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

02103: Re :[WDDM] What is the AIM of WDDM?

From: "Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan" <vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com>
Date: 29 Apr 2009 17:01:39 -0000
Subject: Re :[WDDM] What is the AIM of WDDM?

Dear Mr. Jiri Polak,
The proposed platform would indeed be another discussion channel but the discussion would be centered around developing an alternative to the concept of political parties.

It would be tailored to putting up candidates in elections independent of political parties and hence would have a focussed target group.

It can form a nidus for action on the ground. 

The potential of the internet can be harnessed to the utmost advantage.

Sincerely,

Vijayaraghavan P 



On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:01:48 +0200 wddm@world-wide-democracy.net wrote

Dear Mr.Padmanabhan,
to set up the platform you propose is surely
useful, but it can only become yet another discussion channel without any real
impact on concrete political systems. A transformation into true democracy must
be enforced in communes, villages, towns, regions and states by local
people.  There is no other way.
Sincerely,              
Jiri Polak

----- Original Message -----
From:
Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan

To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net

Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 6:53
PM
Subject: [WDDM] Re :[WDDM] What is the
AIM of WDDM?
Mr. Jiri Polak,You have said that - "....it is extremely
difficult for DD organisations to compete with established parties which have
created all sorts of obstacles to prevent competition." Setting up a
True Democracy Platform (web-based to start with) would bypass the
political parties and present an alternative method for the people to put
up candidates for elections in an organized way. In effect it would be
splicing open the party-oriented election system and getting into the
parliament using the existing electoral procedures. Kindly go through the
forum discussion on 'True Democracy web platform", if you haven't done fully:
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/forum/read.php?23,641,641#msg-641There
should be no legal difficulty either, since it would only be a association of
people promoting a particular idea. It would be non-violent and perfectly
constitutional.The only difficulty could be the cost to set up the
global website. If many people are convinced, then raising resource for it
should be possible. I feel that there are a large number of people who
would like the system to be freed from the clutches of political parties,
presently considered as a necessary evil for electoral
purpose.Sincerely,Vijayaraghavan POn Tue, 28
Apr 2009 09:39:06 0200 wddm@world-wide-democracy.net wroteDear
Mr.Padmanabha,both strategies (extraparliamentary pressure and efforts
to reach parliament using existing procedures) can and should be used at
the same time. But it is extremely difficult for DD organisations to
compete with established parties which have created all sorts of obstacles
to prevent competition. The current systems are illegal and criminal
because they have been put in place without any mandate from the citizens.
Therefore it is legitimate to fight against them by any means except to
physically hurt people. Should we rely on parliamentary procedures only,
we could wait hundred years. Besides, to only participate in elections
means legitimizing the existing oligarchic systems. If "all power comes
from the people" as the myth says, then the people is free to do anything
to change the system.  The only problem is to mobilize "ordinary
people" and make them stop behaving like
sheep.Sincerely,                          
Jiri Polak----- Original Message ----- From:
Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 7:31 PMSubject: [WDDM] Re :[WDDM]
What is the AIM of WDDM?Mr. Jiri Polak,You have mentioned in your
reply while describing the actions needed to enforce a
referendum - "Try to put a DD person into Parliament...". This, I feel,
should be the central aim. If a strategy is devised to achieve this then
all other things like - attracting the man on the street and
enforcing a referendum for making amends to the constitution become
easier. If this core strategy is not there then it is difficult to
convince people about the practicability of other actions.This is why I
feel that a 'True Democracy web platform' should first be set up that will
lead on to putting DD persons into the parliament by directly competing
with political parties during elections.Vijayaraghavan POn Mon, 27 Apr
2009 16:54:34 0200 wddm@world-wide-democracy.net wroteHello,there are
many good ideas on the Forum, but how to realize them? In Czech Republic,
in theory, we have a clear strategy: The basic principle is that it is the
