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

01774: RE: [WDDM] Regarding the social network site

From: ROY DAINE <rdaine(at)btinternet.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 20:08:29 +0100 (BST)
Subject: RE: [WDDM] Regarding the social network site

Georges,
Calm down - It's only an opinion.

On the WDDM site alone there are six alternative definitions of DD -

1.   DD is Initiative and Binding Referendum and Recalls
2.   DD is a socio-political structure concentrating the Legislation directly and exclusively in the hands of people
3.   DD is the system currently used in Switzerland
4.   DD recognises that the Voters are the employers and Politicians are the employees
5,   Direct democracy - Wherein sovereignty is vested directly in the people, who, in exercise of their inalienable right to self-determination and under universal suffrage, determine the structure and functioning of their own governance.
6.   Direct Democracy is where the people have a say in governance directly without the intermediary of one or more political parties

Now in your opinion Georges, DD = Kibbutzism.

That makes seven definitions. And that's from just one site. From just seven people.

With regards to the site mentioned. I said it was not convincing. I did not infer a compliment and I made no attempt to criticise. I merely said it was not convincing.

I see the governance of Israel is not based on kibbutzism.

I have just perused wikipedia's entry on kibbutzism. I would not consider kibbutzism an outstanding success. I'm glad I wasn't raised in such a system.

I cannot envisage any existing system of governance 'evolving' into a kibbutz system, though I can see many already evolving into varying degrees of DD.

'My version' of DD by the way, is no 5.

Now Georges, you're free to disagree. If you wish to critique 'my version', go right ahead, though I'd advise against sarcasm. You're not very good at it.

Conversely, if you wish to engage in a slanging match, I'd be happy to oblige.

Regards

Roy

Georges Metanomski <zgmet(at)yahoo.com> wrote:

--- ROY DAINE <RDAINE(at)BTINTERNET.COM> wrote:

> It depends on your version of DD. To many people,
> the Swiss model incorporates all the DD they
> require.
=============
G:
There is no "my version" of DD, just as there is no
"my version" of General Relativity or of Chicago
Blues. They are rigorously defined concepts. To many
people Intelligent Design is right and Genetics wrong.
Bandwagon's requirements don't define rigorous
concepts.
=============
> I say again - Reality.
=============
G:
The only reality of DD is so far in Kibbutzim.
=============
>
> The world will not change merely because you want
> it to.
>
> The world will definitely not change to your idea
> of a Kibbutz system.
==============
G:
It's not "my idea", but a social and political fact.
If your "reality" disregards facts, it's your problem.
Indeed, world will probably not become a Kibbutz,
(clear and strict synonym of DD) because it strongly
moves in the opposite direction of tyranny, dogmatism,
fanatism and stupidity.
==============
> I've looked at the site you mentioned. I did not
> find it convincing.
==============
G:
In the light of your previous statements it's a
compliment. Thanks.

Georges.
================

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