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

02594: RE: [WDDM] RE: Season greetings and wishes for a new WDDMCongress in the New year!

From: "David Parker" <davefparker(at)shaw.ca>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:09:23 -0800
Subject: RE: [WDDM] RE: Season greetings and wishes for a new WDDMCongress in the New year!

Perhaps Patriarchal would be as equally descriptive. Father knows best. The father, the son and the holy circumciscum. How about Burkas? Why is the picture of a succesful woman one of a model in a pinstriped mini skirt with high heels and padded shoulders? You don’t see many women Generals or Popes.


Careful, Ireland’s new blasphemy laws just went into effect.

-----Original Message-----
From: Antonio Rossin [rossin(at)tin.it]
Sent
: January 4, 2010 3:43 PM
To:
wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Subject: Re: [WDDM] RE: Season greetings and wishes for a new WDDMCongress in the New year!


Esi ha scritto:

Hi Ant

Human societies with a few isolated exceptions has been and are hierarchical.


Hi Hamid,

I don't know of any absence of hierarchy everywhere human communication exists.
Maybe, there are some human societies without any formal hierarchical arrangement.
But substantially, communication in order to be effective requires core hoierarchy
between speaker an listener, parent and child, teacher and pupil, natural leader amd
natural gregarious people.


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.


Provided only their leadership is up.  As soon as their power decreases, they
demand for changes immediately.

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.


I don't think so. They accept the changes only which don't decrease their power
in anything. (Direct) Democracy implies the decrease of every hierarchic power,
uo to the reversal of the current hierarchy.  Insdeede, this reversal would be up
even today, with "We the People" being the sovereign, if only the people were
aware of the communication hierarchy which they still unawarely undergo to.


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.

My humble opinion is, each one of  us should accomplish one's own task
consinstently and responsibly.  This basic task requires each one of us to pay
the utmost attention in the lower part of social hierarchy, which is the part we
live in and should be directly responsible for, first of all the family arrangement
and hierarchy as the paragon.

We cannot pretend to build Democracy in the government, which is the higher
part of the social hierarchy which those in power live in and are responsible for.


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.

Looks like utopia. No governement accepts peacefully more freedom in people,
the History teaches. Let's imagine what the totalitarian fundamentalist theocratical
ones will do.
Buttt...
"I can be wrong but it looks like that you Hamid see only one part of problem
which is higher part of the social hierarchy and forget the lower parts responsibility
for changes."   (your words, dear Friend, see above )

Tell me please, what about today's Iranian family arrangement? Is it democratic?
There is dialectic communication, i.e. freedom of speech, inside? There is gender
parity?




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.


Of course. I am advocating the "question the authority" arttitude in people, by
writing articles in the local newspaper and in the internet.  I carried out my share
in an European project.  I contributed on 1998 to the "Awakening Planetary
Consciousness2 Symposium in Lucknow India.  Etc.


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.


Of course, it is risky for any one who speaks and advocates changes in the
social hierarchy. One risks to be jailed in prison when the public do listen to,
or in a lunatic asylum when the public do not.   But there is a solution - if only
one knows, i.e. is able to control, the communication relationship one shares
into, thus speaking second, after being asked for.


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.

Therefore... power beyond people's control is always a loss for the downsiders
(ourselves).

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

Holy words, Hamid.

regards,  antonio

--------------------------------------------------
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




*********************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*********************************

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