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

00954: Re: [WDDM] Democracy and Anarchy do not mix?

From: "Jiri Polak" <jiri.polak(at)swipnet.se>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 18:29:17 +0100
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Democracy and Anarchy do not mix?

Dear all,
it seems that the term "sirect democracy" is rather wague for many participants of this discussion. It would be better to discuss concrete models of political systems based on this idea. During the years, I have published several such models in my newsletter. Among model builders are Lee, Bernard, George Sagi, Prof.Becker, myself.... Recently, Prof.Behrouzi has published two important books on the subject in the USA. So let´s be concrete!
Sincerely,                     Jiri Polak
----- Original Message -----
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Democracy and Anarchy do not mix?

Dear Richard,
The term Anarchy was given with accepted definitions. It is contrary to democracy by those definitions. This was not a divisive game, it is reality.
Bruce

On 1/27/07, Richard Moore wrote:

I reject this 'do not mix' thesis.

We all want direct democracy!  Some people believe direct democracy
can be achieved by means of some kind of voting paradigm, perhaps
even under the current political system. Some of us disagree, but it
is still direct democracy that we want to achieve. I never use the
label 'anarchism' myself and I resent it being brought in as divisive
tool.

I think it would be productive if people would be willing to enter
into an open-minded discussion of 'what would direct democracy look
like?'. Instead of trying to shut down the opposition, let's listen
to one another.

best wishes to all,
richard



--
Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Urge to Surge
http://tinyurl.com/yndynn
http://www.doinggovernment.com/
Check out my Blog too
http://bruceeggum.blogster.com/


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