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

02958: Re: Evidence we already are in a One World Government

From: Joshua Petersen <joshupetersen(at)gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:10:31 -0600
Subject: Re: Evidence we already are in a One World Government

Agreed, party power is probably one of the greatest banes of a functioning democracy.
br>
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 11:07 AM, <Bruce Eggum> wrote:
Thanks Joshua Petersen, we have so many types of government it is hard to define a system. Most of us now have a "representative" system and parliament or congress, party's rule. We need to change that. My term participatory democracy would include a system such as you describe to come to decisions.
IMHO first we need people talking about the issues in pub's, club's, meetings, community gatherings and government meetings. Than having discussed the matter solutions are suggested. These can be taken to a system like you suggest, and finally to a referendum for final approval. 
[I think "party power" must be reduced or eliminated.]
div>

Wars have nothing to do with democracy, security, women's rights, peace or stability. They are fought for money and power and nothing else.

@BruceEggum



On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM, <Joshua Petersen> wrote:
I wouldn't say a deliberative community is neccesarrily the best route. Because that puts a certain type of power in the hands of the few, and any tyranny of majority is never as bad as a tyranny of minority.
What I would say is that having a built-in method by which votes have a tendency to lean towards comprimises than a winner-take-all route is ideal.
Here's a method I would suggest...
Akin to how the facebook questions gives a feature where people voting can propose new solutions during the voting process, and multiple solutions may be chosen by multiple people, so should the voting in a well-functioning direct democracy have the same features. Now, this does give preference to early solutions over later solutions, but I think that can be remedeied by allowing votes to have a "recall count" option. Basically if it's late enough in the process and a new idea gets added, those still voting can call in a re-vote, in which case everyone is informed that the proverbial "voting slate" has been wiped clean. Each person could have a personal preference set in this situation whether to erases their votes and have them vote again or to keep their old ones if they don't revote. (Also an option to lock in votes should be allowed after recall has be requested so many times.) Of course this would require a digital platform (with possibly a call-in option) but it's definately doable.

So, a typically (online) Ballot measure would look like this...

Big Important Issue Title [click here to report a misleading title] click here to see the public forum on this issue including discussion on topics.
Breif summary. This summary the summary that is the most upvoted on a public forum as being the most accurate.

[_2_] Title of Solution 1 [click here to report a misleading title]. (This solution added on XXXX-XX-XX date) You can click here to vote in favor. This is a short description of this solution's "best summary" as upvoted on public forums. Notice that instead of a checkbox, it's marked with a number. This shows what your order or preference for the solution is. click here for full text of solution

[_1_] Title of Solution 2 [click here to report a misleading title]. (This solution added on XXXX-XX-XX date) You can click here to vote in favor. This is a short description of this solution's "best summary" as upvoted on public forums. Like solution 1, this one can be checkmarked. Notice it can be checkmarked at the same time.This allows you to show you are okay with multple solutions.  click here for full text of solution

[__] Title of Solution 3 [click here to report a misleading title]. (This solution added on XXXX-XX-XX date) You can click here to vote in favor. This is a short description of this solution's "best summary" as upvoted on public forums. Notice you don't HAVE to vote in favor of any idea. You can abstain from any solution you like.  click here for full text of solution

[_-1_] Title of Solution 4 [click here to report a misleading title]. (This solution added on XXXX-XX-XX date) You can click here to vote in favor. This is a short description of this solution's "best summary" as upvoted on public forums. Notice you can vote negative. This says you really dislike this solution, and you want to go against other people's votes. You can order your negatives, like the positives, however you want (-1 being the most against, -10 being only mildly against). It should be pointed out that no vote can get the same ranking.   click here for full text of solution

click here to suggest a new solution. Your new solution will be voted on by those in the public forum to see if its worth adding to the ballot, and if a recall should be done for it.

click here to vote for recall. Do this if you know of solutions in the public forum you want to see added, or you don't like any of the current proposed solutions and want to see other up-rated solutions added.

[_X_] How many recalls do you think this issue should be allowed? More important and more complex issues should have higher numbers, simple or not-important issues should have lower numbers. This allows more important topics to have more time debated. The system will take the median suggested value for the number of recalls allowed.

[Click here to submit your vote]

br>
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:52 AM, <Joshua N Pritikin> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 09:47:09AM -0600, Joshua Petersen wrote:
> One of the problems with a number of "democractic" methods, is that they
> vote on things in "either-or" methods. (Do you vote for or against policy
> "A".) Any such voting system, to avoid a "tyranny of majority" (generally
> caused when people seperate out into parties, and people vote for their
> party on all issues so that other issues that are important to them get the
> support they want.
> Individuals are rarely as black & white as parties are. Thus, each vote
> needs more than a "yes or no". Voting should be done, imho, to address
> solutions to issues. (So, instead of vote on "The Health Reform Bill", vote
> on, "The problems with Healthcare", which would then have various bills
> proposed, and people would then vote in order of preference, while always
> having an option of "none of the above", or "none of the above, please
> revise marked in order of preference" next to any bill. By not only
> allowing, but encouraging, shades of grey, you avoid the "tyranny of
> majority". Any issue that was a simple numerical issue (like "what
> percentage should income taxes be set at"?) Would present a percentage
> range, and take the average value people agree on (while still always
> providing the option for "none of the above", "find an alternative", etc..)

Yes, that is precisely why I am a fan of
http://healthydemocracyoregon.org/ and why a deliberative committee is
at the heart of the National Citizen's Initiative proposal,
http://ni4d.us/en/act_s3i

--
Joshua N. Pritikin
Department of Psychology
University of Virginia
Gilmer Hall 102; Charlottesville, VA 22903
http://people.virginia.edu/~jnp3bc

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