the present Charter. In fact, everybody
participated at least passively. Everybody was informed about the
deliberation and about the vote. They were actually repeatedly begged to
vote or express themselves somehow. If they didn't like the charter
proposal, why did they not voted explicitly against it??? It was so easy
to type NO in an e-mail. There are absolutely no sanctions in this group
against the way people vote (unlike in some false democracies you
mentioned). I suppose that it was made clear enough that not sending an
explicit vote equals abstaining in a vote. If it was not yet made clear
enough, it should be written in big letters somewhere. I do not see
personally other way how to operate in a group like this. In a real
country you may legislate that voting is compulsory, and fine people if
they do not come to the booth (I think Australia is doing that?). But I
do not think that is particularly vise even in a real-life society. Can
you really get an informed vote by dragging people by force to the
voting booth? All people should be of course encouraged by all means to
participate in decision making. But voluntarily, they should have a
choice not to participate when they don't feel like. Perhaps everybody
should be required to confirm that they were informed about a vote?
The basic principle should be: Everybody should get all the
information about an issue, be well aware that a vote will be held. And
it would be up to them if they will participate in the deliberations an
in the vote, and how they will participate. If they choose not to
explicitly vote, it will be deemed that they abstained in this
particular vote. I suggest that we officially adopt this principle at
WDDM, and write it up explicitly into the WDDM rules (or Charter). So
this is my formal request to the WDDM board to put this proposal in due
course to further discussion and vote (maybe as an amendment of Charter)..

Mirek


lpc1998 wrote:

Dear PVR, Mark, Filia, Annette & Albano,

The first step, in my view, we at WDDM could take towards true
democracy is to understand the critical nature of the present WDDM
members in order to tailor a true democracy Charter or Constitution
relevant and meaningful to them. Continued obsession with WDDM history
would only imprison us in the past and deny us our future possibilities.

Those of us who had worked on the Current Operating Rules last year
and earlier are generally conscious of the fact that WDDM
members broadly comprise of two groups: Group A comprises of members
who see WDDM as a cyber forum for the exchange of views and
sympathies in an oasis of politically aware people (surrounded by a
hostile world) who reject the Rule by the Representatives and their
false democracy. Many of these people are excited over their personal
visions of a true democracy where the ordinary people are sovereign.

However, many are very busy and are fully committed in their own
projects and programs and have neither the time nor the enthusiasm to
develop WDDM further as a vehicle for the global development of true
democracy.

At least one member is allergic to the ballot and the majority will,
and another who believes that true democracy must be imposed top
down on the ordinary people by undemocratic means. And there are also
some who preach true democracy like a religion to be accepted by blind
faith and would want all heretics to be burnt on the stakes.

Group B comprises of members who also sees great potential in WDDM as
a global movement in the forefront in the battle for the advancement
of world democracy. And some with faith so great that, despite the
pain and anguish following every major setback, still soldier on,
especially inspired by the talents and enthusiasm of new comers.

Because true democracy is also associated with values such as the
human rights, the freedom of the individual including the freedoms of
the conscience, choice and association, the pursuit of individual
happiness, political equality, respect for the decision of the
majority made for the common good, unity in diversity, and so on, it
is futile for the minority Group B members to try to impose their
views and beliefs on the current majority Group A members, whether
such imposition is done knowingly or unknowingly because democracy
without its attendant values would quickly degenerate into the rule of
the mob.

Anyway, any rule or Charter approved a small minority of members has
neither the moral or legal authority on the relatively vast majority
who, in the first place, have nothing to do with it. At the very most,
as it is it is only morally binding on those who participate in its
deliberation and adoption and most probably, it will be ignored by the
rest. For example, if we have a membership of 54, and only 6 members
participate in the deliberation process and even if all 6 approve and
endorse the Charter, it is only the Charter of the said 6, because for
it to be a current majority decision of the WDDM, it needs to be
approved by a simple true majority of 28 members out of 54 (i.e at
least, 50%+1, the simple and honest meaning of a true majority).

So the road to a truly democratic WDDM is a long and arduous one;
there is no easy short cut based on a false majority. The Charter must
be approved by at least a 50%+1 majority of the eligible voters. This
is, in fact, a good thing as it would mean no hyjacking of WDDM by a
small group of people.

So what is the best cause of action that can be taken by the Goup B
Members for a truly democratic WDDM? Yes, they must presevere in
writing a truly democratic Charter or Constitution for WDDM, a
Charter or Constitution that recognizes the Group A's rights as WDDM
members and at the same time, respect its decision not to participate
in WDDM's affairs.

So in the Group B's deliberation and voting and to determine the 50%+1
majority in decision-making, Group B has to maintain its own Register
of Voters.

It is important to remember that until the Charter is adopted by not
less 50%+1 of the WDDM total membership, it remains the Charter for
Group B only.

Of course, it is tempting to resort to false majority for
decision-making, but in so doing, WDDM would be just another false
democracy claiming to democratic like so many false democracies. Do
note that the undemocratic Bush had garnered about 30% of the eligible
votes in the 2004 Presidential Election and our democracy should not
be more false than his.

The simple and honest truth is that for a true democracy to be viable,
at least a comfortable majority of its members or citizens has not
only to be reasonably informed, thinking and participating, but also
has to be honest, fair and diligent in the handling of public affairs.

For a truly democratic WDDM to emerge eventually, Group B members have
to resolve to uphold democratic principles, practices and values truly
and honestly, by both words and deeds, to a point when many Group A
members would be inspired to cross over to Group B to assist making
the necessary truly majority decisions for WDDM.

At this juncture, some members may ask why must WDDM itself be truly
democratic so long as it could lead the world to true democracy. The
simple answer is that an undemocratic WDDM has no credibility even to
talk about democracy, let alone to lead others. And most probably,
like all false democracies, a small group of members will be speaking
and promoting their personal democracy ideas in the name of many.

Do also note that WDDM is a oasis of politically aware people. If we
are unable to achieve true democracy in WDDM, we are not ready to face
the politically inert masses in the outside world.

So Ladies and Gentlemen, are we ready to take our first step towards
true democracy?

Eric Lim (lpc1998)


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