Hello Antonio
For me it is obvious in a democratic system worth
its name, all mantally normal adult people have right to vote withou needing any
kind of permission from elites.
I don´t see any reason that educated peoples votes
should be more worth than uneducated. I have seen many uneducated people
and even analfabets which were more reasonable and
human than educated people.
We should not forget that Hitler, Mangler and many other
dictators were educated people.
Education is a power mean which in right hands can do
marvelous things and in wrong hands catastrophees.
Regards
Hamid
Sent: Monday, December 28, 2009 11:14 PM
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Weighted voting Hallo Hamid,
Not exactly.
I am discussing amout the
current, discussion-made, context of human relationships, that is rooted in
the family and leads from family grassroots bottom up to the
higher collective arrangement, through politics, until the
State.
Which means, IMHO, if the current context of human relationships,
the so-called "system", were hierarchical, apartheid and cast shaped, every
kind of collective arrangement - including Direct Democracy - we perform
within a collectivity, cannot but be hierarchical, apartheid and cast
sahaped system.
Therefore, genuine Direct Democracy shall be built
starting from a genuine democratic, DD-like arrangement of the family
bottom, and thence upwards until the State.
Just my two DD
cents,
antonio
Esi wrote:
God evening Antonio and Jim
Are you discussing about a
kind of hierarchical, apartheid, cast system or DD decomcracy?
Regards Hamid
Are you writing
-------------------------------------------------- From: "Antonio
Rossin" <rossin(at)tin.it> Sent: Sunday,
December 27, 2009 10:35 AM To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net Subject: Re: [WDDM] Weighted voting
William McConochie ha scritto:
10/14/09
Dear Jim, Antonio and others:
Questions about who should be allowed to vote in a government can
be explored by research. Especially if one supports democratic
forms of government, one should let citizens participate in voting on
such issues as to who should vote. For example, I have done
research asking citizens if persons with more education should have
their votes on policy issues count more than votes of persons with
less education. The majority of citizens were of the opinion
that all citizens' votes should count equally.
(antonio) This means, if the majority of voters were indoctrinate gullible people
with no or little education enabling them for criticism, their
decisional power as expressed by voting is risible.
A way to address the ignorance concern of some
citizens is to follow Jefferson's recommendation to educate
them. This is a reasonable long-term ideal, but not a practical
short term one, except perhaps in a questionnaire itself. E.g.
one could present an issue and pros and cons and then solicit the
citizen's vote on that issue. Then present another issue, etc. In
Oregon before issue elections we get voter pamphlets that provide this
sort of information weeks before the actual vote, to help inform
citizens on the issues they are asked to vote on.
(ant) Nice. But who can defend the citizens from tendentious i.e.false
informations in the pamphlets? Maybe, the citizen herself only can do
it. Jefferson's recommendation becomes actual here.
Another approach is to do research to find out
what citizens want from government on a range of general and specific
issues, not as an actual legal vote that determines policy but as a
way of reliably measuring public opinion to inform both governments
and the media, and via the media the citizenry, on what the community
consider to be the "common good", programs and policies that represent
the best interests of the community at that point in time. These
sorts of surveys could and should be repeated regularly, in my
opinion, and should ask more questions than a typical Pew, Gallup or
other national poll. More questions on a topic increase
reliability of the findings, rather than taking "sound bites" or
"opinion bites".
The questionnaire I sent to you a few days ago is
a draft of the sort of questionnaire I am referring to.
I
invite your review of it and comments on it and on this general model for
assessing the common good.
If there's enough interest, I can load
the questionnaire on my web site and citizens from anywhere in the
world can fill it out to begin informing us about citizen-defined "common
good" from one community and nation to the next.
It
seems to me, your questionnary is too much detailed and uneasy to handle, which makes it lose interest. Anyway the idea sounds good.
Regards, antonio
Best regards, Bill McConochie. Politicalpsychologyresearch.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|