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

00658: Re: [WDDM] On what I mean by the meaningful WDDM

From: <WDDM webmaster>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 23:29:25 -0600
Subject: Re: [WDDM] On what I mean by the meaningful WDDM

Subject: Re: [WDDM] On what I mean by the meaningful WDDM
From: Gordan Ponjavic <geoerdeaen(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:22:45 -0700 (PDT)
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net

*/"M. Kolar" <wddm(at)mkolar.org>/* wrote:

Or a postscriptum to the just finished vote:

Dear WDDM-ers!

We can and definitely will continue the WDDM site as the depository
of the DD
related (and more generally democracy-improvement related)
information, links,
suggestion. For this no formal organization is necessary. Just the
dedication
of one or a few people.

***I think this is the way, as long as this umbrella principle based
on individuals who are obvioulsy not ready for consolidation is not
very good ground for success. *


But it would be even better if we could put together a group of
people that
would be able to produce basic documents appealing to a large number of
democracy-minded people, under which WDDM members from all over the
world would
be willing to sign, something similar to SIMPOL, but more DD
oriented. We could
then speak with a single voice, participate for example in simultaneous
letter-writing campaigns in various countries, or send the same
proposals to
the politicians/parliaments in various countries, start similar
education
initiatives among your people.

Right now, we for example even don't have a statement what we
actually mean by
Direct Democracy ...

The 2000 WDDM founding members were apparently mostly the "DD model
people".
Most of them have formulated their own models on how a DD society
should be
organized, which institutions it should have. The models had some
similar
features, but they were also in completion among themselves. Also,
this was to
some extent a top-down approach. They had these more or less
finished models
and wanted them to put in practise apparently by establishing DD
parties, that
would win the elections and introduce these models. This approach
has the
danger that any political party, even a DD one is susceptible to
corruption or
at least to accepting the current particracy methods once in power.
But if this
danger would be successfully avoided, then one would expect that the
citizens
would see hopefully soon the advantages of these models "more or
less forced
upon them from top" by the successful DD politicians, educate
themselves in DD,
and accept DD for good.


***There is actually plenty of other informations that might actually
help you not going the way of debacle, as long as very simmilar
thoughts have already passed through the all stages of regular
activist scenario. If you ever get actually interested in these
info, you know where to find me. I will gladly help you out as long
as I apreciate your work, Mirek. *


Even for this approach it would be beneficial to have a meaningful
WDDM,
formulate just one DD model, and try to get it accepted
simultaneously in many
countries.

I would say, that it is not that important right now to formulate
very detailed
DD models. More important is to get as many grassroots people as
possible to
learn about DD and start to think in a DD way, and then they would
themselves
demand from their politicians the changes from below. Once they get
DD started,
the detailed way how a DD society would be organized would evolve
with time and
needs of the people all the time anyway.
For this approach the meaningful WDDM would be even more important.
It would
help, if WDDM could prepare good educational materials and start
simultaneous
information campaigns all over the world, try to get young people
interested in DD.
This could be our long-term goal.

If you are interested in something like this, please follow the
discussions in
the WDDM Forum and/or Wiki.
If you have some other ideas and suggestions, please post them
there, too.

***ATB;*
*Gale*


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