| From: | "Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan" <vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date: | 4 May 2009 11:49:28 -0000 |
| Subject: | Re :[WDDM] What is the AIM of WDDM? |
**VP said; "what is the use of I&R if nobody is there in the govt. to heed it." To that I reply, we do not rely on "representatives to heed it" we give representative government direct orders of what to do. Failure to "heed" our command could be their recall from office.**
Bruce has given the same reply several times in the past. I hope I not suffering from any defect in comprehension. But it is elementary. On what basis can we give representative government direct orders? And on what basis can we recall if there is failure to heed our command?
The proposed 'Association of Independents' platform would facilitate simultaneously 3 functions:
1) People learning to control their government by practising I&R
2) Selecting 'Independents' through a fair process to stand in election facing party candidates
3) Serve as educational tool for the above two functions to the younger generation.
Mr. Jiri Polak, kindly give your view.
Sincerely,
Vijayaraghavan P
On Sun, 3 May 2009 16:51:15 -0500 wddm@world-wide-democracy.net wrote
Dear VP and list,
Referring to
VP’s note below, it again seems we are trying to solve two issues with one
resolution.
1. People ruling and controlling their
government.
2. Choosing
Representatives in Representative Government.
WDDM advocates
each community, territory of people write their own Charter or Constitution and
amend it so the people can always supervise, change their government. The
people than have Direct Control of their government. One way to accomplish this
is with Initiative and Binding Referendum. This satisfy’s #1 but not #2.
VP advocates
a system which recruits and selects individuals who would than “run for office”
under a “true” democracy ticket. (Party) This model satisfies #2 but not #1.
Even if all
the elected officials were “true democrats” the people would still have no direct
control of the legislation. I see VP has added an I&R system but not
binding nor in the people’s direct control.
I think it
is possible the USA could embrace the I&BR system, especially as the crisis
gets worse. I do not think the USA is ready at this time to embrace VP system
of representative recruitment. However if the two systems remain separate, the people
would have the choice of one, the other or both.
VP said; “what
is the use of I&R if nobody is there in the govt. to heed it.” To that I
reply, we do not rely on “representatives to heed it” we give representative
government direct orders of what to do. Failure to “heed” our command could be
their recall from office.
I suggest
these two systems would confuse people and WDDM should remain committed to
Direct Democracy utilizing Initiative and Referendum directly by the people. VP remain committed to selecting representatives.
I suggest VP
link his site to ours, and we to his so the people could consider both AIMS and
understand the difference.
Sincerely, BruceBruce Eggum
http://usinitiative.com
vote
On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan <vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com> wrote:
Mr. Jiri Polak and Mr. Bruce,
I agree that crossing the first threshold - having at least one (DD) person elected to a representative body - would be crucial for the further success of the idea.
However my feeling is that it may not require publicity and lot of money to achieve that. In any case it is too far down the road to need consideration. More important would be to get our focus correctly and design a good model to start with.
Bruce keeps reiterating that WDDM should primarily focus on disseminating knowledge and use of I&R. I have told him earlier that what is the use of I&R if nobody is there in the govt. to heed it. Hence, logically 'Association of Independents' should come first, from whom when candidates indeed get elected, they would lend weightage to the I&R results leading to their adoption.
Instead let me suggest how I&R can be integrated into an "Association of Independents' web platform (beforing moving on to the ground) with many more practical benefits:
If from a particular electoral constituency let us assume 100 people are members of the Association, having registered on the site. On a issue concerning their area any one of them can bring in a Initiative and ask for a vote from other members on that issue. Or if a govt. action is questionable one can call for a referendum among the members and call for a vote. The result can be intimated to the local govt. authority. The govt. can ignore them but the people will be left with a practical tool to make their voices heard. It would be a practical education on I&R for the people. It would enhance the popularity of the site.
I hope that everyone including Bruce would agree with this suggestion. Let us achieve unity from diversity of opinions and move forward.
Sincerely,
Vijayaraghavan P
On Sat, 2 May 2009 15:58:49 +0200 wddm@world-wide-democracy.net wrote
Dear Mr.Padmanabhan,
I have studied the system and method you propose.
The idea is good and it might work if a sufficient number of people, to begin
with in at least one country, would begin organizing it and if they would
overcome the firs threshold - having at least one person elected to a
representative body. This would require a publicity campaign costing millions.
So it boils down to the problem of activists and money. At present, I cannot
contribute by anything more than this assessment. If your movement takes off,
please let me know. There can always be new developments.
For the time being I remain,
Sincerely,
Jiri Polak
----- Original Message -----
From:
Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 7:33
AM
Subject: [WDDM] Re :[WDDM] What is the
AIM of WDDM?
Mr. Jiri Polak, I am glad that you agreed about
the commonality of our views. Regarding your question on how a Global
Association of Independents (or World True Democracy Platform - the name does
not matter) can play a role in practical politics I have explained it in my
blog: http://worldtruedemocracyplatform.blogspot.com/ A
key point is selection of a candidate from the members of the association
in a fair manner, to stand in a particular election. For this I find that
the Triplet system is suitable. Kindly give your view on
this. If a workable plan can be arrived at through discussion
among members then it can be put to vote for implementing the
same.Sincerely,Vijayaraghavan POn Fri, 1 May
2009 10:29:28 +0200 wddm@world-wide-democracy.net wroteDear
Mr.Padmanabhan,I see that we are on the same wavelength. I presume
that your proposed Association of Independents is meant to act on a global
scale. I endorse it but I cannot see how such an association could play a
role in practical politics. So far, DD organisations are small (except the
Mehr Demokratie in Germany) and unable to compete with the established
Parties and Unions. Nevertheless,
it's worth trying. We'll see.With my
best
regards
Jiri Polak----- Original Message ----- From:
Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 8:23 AMSubject: [WDDM] Re :[WDDM] What
is the AIM of WDDM?Mr. Jiri Polak,Fundamentally we have similar ideas.
I read your views in 'New Political System'. Under the section 'How do we
achieve this', I find that your suggestion for creation of an "Association
of Independents" to contest elections and face political parties
-
http://www.planet-thanet.fsnet.co.uk/nps/nps2.htm#How%20do%20we%20achieve%20this?
- is basically the same as what I have been suggesting. Only
thing is that I am suggesting the creation of a web-based platform to
facilitate the same process. Once again I reiterate - (1) It can
form a nidus for action on the ground. (2) The potential of the
internet can be harnessed to the utmost
advantage.Sincerely,Vijayaraghavan P