Re: [WDDM] Getting the whole picture about DD

[Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it>]

Georges Metanomski wrote:
> --- Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it> wrote:
>
>
> > Georges Metanomski ha scritto:
> >
> > > --- Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Georges,
> > > >
> > > > There are some flaws about your three functions
> > (+1)
> >
> > > > below:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Supporting individual proposals is at
> > > > powerholders' hands, who
> > > > usually support and select the proposals that are
> > in
> >
> > > > support to just
> > > > themselves.
> > > ==============
> > > G:
> > > Once in DD, there is no "powerholder" else than
> > the
> >
> > > Forum. Support of individual proposals is a
> > function
> >
> > > of the logistic support, which accepts and
> > dieplays
> >
> > > proposals for the next step, the debate.
> > > ==============
> > (ant)
> > I agree on what you wrote, that in DD there is no
> > "powerholder" etc.
> >
> > It is the word "Once" which makes me smile.  You're
> > speaking as
> > if DD were just out of the door, ready to come in,
> ...
> ================
> G:
> Impossible to discuss if you don't read what I wrote
> and put in my mouth the opposite of what I asserted.
>
> QUOTE of Shadow Parliament
> Three issues seem essential for starting to move
> towards the DD:
>
> 1.Getting a Shadow Parliament within the Particracy.
>
> 2.Establish a logistic 3 Functions support.
>
> 3.Propound Sincerity, which appears to be the
> critical condition of DD.
> UNQUOTE
>
> QUOTE
> If Logistics requires at least a generation,
> Sincerity will come still later, if ever,
> UNQUOTE
>
> So I don't speak about DD as if it were just
> out of the door.
>
> Yet, I suggest a DD based militant group viz. the
> "Shadow Parliament", internally DD structured and to
> which would internally apply all my DD assertions.
>
> WDDM could evolve to such a group if it stopped
> "discussing" silly cliches and decided to became
> sincere.
>
> Georges
> ================
Georges,

tell me please:

which condition sounds essential in order to:

(quote)
--------------
1.Getting a Shadow Parliament within the Particracy.

2.Establish a logistic 3 Functions support.

3.Propound Sincerity, which appears to be the
critical condition of DD.
---------------
(unquote)

Please explain.

Please notice, I don't put other words in your mouth.
You wrote, in your previous explanation:
"Once in DD, there is no 'powerholder' else than the
Forum....   There is no top, no down, no powerholding
and no
orchestration."

I guess, this is quite unrealistic a start. Really,
DD is not in, still.  Me too, I'm looking forwards
to seeing DD to succeed. But unfortunately it is not.
Hence, the only reaistic start should be:  "Since DD
is not in... what shall we do, to make it succeed?"
Anything else is dreaming, to say the least.

Yet we know, out of its  definition, DD is made by
the people grassroots bottom-up.  This means, people
only can be the DD-makers.  Thence...

Regards,

antonio