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

01430: Re: [WDDM] Anarchism and Direct Democracy

From: Doug Everingham <dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:41:09 +1000
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Anarchism and Direct Democracy

Friends,

Mirek's philosophy (as expressed below) seems to me hardly distinguishable from that of the Sociocratic Center www.sociocracy.biz or that of Dr Shann Turnbull [Principal, International Institute for Self-governance, PO Box266, Woollahra NSW 1350 Australia, http://www.aprim.net/associates/turnbull.htm ]
They give examples of how such self-monitoring, transparent, accountable cooperative networks surpass conventional pyramidal hierarchies in durability, efficiency and equity (in private or public enterprises / projects).

Pioneers of group dynamics (study of how members interact in groups), including psychiatric group therapists and some Quaker groups, suggest 12 to 15 people is about the practicable maximum size for a group to arrive at total consensus or at least eventual compromises where no member persists with an objection. Less frequent meetings of larger groups can be tolerated where majority vote is sufficient to satisfy participants, but the more detailed ad specialized their discussions the more care is needed to secure community solidarity.

I see forming specialized groups (law administration, health services, transport experts etc.) as not necessarily against democratic principles. We may need to have them but they need not be exclusive and secretive – they can follow syndicalist or anarchistic principles by ensuring their decision control groups include due representation of all relevant stakeholders (providers, clients, monitors etc.) in cross-liaison with related groups, including those at adjoining 'levels' of complex organizations, much as a living organism has vital organs each specialized for certain functions but 'subservient' / deferring to each other in other functions.

We need to have parents aware of the conflicting trends in the way infants interpret (and deeply absorb) essential interaction / communication patterns: at one extreme hierarchical ('top dog' or unchallengeable parent / monitor and docile follower, the dominance pattern too often expressed in intolerant extremism, rebellion, escapism, mind-altering substance abuse etc.) and the opposite more 'matriarchal' or constructive trend, giving equal say to alternatives, cooperating in the search for common ideals, not seizing on the views of parent-like leaders who seductively claim exclusive compassion, truth, equity or beauty for a leap of faith in a particular divine father, mother Earth, nor for a militantly atheistic view. Dr Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it> http://www.flexible-learning.org is participating in a school experiment to test his psychiatric theory that the parents' example of dominance or more flexible consensus-forming lays down a precedent in our first 3 years of social interaction that tends to persist,

– Doug Everingham
====

From: "M. Kolar" <wddm(at)mkolar.org>
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:33:48 AM Australia/Brisbane
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Subject: [WDDM] Anarchism and Direct Democracy
Reply-To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net

Dear all,
This is a copy of my post at the WDDM Forum, http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/forum/read.php?5,511,511#msg-511 .
I encourage you to place any possible replies directly in the Forum (however, if something relevant comes here, I'll copy it into the Forum):

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.

Mirek


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