Dear Fred Gohlke, I can appreciate that your original version of Practical Democracy, having as its core the 'Triad System' does have bi-directionality and the candidate can be recalled if the people choose to do so. Even though the Practical Democracy as described by you is the ideal way choosing the best from among the electorate as leaders, since it involves the entire population it would be much more difficult to be operationalized by any election authority; hence I suggested that only those who are willing to contest may be involved in the Triad Process.
However these considerations are secondary. The crucial point is that an unbiased way is available to select a candidate. Moreover only when such unbiased, open-minded, people-friendly representatives get elected, can the government of the day usher in the system of Initiative and Referendum to make revision of policies or recall of candidates possible. A prototype of having both these processes into one functional mechanism is the idea of 'Web Platform for Association of Independents'.
With regards,
Vijayaraghavan P
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 03:43:07 +0530 Fred Gohlke <FREDGOHLKE(at)VERIZON.NET> wrote >Good Afternoon, Jiri > > From your January 14th post: > > "The basic fault ... is to call party-based regimes 'democracy'". > > From your January 16th post: > > "But I - and many others - also want a system where elected > representatives get continuous feedback from their voters who > can recall them at any moment (not only during elecions) if > the majority within the respective constituency demand it." > >Have you thought about the way Practical Democracy functions? It >addresses and resolves both the points you make; the first because it >sidesteps political parties and the second because it is inherently >bi-directional. > >Political Parties >----------------- >Over two hundred years experience with party politics informs us that, >when politics is based on partisanship, the partisans form oligarchic >power blocs that become an end in themselves and ultimately transcend >the will of the people. > >Partisanship is a potent tool for those with a thirst for power but it >does not foster government by the people. It results in government by a >small fraction of the people. For the people as a whole, the flaws in >party politics are devastating. Their cumulative effect victimizes the >public by the most basic and effective strategy of domination --- divide >and conquer. > >Parties are important for the principals: the party leaders, >contributors, candidates and elected officials, but the significance >diminishes rapidly as the distance from the center of power grows. Most >people are on the periphery, remote from the centers of power. As >outsiders, they have little incentive to participate in the political >process. > >The challenge of representative democracy is not to divide the public >into blocs but to find the best advocates of the common interest and >raise them to leadership positions as the people's representatives. > >To meet that challenge, given the range of public issues and the way >each individual's interest in political matters varies over time, an >effective electoral process must examine the entire electorate during >each election cycle, seeking the people's best advocates. It must let >every voter influence the outcome of each election to the best of their >desire and ability, and it must ensure that those selected as >representatives are disposed to serve the public interest. > >Practical Democracy allows voters to quickly and easily align themselves >with others who share their views. It changes the focus of advocates of >a partisan position from getting votes for a politician to persuading >voters of the value of the idea they espouse. It lets every faction >select, from among themselves, the best champions of their point of view >and raise them as far as the size of the group allows. > >One huge flaw in the party-based systems that dominate the globe is that >individuals must support one of the existing parties or be denied a >voice in the political process. They have no way to prevent the >excesses of the parties. > >Practical Democracy gives unaligned people a voice. Those who advocate >partisan interests must ultimately present their point of view to voters >who may not share their view. This provides unaligned people with a >countervailing force that prevents domination by any party. > >PD allows, indeed encourages, enclaves to easily form and attract >adherents. As Jane Mansbridge said in The Deliberative System >Disaggregated, "Enclaves are good at generating new ideas. Everyday >talk is good at applying ideas and selecting those best applicable to >common experience." That is how fresh ideas are introduced into >society, but they cannot impose their will unless they are able to >persuade the unaligned of the value of their ideas. PD guarantees that >fresh ideas will be accommodated to the extent they are deemed worthy by >the electorate. > >Bi-directionality >----------------- >Practical Democracy is inherently bi-directional. Because each >advancing participant and elected official sits atop a pyramid of known >electors, questions on specific issues can easily be transmitted >directly to and from the electors for the guidance or instruction of the >official. This capability offers those who implement the process a >broad scope, ranging from simple polling of constituents to referenda on >selected issues and recall of an elected representative. > >If you are interested in these concepts, the process is described in >Paricipedia at: > >http://participedia.net/wiki/Practical_Democracy > > >I wonder if you'll find value in it. > >Fred Gohlke >
[Prev] [Next] [Index]
[Thread Index]