Re: [WDDM] RE: Season greetings and wishes for a new WDDMCongress in the New year!

["Esi" <esi1mohseni2(at)hotmail.com>]

Hi Ant

Human societies with a few isolated exceptions has been and are
hierarchical. Those in power and welfare and those who take order and do the
job.
Most of those in power and welfare are satisfied with social reality and
don´t demand for changes. Most changes in human societies in history has
been initiated and performed
by those who suffer and are unsatisfied. The wave of unsatifaction and
demand for changes get stronger and weaker by time depended to social
reality in different times.
When those in power are clever enough to accept changes evolution and
peacefully and peaceful changes take place. When those in power has not
understood the reality and resist
changes perhaps it initiates revoulutions and bloodshed. In short periods of
time in a society´s history people in lower part of hierarchy don´t mind to
demand for changes of different reasons as fear,  fatique, hopelessity, etc.
But this does not mean that they are satisfied.
I can be wrong but it looks like that you Antonio see only one part of
problem which is lower part of the social hierarchy and forget the higher
parts responsibility for changes.
What happens in Iran now is an obvious example of that lower part of the
hierarchy are demanding mostly peacefully for changes to more democracy and
freedom of speach.
In other words they take care of their part of responsibility to change the
society peacefully. The answer from ahuthorities are killing, torturing,
rubbing and hiding countries resources
in their own accounts outside the country and etc.
I wonder if you are also engaged to find ways to convience people in power
to take their part of responsibility.
I don´t blame you if you are only engaged in changing the lower part of the
hierarchy because the risks are much lower for you to do so.
Demanding for change of behaviour of higher part of hierarchy has always
been risky for those who dare.
I don´t neither blame the authorities for their behaviour because it is a
part of human mentaliy to struggle for his own interests before others.
This is the cause of the saying that, power corrupts people.
It is therefore I believe to direct democracy and not indirect democracy via
politician and leaders. If we study history we find many leaders who has
started their carrier as
progressive and people loving leaders but by time they have changed to
dictators.
You are ( or IS if it satisfies Lucas) right that authorities are not
ailiens but humans and that is why I don´t blame them but political systems.
It is our heritage of old-fashioned political
systems which change people to dictators and unhuman characters.
I think most people are aware of facts above but the real problem is how to
change the faulty political systems to better ones.
The obstacle and stop for changes exist most of the time between higher part
of the hierarchies.
The target for me is direct democracy which means split of power between all
individuals in the society. It must be more difficult that all people in a
society get corrupted than
a few people in the top.

I don´t have time now to explain more but perhaps and if necessary in the
future.

Regards
Hamid

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jim Powell" <autoinfo(at)acenet.co.za>
Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2010 7:08 PM
To: <wddm@world-wide-democracy.net>
Subject: RE: [WDDM] RE: Season greetings and wishes  for  a new WDDMCongress
in the New year!

> Hi Ant,
>
> Thanks for the email. Look for *** below
>
> Regards
>
> Jim Powell, Johannesburg, South Africa
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antonio Rossin
> Sent: 03 January 2010 03:48 PM
> To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> Subject: Re: [WDDM] RE: Season greetings and wishes for a new WDDMCongress
> in the New year!
>
> Jim and Hamid,
>
> why don't you come closer to reality?  Please open your eyes, and you
> will see:
>
> Within the reality that exists, Politicians are NOT the employees of the
> voters. They should be, but are not. *** I agree with you that politicians
> do not act as employees. The description of being employed and having the
> salary paid is that of an employee. If the voters in each constituency
> supports a candidate that signs up for DD, and that person wins, then
> there is a person in the system that will push DD
>
> Politicians in direct democracy sytem are NOT employed experts and
> researchers who support voters. They should be, but are not. *** These
> people are selected by the voters, which is OK by me. The voters in DD
> still have control
>
> Therefore, Direct Democracy which we are minding about, is un-existent,
> within today's reality.  It should be, but it is not. *** As long as the
> system of binding Referendum and I the initiative is in place, the voters
> then have the option of accepting status quo or rejecting it.
>
> Who are the culprit, of this non-existence?  Maybe the main culprit is
> ourselves, as far as we are unable to question the authority. *** In DD
> the mechanisms for not only questioning authority, but changing the
> decisions that are made
>
> Which questioning should start from the crystal evidence that our
> |"politicians"are not aliens from a distant planet. They are the
> spontaneous leading authorities of the collectivity we live
> in, whom we accept as official authorities without being able to question
> whether they are, or are not, the employees of the voters, i.e., employed
> researchers and experts who support the voters. *** The politicians are
> employed by the voters
>
> Within the existing reality, they support themselves only - except perhaps
> a too few only - in their enduring struggle for (money and) power. ***
> With DD this can change
>
> (As a practical consequence: dear DD lower and activist, stop please
> asking the politicians in office for they to build up Direct Democracy)
> *** It is up to the voters to put in representatives that believe in
> Direct Democracy
>
> Regards,
> ant