|DISCUSSION ON HOW TO PROMOTE DIRECT (TRUE) DEMOCRACY|
Any member can post here proposals concerning WDDM (its function, mission, goals, organization).
I am anxious to participate in a discussion of "true democracy", but I'm not certain my interpretation of that term is in concert with the intent of this site. I would like to clear up that point. To do so, I will describe the reason for my apprehension. (When I came on-line to post this message, I found the Glossary of WDDM Terms and now believe my concept will be acceptable. Even so, I'll post my question.)
From what I've read here, true democracy seems to mean having the electorate vote on every issue of government. That, it seems to me, is unwieldy. Sooner or later, it must come down to the question of "Who buys the paper clips?"
Assuming, as I do, some entity must exist to administer the laws of the people, the entity must be staffed. Therefore, it is (in my opinion), virtually inevitable that the task of buying the (figurative) paper clips will be delegated to a staff member. If so, the staff member is functioning as a representative of the people ... buying paper clips in order to administer the laws expressing the will of the people.
The point is: The delegation of authority is an essential part of democracy.
If we must delegate authority, we must address is the question of the quality of those to whom we delegate that authority. If they are unethical people, we should not be surprised if they act in an unprincipled fashion.
The problem in the United States is that our representatives, those to whom we delegate authority, are unprincipled. They are chosen by our political parties ... parties that have usurped control of our government ... because of their willingness and ability to dissemble, to obfuscate and to mislead the electorate. They are cheats and liars.
I do not believe we must tolerate these circumstances. I would like to outline a method of selecting representatives that, among other things ...
1) lets the entire electorate participate in the election process to the extent of their desire and ability.
2) allows (or requires, which may be more in line with the imperatives of this site) representatives to seek the guidance or instruction of those who elect them.
3) eliminates political campaigns and the cost of campaigning.
4) subjects candidates to examination by other candidates who will not hesitate to cause the rejection of anyone they can show to be unsuitable.
Would a discussion of such a concept be appropriate for this site?
|Asking about the suitability of a concept||1088||koikaze||09/04/2007 05:44AM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||470||BrEggum||09/21/2007 10:38PM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||502||koikaze||09/23/2007 08:02AM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||437||BrEggum||09/23/2007 10:41AM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||484||koikaze||09/24/2007 05:28PM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||507||WebMaster||09/04/2007 06:39PM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||521||koikaze||09/06/2007 05:20AM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||471||BrEggum||09/20/2007 03:16PM|
|Re: Asking about the suitability of a concept||435||koikaze||09/21/2007 12:21PM|