WDDM Forum : Proposals and Initiatives

Any member can post here proposals concerning WDDM (its function, mission, goals, organization). 
Goto: Forum ListMessage List• New Topic • Search • Log In
Re: A definition of DD?
Posted by: PVR (IP Logged)
Date: March 11, 2008 10:30PM

Dear All,
I agree with the definition suggested by Roy Daine - "Direct democracy - Wherein sovereignty is vested directly in the people, who, in exercise of their inalienable right to self-determination and under universal suffrage, determine the structure and functioning of their own governance."

This is broad and accomodative of various points of view. However this is precisely the definition that would be offered by all those who believe in 'Democracy' and not particularly 'Direct Democracy'. Similar would be the case with other definitions. The definition - 'DD is Initiative and Binding referendum' focusses on what exactly needs to be done to bring about True Democracy, which implies that what we have in the name of Democracy today is 'false'. What is it that makes it false? Undoubtedly there are shortcomings and the visible symbol of this is the unsatisfactory governance based on political parties.

All of us want to get rid of the false and usher in the true. The first step would be to identify where to start. It has to start where power lies at present as otherwise it would be an exercise in futility. We have to declare that we are opposing the concept of political parties and not any political party as such. Only then would an alteration in dynamics in favour of True Democracy be possible.

I&BR is focussed on the process that would enable True Democracy but it does not tell us how to get there. It ignores the reality of political parties wielding power in the present day. The definition of DD should indicate how it is going to be attained in the real world. I would suggest that the following be added to the one suggested by Roy Daine, at its end - ".....without the intermediary of political parties".

There is a story where five blind men encountered an elephant, but each one of them felt only one part of the whole. The person who touched the ear told that the animal is like a huge fan. The person who touched the trunk told that it was like huge moving pipe. The person who touched the limb told that the animal was like a pillar. The person who touched the body told that it was like a rock. And the person who touched the tail told that it was like a whip. Each one of them is correct and they would continue in their belief about what an elephant looks like unless somebody is going to tell them about the reality.

We do not know the entire picture about DD. We have to first understand how it came to be established in Switzerland. It must have been established long before the advent of the internet. Hence it would be hasty to conclude that DD should be accomplishable with the availability of internet. First we have to understand the human aspect. I had mentioned in an earlier post that it is quite possible that the Swiss were able usher in DD because they were focussed on family values. Possibly because of their geographical location they were protected from political developments occuring around them and were able to concentrate on the basics of good living.

Now we have to deal with a system of governance that is controlled by political parties, world-wide. We have to face this reality and plan accordingly. WDDM should primarily be concerned with evolving guidelines for action at the local level. We have to avoid centralized action as it would replicate the existing system of governance. In this context may I suggest that we need not have an executive board at all. If somebody is ready for local action he may proceed. He can seek opinion from other members and share his experiences so that others may benefit. He may raise funds locally and WDDM need not get involved with it. There is no need to register WDDM locally; it can remain as a web-platform for discussions on DD.

Finally action on the ground is what is going to matter. We should know the value as well as the limitation of having discussions. I am myself not ready for any local action in my area. It may take some years for that. WDDM should facilitate the evolution of thought and action on DD. Members would be in various states of readiness. Everyone should find WDDM to be useful.


Options: Reply To This Message • Quote This Message
Navigate: Previous MessageNext Message

Subject Views Written By Posted
  A definition of DD? 1780 RoyDaine 03/02/2008 01:17PM
  Re: A definition of DD? 901 PVR 03/11/2008 10:30PM
  Re: A definition of DD? 898 MiKolar 03/13/2008 12:30AM
  Re: A definition of DD? 982 PVR 03/16/2008 02:44AM
  Re: A definition of DD? 904 PVR 03/20/2008 08:30PM
  Re: A definition of DD? 919 PVR 03/27/2008 04:23AM
  Re: A definition of DD? 923 RoyDaine 03/28/2008 06:20AM
  Re: A definition of DD? 931 MiKolar 03/28/2008 08:47PM
  Re: A definition of DD? 889 RoyDaine 03/29/2008 04:45AM
  Re: A definition of DD? 930 BrEggum 04/24/2008 11:56AM
  Re: A definition of DD? 908 MiKolar 03/28/2008 08:33PM
  Re: A definition of DD? 972 MiKolar 03/28/2008 08:09PM
  Re: A definition of DD? 879 RoyDaine 03/12/2008 05:34AM
  Re: A definition of DD? 905 WebMaster 03/07/2008 02:46PM
  Re: A definition of DD? 922 RoyDaine 03/10/2008 03:47AM

Get Firefox!       Powered by Phorum.       PHP