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

01265: Re: Re: Re: [WDDM] Proposal

From: "Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan" <vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com>
Date: 12 Jun 2007 13:32:05 -0000
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [WDDM] Proposal

Dear Bruce,
Thanks for your reply. I was surprised that you have answered to a question I did not ask. I have indicated it in capitals below.
My concern is that there may not be even a single nation, apart from the Swiss, where people will be in a position to bring into action the mechanism of I&R. The political parties are wily and will not allow this. And the current definition of WDDM is too innocuous to make any headway.

PVR


On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 Bruce Eggum wrote :
>Dear PVR.
>
>I answer in your note. I thank you for your response.
>
>On 10 Jun 2007 07:51:04 -0000, *Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan* <
>vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com> wrote:
>
>Dear Bruce,
>You have said - "We must have the power to intervene, and getting I&R is the
>first step. Once that is achieved we can 'take charge of our governments'.
>Until that is achieved, we are whistling in the wind".
>
>Assuming that the Swiss, who already have I&R in place, decide that they
>want to take charge of their government fully by doing away with the
>political parties, will the political parties agree to it? Is there such a
>possibility in the Swiss constitution, and if not, will the political
>parties allow such an amendment to be brought in? My guess is that the
>political parties will not allow this to happen.
>
>BE- The Swiss have Initiative and Binding Referendum. If the Swiss made an
>Initiative that the people were going to run the government using an
>electronic forum, the people making all decisions and the Parliament was
>only an administrative body, providing the Initiative was validated by
>Referendum, it would be so in Swiss land. (Binding Referendum) The Swiss
>make their Constitution, not the parties or any part of the government.
>
>That is why I say FIRST Initiative and Binding Referendum, than the people
>have control and can operate their government as they choose.(Please note
>Swiss political parties are subservient to the people)
>
>Most communities have the provision established by Magna Carta and
>subsequent law:: "Every person has the right to petition their government"
>and the government is subservient to the people.  I believe if a huge
>majority petition, it can not be denied. ( just my view)
>
>PVR- Talking about other nations, may I know which of them is closest to
>being the second nation where I&R can be ushered in? I do not know any
>groups other than those on WDDM.
THE SECOND SENTENCE IN THIS PARA WAS NOT WRITTEN BY ME. YOU CAN VERIFY IN MY MAIL (COPY FOUND BELOW).
>
>BE-  I only know of the groups on WDDM. WDDM was the initiating group for
>the I&E  "movement".
>
>PVR-  I am unable to understand your optimism for WDDM with the current
>definition of DD.
>
>BE- What definition of DD are you using?
>
>PVR- I believe that we should first concentrate on taking charge of
>governments, through constitutional means, and then the direct democratic
>processes like I&R can easily be ushered in.
>
>BE- I agree. However each present constitution is different. Each  Nation
>or Community must do what is necessary to have I&R provisions in their
>Constitutions. WDDM was established to discuss I&R, explain what I&R is, why
>it is important for people to establish I&R in their Communities. WDDM
>intended to have information for activists to use to "Sell" I&R in their
>community. WDDM was not intended to take on government or parties or tell
>people what to do. WDDM is simply a clearing house of ideas and information
>which serve to assist people in their pursuit of I&R. When WDDM was
>established, there was little information on Swiss DD available and in
>languages other than Swiss.
>
>Do you want to establish I&R in your government PVR? Do you think in your
>Communities government, it is best to form a political party or some way get
>parties to support it? Than do it. You do this in your community But your
>solution does not fit all. What you have been advocating is that WDDM accept
>your idea as the WDDM supported way to achieve the goal of WDDM. It can be
>one of many but not THE way.
>
>[I realize some of the replys do not encourage you to do this]
>
>When you have a good plan, please publish it on your WDDM Website, please
>keep us posted on your accomplishments so others can learn and utilize your
>experience.
>
>PVR- You had said that WDDM stands for ushering in DD and not for any
>revolution. This is surprising. Then why call it a 'movement'? "DD education
>forum" would be a more appropriate name.
>
>BE- The WDDM Movement is not violent but a movement from full
>Representative to Direct Democracy (I&R). WDDM does not tell people how to
>activate I&R, only that I&R would be advantageous for them. They must "sell"
>the people of their community that they should establish I&R, than those
>people within community act in their community to do so. WDDM hopes to have
>available "selling points" people can utilize. WDDM does not tell them not
>to have a revolution, that is their choice. Yes WDDM  hopes to provide
>"education"  however it takes  people  to bring these  works into  action
>and  recruiting  people to  do  so  establishes  the  movement toward  I&R
>DD.
>
>A personal opinion, if violent overthrow is necessary and warranted, than it
>must be done. The US Constitution states the people must overthrow the
>government, violently if necessary, if the government becomes corrupt. [it
>may be time for the US people to do so?]
>
>Bruce
>
>PVR
>
>
>On 10 Jun 2007 07:51:04 -0000, Vijayaraghavan Padmanabhan <
>vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Dear Bruce,
>>You have said - "We must have the power to intervene, and getting I&R is
>>the first step. Once that is achieved we can 'take charge of our
>>governments'. Until that is achieved, we are whistling in the wind".
>>
>>Assuming that the Swiss, who already have I&R in place, decide that they
>>want to take charge of their government fully by doing away with the
>>political parties, will the political parties agree to it? Is there such a
>>possibility in the Swiss constitution, and if not, will the political
>>parties allow such an amendment to be brought in? My guess is that the
>>political parties will not allow this to happen.
>>
>>Talking about other nations, may I know which of them is closest to being
>>the second nation where I&R can be ushered in? I am unable to understand
>>your optimism for WDDM with the current definition of DD. I believe that we
>>should first concentrate on taking charge of governments, through
>>constitutional means, and then the direct democratic processes like I&R can
>>easily be ushered in.
>>
>>You had said that WDDM stands for ushering in DD and not for any
>>revolution. This is surprising. Then why call it a 'movement'? "DD education
>>forum" would be a more appropriate name.
>>
>>PVR
>>
>
>-- Bruce Eggum
>Gresham Wisconsin, USA
>http://www.doinggovernment.com/
>Check out my Blog too
>http://bruceeggum.blogster.com/
>


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