|
The first and most important thing we need
to consider is humans don't like change, so whatever we change will have to be a
little bit at a time.
The Swish model is very sellable, the fact they haven't been involved in a war since it was
brought in, and they have an Inquisitorial legal system -Civil law legal
system.
I like America's Bill of Rights,the gun ownship
needs some qualifiers and controls in the home environment.
Ricardo Semlers systems of managing departments
where all people vote on decision made within their department,parliament or
business,this will counter vessed interests.
Candidate selecting process to be decide by the
people, candidate to put credentials forward and people vote and select
candidates
To encourage steadily further involvement of people
in political process,year by year.
For each country to take control of in money
systems through it's parliament.
Countries to back to bi-lateral
agreements.
To ban secret societies that work against the
national interest of the country.
Regards Martin Jackson
----- Original Message -----
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Facets of Truth
Dear PVR
Unfortunately maybe, you missed the great
damper of WDDM "discussions" which kept it from even voting on how to vote.
This was caused by various members who seemed to want anarchy instead of
democracy. Thus no "Charter" was written/revised since the original which was
incomplete.
We also had "inactive" people who would turn up once a
year or so, make noise but never be around to make decisions. Quorum of
members? That is why we now have the first board. Please, they have hardly had
time to meet and you want to get rid of them?
There must be
organization to an organization. This provides a system where members
can express themselves, make basic decisions for the group. The group can than
decide to endorse certain methods or decide to advertise DD to the
people as a concept. Of course that means they must decide what DD is first
thus the need to discuss the matter and vote. How can "the group" take on "the
political space" if it is not united in it's definitions of DD? We need to be
able to define these things and post out "beliefs" on the website with
handouts, flyer's etc.
We must allow the Board time to begin ,,,,,,,
and than accomplish it's tasks before we jump to other
methods.
Bruce
On 3 Jun 2007 02:20:57 -0000, Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan
wrote:
Dear all,
Everyone of us is unique and each one of our opinions is a
facet of truth. Also each one of us has our predilections, our pet ideas.
Nothing wrong with that since it forms the motivation for our action. About
my suggestion for redefining DD, it was aimed at being action-oriented and
taking on the world wide network of so-called democracy in the present form.
I agree with Mirek that it represents only a intermediate stage in our final
goal of True Democracy, however theoretical it may sound.
Mark has
declared that he is a stickler for constitutionalism. This is essential in
an organization. But emphasis on this aspect in a group like WDDM would
convert it into one more political party at a global level. We need a
dynamic association to enter the political space instead of being bogged
down by organizational matters.
The current definition of DD is well
expressed in initiatives like that of Nicole Durand, Echarp's variation of
it, Roy Daine's myverdict, and the canadian initiative. Our in-built
repulsion to authoritarianism and our earning for individual freedom is the
basic motivation. But we need to keep the ultimate goal of taking on the
political space while integrating these ideas into our mission since
otherwise we will remain merely a discussion forum and nothing more. I think
we should first decide on how we are going to take on the political parties
on ground and check whether whatever we do is in line with this final goal.
The very fact that only a handful of members are discussing
indicates that presently WDDM is not attractive for open discussion. The
formation of the executive board is a damper. Mirek's suggestion that it is
meant for carrying out decisions made by members is appropriate. Since we
are in a preliminary stage, may be the present board should be dissolved and
a new board elected, if needed, in the future. The WDDM charter needs to be
modified appropriately.
PVR
--
Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
http://www.doinggovernment.com/
Check
out my Blog too
http://bruceeggum.blogster.com/
|