people, not party politicians, who alone are entitled to write and adopt a
Constitution establishing a political system. If you let party politicians
to do that - as the case has been everywhere - they will put in place a
Constitution giving all power to political parties. We - a few independent
citizens - have proposed and published a Citizens´ Constitution by
amending the existing one which we consider as only provisional. The next
step should be to enforce a referendum on this proposal. If successful,
the referendum would put in place a new Constitution and a new political
system. Such a system would probably contain many elements proposed in the
WWDN Forum. How to enforce a referendum? Seek publicity by any non violent
means; organize demonstrations, e.g. marches on the Parliament like they
do in Poland; a symbolic defenestration and the like. Try to put a DD
person into Parliament, get the support of some widely known persons etc.
The feasibilyty of such a strategy will obviously depend on the degree of
"shakeability" of the man-in-the-street. Maybe people will remain passive
and apathetic. In such a situation, we can only hope for a global
catastrophy. George Sagi has written a visionary book called "Only from
the Ruins". Maybe this will be the only way. But let´s try to attempt
something less drastical first!Jiri Polak----- Original Message -----
From: Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net Sent:
Monday, April 27, 2009 1:26 PMSubject: [WDDM] Re :[WDDM] What is the AIM
of WDDM?Bruce,I wonder how you equated True Democracy with - "No
president, No prime minister etc. Just the people making decisions...". I
think you have the 'anarchist' conception of democracy in mind.We have
discussed a lot about True Democracy on the Forum. I am giving a link that
explains how the concept of True Democracy is in tune with the existing
kind of representative democracy. It also explains how the tools of
I&R can be integrated into the process of governance:
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/forum/read.php?23,641,641#msg-641First
we should get there into the corridors of government. This can be done
from the grass roots and this movement can do it provided it is
not preoccupied with I&R only.Vijayaraghavan PadmanabhanOn
Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:00:46 -0500 wddm@world-wide-democracy.net wroteDirect
DemocracyIt isdifficult to go in two directions at once. I bring these
questions up so we maydiscuss it a bit. Of course this is my opinion; I am
looking for moreinformation. There seemto be two popular modes
of DD. One beggars the people to make all decisions. Somecall this
â%u20AC%u0153True Democracyâ%u20AC? or other term. This model usually
eliminates governmentas we know it. No Presidents, Prime Ministers,
Senate, Congress, Parliamentjust the people making decisions. There is a
void however, how would thedecisions be carried out? How would they be
evaluated and who wouldadministrate the financing? There would have to be
some huge administrativemechanism to accomplish the decisions of the
people. How would this besupervised?Anotherquestion is who
would be voting? Would the elite be the majority participatingin these
elections? Would minorities simply be discounted?My questionsto
WDDM is; does WDDM want to support this type of â%u20AC%u0153True
Democracyâ%u20AC? at thistime? Have we progressed to the point we could do
so?The presentrepresentative system has rules and
constitutional requirements about equalrights, Liberty, minority rights
etc. This system built over many years now hassome safe guards. However
there are times this system makes decisions which arecontrary to the
majority of the people.The second methodis the
â%u20AC%u0153Swiss modelâ%u20AC? which retains the
â%u20AC%u0153Representative Systemâ%u20AC? but addsInitiative and Binding
Referendum. This system oversees the Representatives andprovides the
people the tools to directly alter or stop any and all legislationthe
people disagree with. With this oversight, the Representatives are
morecautious in their decisions, knowing the people can change the
decisions aswell as recall the Representative.Indeed, if thepeople
wanted to eliminate Representative Government, they could build
thenecessary administrative mechanism; develop rules, laws and
constitutionalrequirements necessary to accomplish this using the Swiss
model. Once thenecessary systems were functioning, the people could use
the Swiss System andsimply pass an Initiative implementing the new way.
I think WDDM needs to decide specifically what itsAIM is and
how to carry it out. I ask that we deliberate the above questionswith much
discussion. What do you think?Kind Regards, BruceBruce EggumGresham
Wisconsin, USAhttp://www.doinggovernment.com/Check out my Blog
toohttp://bruceeggum.blogster.com/http://usinitiative.com
vote

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