| From: | "Jiri Polak" <jiri.polak(at)swipnet.se> |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 21 Jan 2011 20:39:03 +0100 |
| Subject: | Re: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS |
Excuse me, but there is STRONG EVIDENCE that randomly selected
legislatures work very well...and are TRULY representative of the people
if we mean by that: demographically. All elected representative systems
have elites that supposedly "represent" the people (please read Edmund
Burke's indefensible address to his constituents in Bristol, England).
Citizens Assemblies as at least one of the two houses would complement
the direct, deliberative democratic part of any system.
Ted Becker
Correct. But most people are too lazy and passive to want to constantly"Jiri Polak" <jiri.polak(at)swipnet.se> 1/21/2011 9:20 AM >>>
vote on all issues. It would not be realistic to try to put in place
such a system. Some form of representation will be indispensable for the
foreseeable future. However, the representatives will be under constant
scrutiny and susceptible to be recalled at any moment if guilty of
misconduct. What we strive for is semi-direct democracy with strong
elements of deliberation.
Jiri
----- Original Message -----
From: Hamid Mohseni
To: World Direct Democracy
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 3:12 PM
Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
And what about people who like to manage the job themselves and not
employ others for that. The experience shows that this politician
managers has seldom been honest and soon or later has taken over the
power and used it for their own egoistik matters.
Hamid
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jimpowell(at)mweb.co.za
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:38:12 +0200
Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
Hi Hamid,
Having the voters making decisions on all matters is a waste of time.
The politicians are employed to consider the information and make
decisions, similar to managers employed by shareholders in a company.
The voters are the shareholders and the politicians the managers
Regards
Jim Powell South Africa
From: Hamid Mohseni
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 7:24 PM
To: World Direct Democracy
Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
The Swiss system is better than many other countries but not good
enough, because stíll it is politicians and not people who are the
leaders eventhogh people can stop politicians decisions and propositions
sometimes.
Hamid
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jimpowell(at)mweb.co.za
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 07:47:38 +0200
Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
I think the Swiss have got it right (mostly)
Have your politicians investigate and propose new laws. The
electorate will have access to all the information and can raise a
referendum if enough of them are unhappy with the legislation. A
referendum is held and the will of the people is sovereign.
97% of legislation in Switzerland goes through without objection. The
laws that are passed will be created with the knowledge that they can be
challenged, so they are voter friendly
Jim Powell South Africa
From: Hamid Mohseni
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 8:18 PM
To: World Direct Democracy
Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
As I understand real direct democracy dońt need politicians as
represents or leaders but advisors and organizers. Their job is to
inform people about political facts and theories
and organize refrandums and realise the result of refrandums and
decisions made by people
in common political and practical questions.
Regards
Hamid
> From: jiri.polak(at)swipnet.se
> To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:06:18 +0100
> Subject: Re: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
> Dear Fred,
> as far as I see, the model of PD you put forward is compatible with
my own
> ideas, which are much more simple and only rudimentary. The PD
model is
> certainly worth studying. Íll bring an information about it in the
next
> issue of my newsletter.
> Sincerely, Jiri Polak
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fred Gohlke" <fredgohlke(at)verizon.net>
> To: <wddm@world-wide-democracy.net>
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 11:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
>
> > 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
>