On 03/10/2009, at 10:06 PM, Worldwide Direct Democracy Movement wrote:
Fred Gohlke replied to the discussion "The Immense Possibilities of 'Association of Independents'" on Worldwide Direct Democracy MovementTo view the new reply, visit:--To stop following this discussion, go to:
====
I extract below from Fred's new reply and insert my COMMENTS IN CAPITALS. –Doug. Everingham.
Information exchange for advocates of Direct Democracy from the whole world
...
[snip by D E ]
...
[snip by D E ]
...
Permalink Reply by Fred Gohlke on October 3, 2009 at 5:06am -
Thank you for your comment, Mr. Everingham, but it's hard to assign much value to your opinion when you "read only a small part of" the method you condemn. Your assertion would be more convincing if you studied the material and offered cogent reasons for denigrating it.
Now, regarding the 'movement' and 'initiative' you think will succeed:
SOCIOCRACY
The Sociocratic method is said to be an 'empty' method (i.e., can be applied to any kind of organization), but is described in terms of business applications. Attempting to evaluate it as a political methodology must be done by considering its operation in businesses. It is a more issue-oriented than character-oriented approach to governance. That is to say, it is more concerned with the business problems to be solved than with the integrity of the people working on them. That is not a good basis for a political system where the people charged with resolving issues in the public interest must be trustworthy.
Sociocracy assigns significance to the 'consent' principle, as opposed to the 'consensus' and 'veto' principles. That implies a subtlety that must be understood. Determining the applicability of the 'consent' principle to a political situation will require analysis and discussion.
Another distinction to be considered is that Sociocracy provides decision-making capability for people who have a 'social relationship' with each other while political systems provide governance for 'the general mass of people', who have no such relationship. That is a major difference. In a political system, the character of the decision-makers is more important than in an issue-oriented one where participants who work in the same enterprise are known to each other.
Sociocracy is said to be organized in a hierarchy of double-linked, semiautomomous circles where the operational leader of a circle is selected by the next higher circle, providing one link, and a member of a circle is selected to represent the circle in the next higher circle, providing the second link. This arrangement vests a control capability in the higher circle, and that crushes any claim of democracy for the process.
...['CONTROL' IN A SOCIOCRATIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IS NO MORE NOR LESS DEMOCRATIC OR HIERARCHICAL THAN OTHER SYSTEMS OF ADMINISTRATION BY COMMON CONSENT. – D.E. ]...
Sociocracy can be likened to a Suggestion Box, formalized and broadly enhanced. It encourages examination and reinforcement of issues raised at the lowest levels of the enterprise and lets management acknowledge the potential of all employees.
In general, the positives for Sociocracy in business systems seem to outweigh the negatives. Suggestion boxes, for all their shortcomings, were modestly productive. Given the relatively fixed nature of the leaders of a business, like the founders and executives, formalizing an operational method built around employee participation is an excellent way to identify and correct weak spots in the business. However, these positives are no guarantee the method will work in political systems where problems do not arise within easily identifiable limits, and where the social relationships between the people of the electorate are undefined.
In summary, Sociocracy is a good system that may be gaining broader acceptance in business applications. In terms of political systems, though, the control the 'upper' circles exert over the 'lower' circles shows the process will not result in a democratic environment.[A SOCIOCRATIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IS NO MORE NOR LESS DEMOCRATIC OR HIERARCHICAL THAN OTHER SYSTEMS OF ADMINISTRATION BY COMMON CONSENT IN A COMPLEX ORGANIZATION DEVELOPING AND NEEDING DECISION-MAKING AT MORE THAN ONE LEVEL OF COMPLEXITY. – D.E. ]...
SIMPOL
The following citations from the Simpol site describe the organization's objectives and means of attaining them:
~~~o~~~
"The Simultaneous Policy (Simpol) aims to deliver social justice around the world, resolve global problems like environmental destruction, and regulate the economic power of international capital for the good of all. Simpol seeks solutions to problems that individual national governments cannot resolve by acting alone."
~~~o~~~
"Simpol aims to achieve these objectives by encouraging ordinary people around the world to oblige their political representatives and governments to move toward co-ordinated international resolution of global issues for the good of all."
~~~o~~~
"All you need to do is sign up as a Simpol Adopter which costs you nothing. By so doing you agree in principle to vote at national elections for any candidate, within reason, who has signed a pledge to implement Simpol alongside other governments. Alternatively, if you have a party preference, your Adoption signifies you will encourage your preferred party to make this pledge. This is the simple mechanism Adopters use to advance their cause."
~~~o~~~
These are clearly desirable objectives and I encourage everyone to support them. However, nothing in these objectives seeks to make our governments more democratic. Simpol reacts to evils that exist but makes no effort to prevent them.
A problem is a symptom. It is the visible evidence of an underlying fault. We can discuss problems ad nauseum, but the only way to prevent them is to eliminate their cause. Simpol makes no effort to do that.['ON THE CONTRARY, SIMPOL ENCOURAGES EVERY 'ADOPTER' OF THE SIMULTANEOUS POLICY PRINCIPLE TO PROPOSE AND ENDORSE SPECIFIC MULTILATERAL GOVERNMENT ACTION TO ELIMINATE INTERNATIONAL PROBLEMS. ALREADY THE LARGEST (U.K.) SIMPOL CHAPTER HAS AGREED ON SUCH MEASURES http://www.simpol.org.uk/forum/index.php AND ENCOURAGES ALL SIMPOL ADOPTERS WORLD WIDE TO DISCUSS AND DEVELOP FURTHER SUCH MEASURES.. – D.E. ]...
Fred Gohlke
