| From: | "Bruce Eggum" <bruceeggum(at)gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date: | Mon, 4 Jun 2007 19:35:39 -0500 |
| Subject: | Re: [WDDM] The Key Issue |
Dear PVR
I answer in your note. This
issue has been going on for years so it
is not "under the table" however people seem to stop discussing it before a resolution
has been completed.
Dear Bruce, Antonio and all,
I think this conversation between Bruce and Antonio illustrates the key issue
facing WDDM. Bruce says that he visualizes DD as people's initial method
of controlling government. The people need a structure to develop initiatives
and petitions they agree upon to tell government what their community is
demanding.
BE- I add this clarification.
This peoples structure is made up of all their community, their meetings, email
and blogs, websites all of it which allow them to communicate and decide what
they want their government to fulfill and how to run (rules, laws, procedure)
their community. They can than INITIATE these to the government for activation.
PVR- My question is that how is this going to transform into true democracy
when people are still out of govt. controlled by political parties. Already
there are methods of petitioning and developing initiatives available for
people to make known their preferences as in the Swiss system.
BE- WDDM began because I&R was (is) not standard for most nations and communities. WDDM's sole purpose was to guide people in the development of I&R for themselves. WDDM can not (no power) do that for anyone
PREAMBLE
We, members of the Continuing International Congress on Direct Democracy
(CICDD) decided during our second Congress in Delphi, Greece,
the birthplace of democracy, to establish a formal Worldwide Direct Democracy
Movement. We dedicate ourselves to work toward the introduction of Direct
Democracy (DD) into the representative systems, through Citizens Initiatives
and Referendums, and, ultimately, transform them peacefully to true democracies
of the people. We pledge ourselves to remain faithful to genuine democratic
principles as expressed in our Mission Statement. We aim to inspire others to join
us and help to develop principles and methods leading to direct democracy (DD)
of the people. We have been and will remain dedicated members of CICDD and
share our ideals and proposals with all participants in the Network,
individuals, and families.
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/archive/original_wddm/OriginalFoundingDoc.html
Every person who joined WDDM was required to sign a form they agreed with the above before becoming a member. We are to do nothing more than this:
Introduce Direct Democracy (DD) into the representative systems, through Citizens Initiatives and Referendums.
BE- That is all we do. We do not write constitutions, we do not even tell people what to write. We can only suggest the use of I&R. We can discuss the best ways of I&R, how to implement I&R and suggest remedies. That is it.
PVR- But still they are
at the receiving end. There is no clear strategy on how the people
are going to gain control over governance.
BE- We only suggest the tool
of I&R than it is up to the people how they use it. If they have the
complete Swiss model I&R they than HAVE control. For instance, if the Swiss
wanted to make ALL decisions, they could by passing an appropriate Iniative.
They apparently do not want to or they would have. BUT THEY HAVE THE CHOICE !
That is why I belong to WDDM to help all people develop I&R so they have a
choice.
Many of the present I&R
including many in the US
do NOT have BINDING REFERENDUM which is essential or the people do not have any
control at all. This is another emphasis needed from WDDM suggesting the need
for binding Referendum. Unfortunately we have not been able to come to any
decision on these things, nor make these statements because we are immediately
charged with developing a bureaucratic organization.
It is the popular anarchy
stance that all hierarchy are bad. Thus those who believe and practice anarchy refuse
to develop anything which needs structure. How could the web even be used if
not for the hierarchy of standardized rules and process? What about the rules
of language? Of writting? This radical unrealistic rule/belief is stopping
progress.
WDDM can not, will not lead people
on revolutions, parades or civil unrest. The SOLE responsibility of WDDM is to
provide information on how I&R COULD be utilized.
PVR If there is a final
method of controlling the government that is being contemplated, Bruce, kindly
make it known. [I&R will do it, if WDDM were functioning you would
know that]
Under such circumstances,
Antonio's grievance over 'setting up a bureaucratic infra structure
as the core point of DD' is valid.
BE- WDDM is NOT "setting up a
bureaucratic infrastructure". WDDM does not have the power nor intent to do so.
WDDM is simply developing a Charter for WDDM so WDDM has the ability to
function. The Charter is designed for WDDM members to post, discuss, initiate, vote
on issues ONLY for the WDDM Org.
First the exact way in which
the goal is going to be realized should be made clear. Without this WDDM with
its present rules and regulations will end up as one more political party.
The values that Eric has clearly explained, which should guide WDDM, will
remain just on paper.
We have been trying to clarify the WDDM goals and such but
Antonio has consistently undermined all attempts to do so. We are simply a
group of people deciding on how to run our meetings (in cyberspace). To do this
the process must be written so all can follow the procedures or change them if
they do not work. The WDDM Charter has no more power to change the world than
the rules you have for a local card club.
Pushing this issue under the carpet is not going to help.
BE- thanks for bringing it up
again.
PVR
Yes Antonio, I am aiming to a Direct Democracy which is the peoples initial
method of controlling government. Yes the people need structure to develop
initiatives and petitions they agree upon to tell government what their
community is demanding.
Bruce
Dear Bruce, Antonio and all,
I think this conversation between Bruce and Antonio illustrates the key issue facing WDDM. Bruce says that he visualizes DD as people's initial method of controlling government. The people need a structure to develop initiatives and petitions they agree upon to tell government what their community is demanding.
My question is that how is this going to transform into true democracy when people are still out of govt. controlled by political parties. Already there are methods of petitioning and developing initiatives available for people to make known their preferences as in the swiss system. But still they are at the receiving end. There is no clear strategy on how the people are going to gain control over governance. If there is a final method of controlling the government that is being contemplated, Bruce, kindly make it known. Under such circumstances, Antonio's grievance over 'setting up a bureaucratic infra structure as the core point of DD' is valid. First the exact way in which the goal is going to be realized should be made clear. Without this WDDM with its present rules and regulations will end up as one more political party. The values that Eric has clearly explained, which should guide WDDM, will remain just on paper.
Pushing this issue under the carpet is not going to help.
PVR
Yes Antonio, I am aiming to a Direct Democracy which is the peoples initial method of controlling government. Yes the people need structure to develop initiatives and petitions they agree upon to tell government what their community is demanding.
Bruce
Thanks for your agreement.
Yet unfortunately, you want to set up a (top-down led) bureaucratic
"infrastructure" to be the core point of (direct) democracy. In other
words, you seem like you're aiming at a kind of directed democracy.
antonio
Bruce Eggum ha scritto:
Yes Antonio, I agree with your statement " I would suggest
Democracy is a society where the people (not the bureaucrats!) have the
first say --and the last say, in respect of local laws."
That is why "the people" need an infrastructure to discuss and develop
their community's laws and needs so they can be united and petition
[demand] government do what they want done. Unless the people vote
democratically and make decisions, those decisions will be made for
them. It is a matter of the people taking responsibility and exercising
their power.
Regards, Bruce
ps - we people are not bureaucrats, that is government agencies.
On 6/3/07, Antonio
Rossin <
rossin(at)tin.it> wrote:
VPR,
and others,
The difficulties WDDM faced these years, have not been overcome still.
These difficulties are still up, caused by some members who want to get
(direct) democracy being turned into a bureaucratic organization.
Anyway, their attempts to rule democracy by a bureaucratic board seem
to have revealed a flop, so late, because of the refusal of members
inside - and the member inside I dare say - to keep on being ruled by the usual
bureaucratic power-seekers' class.
That is, in reply to the question: "What the Hell is Democracy", I
would suggest Democracy is a society where the people (not the bureaucrats!)
have the first say --and the last say, in respect of local laws.
antonio