| From: | "Jim Powell" <autoinfo(at)acenet.co.za> |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:24:44 +0200 |
| Subject: | RE: [WDDM] Agree or Disagree |
|
Hi Hamid, Look for *** Regards Jim Powell South Africa From: Hamid Mohseni
[esi1mohseni2(at)hotmail.com] Hi Jim Nobody is allowed to make decisionsin behalf of you in your private life as long as you have not officially and lawfully accepted be represented by others, with execption for children and mentally sick people. *** Agreed
Of course for peoplewho prefer it there should be possibile to let others (you can call them politicians) to represent them in some or all questions but this does not mean an obligation foreverybody. *** As long as DD is in place this is not a problem As you told before politicians are
employees of voters, so if voters like they can fire their employees and take
the political power in their own hands. *** With DD the power is always in the voters hands From: autoinfo(at)acenet.co.za Hi Vijayaraghavan, We do not have to have an alternative to political parties. This would be imposing an alternative on the voters. Politicians have a job to do so that the average person can get on with his/her life. Voters just need the power to reject, modify or create legislation. Our energies need to be in this direction Regards Jim Powell South Africa From: Vijayaraghavan
Padmanabhan [vijayaraghavan.p(at)rediffmail.com] For
people to be really able to do this, an independent setup (free from party
influence) is needed. We need to conceptualize an alternative to political
parties. Hamid, Thatis exactly the point of DD. If people have the power to make decisions, makemistakes, learnfrom their mistakes, and then correct them, they will ultimately mature into grownupcitizens. Otherwise, we live in our parent's house forever. B. T.Marking www.sdindie21.org From: Hamid
Mohseni[esi1mohseni2(at)hotmail.com] Outcome
of bad laws decided by people by refrandom willaffect people badly and make
them to changethe law later on From: parrhesiajoe(at)gmail.com Good point. The removal of bad laws has proven trickythroughout history. What is a bad law? Should they be judged by theirintentions or their outcomes? Or, does a law become “good” if it issupported by a majority of the people, or their representatives? If a people are unjust or immoral, should a democracyallow them to design an unjust or immoral social structure? For example, if 90% of the people in Seattle want to outlaw outdooradvertising… billboards, etcetera… is it a good law? It violatesproperty rights, but those rights are DEFINED by the public in general.Certainly, other building codes already allow the liberty of an owner to besuperseded by will of the public. If 90% of the people want to outlaw Muslimchurches, should that be allowed? Please, take into account that this isalready the case. Our representatives can effectively change any part of theconstitution if they think it will gain them votes, and 90% means a politicianwould be suicidal not to take up the call. (Honorable, but politically, aloser). So… Should good law based on a defined set of virtues (if so,then who defines the set), or should it be based on the public will? Or both?Or neither? Or something else? Be very specific. Parrhesia P.S. Our current system makes it very possible for ourprejudices to work their way into law. As long as the people do not clamor forlimits to government power, the representatives tend to give them what theywant. Even when the public is 40% in favor of something, the government willlatch onto it if it increases their scope and power (Health Care Bill, $700Billion Bailout). When the people are highly in favor of a measure that limitspower, however, the government is less responsive. For example, term limits forcongress have had over 50% public support for over half of the last 100 years,and no congress has ever acted on it. From: wingsprd[wingsprd(at)goldenwest.net] And the repeal of those that have proven ineffective or that have outgrowntheir usefulness. B.Thomas Marking From: Joseph
Hammer[parrhesiajoe(at)gmail.com] A stable, fair and productive government should promotethe formation of new laws and changes to existing ones. (To keep them fresh, one might suppose?) Parrhesia |