On July 28, 2007 I attended the Grassroots Social Awareness Festival (organized
by Popular Participation Movement, http://www.ppmnanaimo.com/. Many interesting
local organizations participated. Several were calling for increased
participation of citizens in decision making about various local issues
(airport expansion, waterfront development). There was also an anarchist
(anarcho-syndicalist) stand where I picked up various literature. What caught
my eye first was the text titled "WHAT IS ANARCHISM?". It is quoted in the
quote below. You can also find it in on the Nanaimo Anarchist Network site at http://www.geocities.com/vcmtalk/nan1.html. (While you are there, I also
recommend to read WHY DO WE NEED ANARCHISM? at http://www.geocities.com/vcmtalk/nan1.html - it's about what to do to improve
society, something we seem to have hard time here to arrive at).
There was some posts against anarchism in our mailing lists rather recently. I
am posting this here because for me the points listed below do constitute
exactly what I believe is the Democracy (ideal of Democracy or True Democracy
or Direct Democracy). So apparently I am also an anarcho-syndicalist. Note that
the Anarchists also have Direct Democracy only as one constituent point in what
makes a good society, that is what we called I&R here.
Thus
1. we should really make clear what we understand under the term Direct
Democracy. I for one always meant under this term all what is listed in the
inset below. And I had this in mind what I accepted to task of the webmaster to
help revive WDDM some two years ago.
2. It would be interested to know what others think of the list below. How many
do agree that all these points are necessary for a functioning democracy. I
suggest that you post your thoughts on this in replies to this post.
3. Do you still have any objections to anarchism?
[quote]
WHAT IS ANARCHISM?
It does NOT stand for chaos, violence, bomb-throwing or disorder. What it does
stand for is:
* [b]Decentralization[/b] - Centralization of political and economic power
leads to abuse and corruption. Political and the economic structures should be
human-scale.
* [b]Liberty[/b] – each person should be free to do what they wish
providing they do no harm to other people.
* [b]Self-management[/b] - Each person should have control over those
situations that effect him/her, in both the work place and the community.
* [b]Federation[/b] – decentralized groups, whether communities or work
places unite in a federation to create an "economy of scale" without creating
an authoritarian, top-down structure.
* [b]Autonomy[/b] – each group or community should have the right to
control those aspects which effect it.
* [b]Direct Democracy[/b] – Decisions ought to be taken directly by the
people effected. Where decisions must be made at a larger scale, such as with a
federation, recallable delegates are selected.
* [b]Localism[/b] – It is best for the environment that as much as
possible of our needs are met locally.
* [b]Regionalism[/b] – We live in a place and that place is a region. Each
region has its own history, environment and culture and these are the basis of
community.
* [b]Community[/b] – A lack of community brings social breakdown. We must
work to restore community.
* [b]Internationalism[/b] – Nothing exists in isolation, and in truth "an
injury to one, is an injury to all" The destruction of a community abroad helps
to undermine community locally. The repression of workers overseas, leads to
the oppression of workers here.
[/quote]
In this context it may be appropriate to place one more link, a link to a quote
from the lecture by Andre Carrel titled "Democracy: Back to Basics" at http://canadianvoices.org/speakers.php?id=22. There you will find:
"[b]Democracy’s premises are equality and responsibility[/b]. These simple
propositions have yet to be achieved after centuries marked by wars and
revolutions fought in the name of democratic ideals."
[b]Democracy = equality and responsibility[/b] seems to be very compatible with
the list above. And having this in mind you can see why I was so strongly
questioning (opposing) the admission to WDDM of somebody who calls 'True
Democracy' a system based on unequal classes of citizens. (While this may be a
workable idea for a transitional system for some jurisdictions to give some
voice to classes of citizens who do not have any voice at all at present, I am
strongly against calling such a system a democracy, and even add the qualifier
'true'. Again, we should made our mind on what we want to be: a group promoting
the ideal of Democracy, or an unfocused discussion club.