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

01659: Re: [WDDM] Getting the whole picture about DD

From: Giorgio Menon <giorgio.menon(at)pd.infn.it>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:43:13 +0100
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Getting the whole picture about DD

*Charles Bukowski quotes* <http://thinkexist.com/quotes/charles_bukowski/>


“The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a
democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you
don't have to waste your time voting.”


Regards
Giorgio

Jon Lalanne wrote:

The cheepest most efficient form of government is a
dictatorship as long as the dictator is
benevolent....some of the best governments in the
world are dictatorships...


--- Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it> wrote:



Jim Powell ha scritto:


Hi Antonio,

I do not agree that this will lead to


dictatorship.


We may disagree with the methods that are put


forward but this


concentrates on the differences.

Mainstream communication is required.



Hi Jim,

These words of yours sound strange to a fellow -
like me -
who lived in a country ( Italy) under fascistic
dictatorship.
Maybe in your country you've got no such background.


The best way is to introduce “the way things work”


into the school


curriculum.
This would examine the way in which decisions are


made.


The fertile mind of the child would then ask why?



I do not agree totally with this .
The best way is to introduce "the way things work"
into the family
curriculum, at the zero-to-three age, when parents
are still the only
teachers and the child is learning communicated
things not only, but
also how communication works within interpersonal
(within social,
later) relationships. There the problem is, how to
save children from
their "fertile minds" getting sterilized by family
dictatorship, imho.

About this topic, if you were interested in, I have
some stuff at:



http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/rossin08.htm


(and at .../rossin09.htm, if you were interested in
how differences
work inside mainstream communication, to wit,
Dialectics.)



Simple logic would then have them realize that the


system is not


representative of the will of the people.

Regards

Jim Powell



See my "idea" about this point in a previous post of
mine.

There I question: how does the real will of the
people work?
" - for good or bad purposes - ? "

Which becomes, now: "with a fertile or with a
sterilized mind?"


Regards

ant


*From:* Antonio Rossin
*Sent:* 13 Mar 2008 07:34 AM
*To:* wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
*Cc:* epistemology(at)yahoogroups.com
*Subject:* Re: [WDDM] Getting the whole picture


about DD


Georges,

The problem of (the lack of) Democracy is not that


of


communicating valuable stuff -- such as yours


below --


to people.

Instead, it is about how to communicate any stuff


--


encompassing yours -- to people, so to enable them
to deal with.

In other words, that's not a problem of


communicating.


That's a problem of meta-communicating.

If you were unable to understand the difference,


as you


seem as, you are a damage to Democracy, because


you


are leading towards (scientific) dictatorship.


Regards,

antonio





Georges Metanomski ha scritto:

--- Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan
<vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com>


<vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com> wrote:



I&amp;BR is focussed on


the process that would enable True Democracy


but it


does not tell us how to get there.



=============
G:
For once a reasonable statement. It's not for us


to


discusse, let alone to dictate which forms should


take


the DD governance. Once established, it will be


for


the
Forum to determine them. All we can do is to see


how


to
get there. Years ago I proposed a way that I


called


"Shadow Parliament". I cannot be judge and party,


so


it should be discussed by other people.

It's available in




http://findgeorges.com/ROOT/WRITINGS/POLITICS/shadow_eng.html



I quote here it's conclusion:

QUOTE
Three issues seem essential for starting to move
towards the DD:

1.Getting a Shadow Parliament within the


Particracy.



2.Establish a logistic 3 Functions support.

3.Propound Sincerity, which appears to be the
critical condition of DD. A very limited


experience


seems to point to "self applicable attitude".
An example:
A small forum discussed pollution and found out
rightly
or wrongly that the worst pollution source is the
factory breeding of animals. Besides pollution it
involves unacceptable suffering of animals and


mental


corruption of attendants who become potential


sadistic


Auschwitz guards. The group condemned eating meat.


Not


as a theoretical principle, but as a self applying


decision and all members stopped eating meat.
Another very limited and positive experience


consisted



in stages in Kibbutzim, confronting fellows with


the


sincerity of the unique ever realized genuine DD.
UNQUOTE
=============

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