| From: | Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it> |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:10:26 +0100 |
| Subject: | Re: [WDDM] Democracy - Glossary - Referendum |
Dear Antonio,
If you had been following this discussion, you would have seen
Merick's 2005 statement. We have been doing this for four years. I did
not realize you had become so forgetful. Bruce
Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Health Care http://tinyurl.com/ycx9vpz
http://usinitiative.com
http://vote.org/
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:18 AM, <Antonio Rossin> wrote:
Bruce,
please remind which "WDDM community" and which "2005 decision"
you are speaking of.
Please remember, *this *is the WDDM discussion list, un-moderated,
open to any discussion topic which any one of this list contributors
may think it is of a common, democratic relevance.
If you think of one's posted topic that it is of no democratic
relevance,
please do not push your reply button to it, that will be enough to
make
it get its natural end, methinks.
So, let please our WDDM discussion be free and stop bothering its
discussants by claiming your "2005 decisions" that have been decided
somewhere else by your claimed WDDM community which is not this
esteemed WDDM discussion list.
Thanks, best regards,
antonio
Bruce Eggum wrote:
I remind you this is only for WDDM
We are not making decisions for other community's - organizations.
The WDDM community made it's decision in 2005.
bruce
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Doug Everingham
<dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au> wrote:
Dear Bruce,
I think in this discussion we are slowly approaching
consensus by exehanging and considring with mutual respect
our differences and agreements.
I agree that 100% consensus is never, or nearly never,
reachable, whether by discussion, majority vote and/or
referendums. Yet I see this unattainable goal as always, or
nearly always, the outcome sought by mutually accepted
discussion and voting, including referendums. – Doug.
====
On 14/12/2009, at 7:42 PM, Bruce Eggum wrote:
Dear Doug and WDDM
I missposted my last note. I have always supported Antonio's
Parental Training. But that is not the issue we are discussing.
Doug brings many issues confusing the main issue which is
Referendum.
Others have stated and I fully agree, democracy works with
democratic elections and referendums. The idea of
“consensus” is an unreachable ideal. There are to many
different views and cultural principles which people follow
to come to a 100% consensus.
Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Health Care http://tinyurl.com/ycx9vpz
http://usinitiative.com
http://vote.org/
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Doug Everingham
<dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au>
wrote:
Not so, Bruce. The parenting trend I prefer is
'informed' by personal cooperative experience of how a
child can develop confidence and reasoned autonomy when
the child and co-dependent parents are each heard and
encouraged by example to prefer cooperative, mutually
tolerant decision-making by supporting parents and
parent-like authorities.
Each member of the family or othr cultural group can
still agree to disagree and explore alternatives. This
'informed' stance is based on grass roots relationships
(from the bottom up). Referendums can help in
recognizing equality of personal sovereignty, but if
relied on alone may bypass vital issues and be stalled
in existing pyramidal hierarchies, 'top-down'
decision-making, indoctrinated from a 'higher'
culturally entrenched authority.
Cultured people assassinate each other when their
parenting and related experiences prefer to emphasize
dominance hierarchies, censor dissent – where
referendums may reject concepts like 'the human family'
and produce votes like that which brought Hitler to
power. – Doug.
====
On 14/12/2009, at 12:52 AM, Bruce Eggum wrote:
Interesting concept Doug. Informed parenting, allowing
each child a choice, means they will all choose the
same, eliminating the need for disputes in referendum
or election. The perfect consensus would be found
using simpol.org <http://simpol.org> cooperative
consensus process. By the way, why do cultured people
assassinate each other?
Bruce Eggum
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Doug Everingham
<dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au> wrote:
Dear Bruce,
Informed parenting implies for me reallization that
mutual respect. tolerance, consensus and
cooperation are consciously fostered and taught by
example, specially in our first 3 years when such
social attitudes may be either dominant or
suppressed by extremism and dogmatisms.
These alternative personality trends determine
whether we use votes democratically, shaped from
the interdependent grass roots, or
undemocratically, developed from dominant elites down.
Referendums produce undemocratic decisions when the
voters are misled by dominant elites.
The International Simtaneous Policy Organization
www.simpol.org <http://www.simpol.org> is one of
many democratizing tracks that is developing
cooperative consensus within existing referendum rules.
– Doug.
====
On 12/12/2009, at 5:25 PM, Bruce Eggum wrote:
Dear Doug, What does informed parenting have to do
with determining the choice [vote] of eligible
voters? Certainly antonio's program is good for
parenting and develops the child's ability to make
their own choice.
But it does not determine what the choice is of
the voter is. There are many issues which do not
resolve to 100 % agreement. Thus we need
democratic elections. [referendum]
Bruce Eggum
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Doug Everingham
<dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au> wrote:
Referendums, like majority votes at elections,
are still imperfect as a consensus development.
In feudalism it's our count that votes; in
referendums it's our votes that count –
in more equitable consensus regimes we need
more reliable safeguards
like the *informed parenting* and other mature
parent-like reciprocal relationships
fostered by cooperative family growth in our
first 3 years of life, as advocated by Antonio
Rossin.
[ *http://www.flexible-learning.org/* ]. _
Doug Everingham
====
On 10/12/2009, at 5:14 PM, Bruce Eggum wrote:
Hi All,
The following is my opinion for your
consideration:
Democracy is rule by the people.
Representative democracy perverted it even
though RD was “called” democracy.
We now refer to “direct democracy” as the
people ruling, having final say.
This is why we need a Glossary to define
terms we use for WDDM community.
We must establish the tools necessary to
conduct a World Referendum so we can have a
“democratic world”.
Now as to Antonio's constant objections, the
people of each community have the power if
they choose to use it and if they have
demanded that they have this power. This
power was established in the Magna Carta/
/[IE] The power to petition the government.
The only power necessary for democracy,
direct democracy, pure democracy or any
democraacy is REFERENDUM.
If the people have the power of Referendum,
they control everything. It they do not have
the power of Referendum, they control
nothing. This works in all community's, town,
county, state, national, world. Each must
have their own referendum.
At least that is my opinion.
Sincerely Bruce
Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Health Care http://tinyurl.com/ycx9vpz
http://usinitiative.com
http://vote.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
*********************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reifications (like biological entozoic infections of the gut) are
proto-socio-neurological enculturations and as useful fictions
are not necessarily symbiotic with, nor necessarily benignly
adjuvant to the welfare of their unwitting and often naive hosts.
Jud Evans.
Freedom in humans consists of the ability to liberate
oneself from the tyranny of reificationalist imprinting.
Antonio Rossin.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*********************************