Re: [WDDM] Democracy and Anarchy do not mix

[Giorgio Menon <giorgio.menon(at)pd.infn.it>]

Let's face it: democracy is no democracy at all, history says. In
ancient Greece only 12% of humans had the right to decide. Of the
250,000 inhabitants only some 30,000 on average were citizens. The
remaining were women, metics and slaves, people who did work. Their
masters had plenty of time to spend in democratic plays. Things don't go
much differently these days: the Biggest of All Democracies (BAD=USA)
has an average partecipation of eligible voters around 50%. Of such 50%
the majority is 25.5%, representing 51% of 50%. Thus only 25.5% of
eligible voters makes a majority and determines a governmental right to
decide over 100% of population. Pretty odd, isn't it? We're living in a
place where numbers (for statistical, scientific, virtual, communicative
etc.. purpose) are ruling our lives. Not wisdom, honest confrontations,
open discussions, agreements found upon mutual satisfaction, but
numbers. Abstractions. In this sense we've gone no better than our
ancestors who had a King with divine lineage ruling them. God or
numbers, what difference can it make? A King with God behind him or a
President with Numbers backing him, what difference can ever make for
people who must work hard all day to bring the bread home?
This said, when someone tries to implement anarchy into this can be
anything but a bad idea. Anarchy, as i understand it, is a commonly
accepted form of equal rights and equal powers where no number nor god
can ever make sense.  Anyone preaching further divisions, new ruling
casts, more elites to defend our rights and powers has been caught by
divine or numeric logics. We've already know this, methinks. Besides:
we're just a small community, and small communities are the best places
to practice equal rights and equal powers. If we accept to be ruled by a
strict minority (elite, or cast) we'll fall again in the trap of  one
King-most power ( or its modern version: one President+presidential
crew-most power) and the remaining power (unsufficient to grant anything
sensible) spread with different digrees relatively to the power of the cast.
Should this be the case i'm no longer in the position of finding of any
sense my partecipation to this forum.

Regards

Giorgio

PS i'd like to hear more about the differences between anarchy and
democracy, but i'm quite sure the discussion would turn into a
meaningless academism where intentions and proposals have not the same
weight as facts and history.

> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Bruce Eggum
> *To:* wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:30 AM
> *Subject:* [WDDM] Democracy and Anarchy do not mix
>
>
>   WDDM is Worldwide Direct Democracy Movement
>
> <snip>
>
> Thus, all those who are members of WDDM and insist in trying to
> implement anarchist ideology into WDDM are in the wrong organization.
> Your efforts to destroy the democracy in WDDM have left the
> organization in confusion.
>
> I  therefore ask those who choose anarchist ideology to resign from
> WDDM. You may choose to join an anarchist organization, but you do not
> fit in a democratic organization.
>
> I hold no animosity toward anarchist's, we simply have different beliefs.
>
> I submit some information from Wikipedia which details these items I
> bring to your attention.
>
> Respectfully, Bruce Eggum