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

02496: Re: [WDDM] Democracy - Glossary - Referendum

From: Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:18:01 +0100
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Democracy - Glossary - Referendum

Bruce,

please remind which "WDDM community" and which "2005 decision"
you are speaking of.

Please remember, this is the WDDM discussion list, un-moderated,
open to any discussion topic which any one of  this list contributors
may think it is of a common, democratic relevance.

If you think of one's posted topic that it is of no democratic relevance,
please do not push your reply button to it, that will be enough to make
it get its natural end, methinks.

So, let please our WDDM discussion be free and stop bothering its
discussants by claiming your "2005 decisions" that have been decided
somewhere else by your claimed WDDM community which is not this
esteemed WDDM discussion list.

Thanks, best regards,

antonio


Bruce Eggum wrote:
I remind you this is only for WDDM 
We are not making decisions for other community's - organizations.
The WDDM community made it's decision in 2005.
bruce

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Doug Everingham <dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au> wrote:
Dear Bruce, 
I think in this discussion we are slowly approaching consensus by exehanging and considring with mutual respect our differences and  agreements.
I agree that 100% consensus is never, or nearly never, reachable, whether by discussion, majority vote and/or referendums.Yet I see this unattainable goal as always, or nearly always, the outcome sought by mutually accepted discussion and voting, including referendums.–Doug.
====

On 14/12/2009, at 7:42 PM, Bruce Eggum wrote:

Dear Doug and WDDM

I missposted my last note. I have always supported Antonio's Parental Training. But that is not the issue we are discussing.

Doug brings many issues confusing the main issue which is Referendum.

Others have stated and I fully agree, democracy works with democratic elections and referendums. The idea of “consensus” is an unreachable ideal. There are to many different views and cultural principles which people follow to come to a 100% consensus.


Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Health Care http://tinyurl.com/ycx9vpz
http://usinitiative.com
http://vote.org/



On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Doug Everingham <dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au> wrote:
Not so, Bruce.  The parenting trend I prefer is 'informed' by personal cooperative experience of how a child can develop confidence and reasoned autonomy  when the child and co-dependent parents are each heard and encouraged by example to prefer cooperative, mutually tolerant  decision-making by supporting parents and parent-like authorities.  
Each member of the family or othr cultural group can still agree to disagree and explore alternatives. This 'informed' stance is based on grass roots relationships (from the bottom up).  Referendums can help in recognizing equality of personal sovereignty, but if relied on alone may bypass vital issues and be stalled in  existing pyramidal  hierarchies, 'top-down' decision-making,  indoctrinated from a 'higher' culturally entrenched authority.
Cultured people assassinate each other when their parenting and related experiences prefer to emphasize dominance hierarchies, censor dissent – where referendums may reject concepts like 'the human family' and produce votes like that which  brought Hitler to power. –Doug.
====

On 14/12/2009, at 12:52 AM, Bruce Eggum wrote:

Interesting concept Doug. Informed parenting, allowing each child a choice, means they will all choose the same, eliminating the need for disputes in referendum or election. The perfect consensus would be found  using simpol.org cooperative consensus process. By the way, why do cultured people assassinate each other?
Bruce Eggum




On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 1:12 AM, <Doug Everingham> wrote:
Dear Bruce, 
Informed parenting implies for me reallization that mutual respect. tolerance, consensus and cooperation are consciously fostered and taught by example, specially in our first 3 years when such social attitudes may be either dominant or suppressed by extremism and dogmatisms.
These alternative personality trends determine whether we use votes democratically, shaped from the interdependent grass roots, or undemocratically, developed from dominant elites down.
Referendums produce undemocratic decisions when the voters are misled by dominant elites.

The International Simtaneous Policy Organization  www.simpol.org is one of many democratizing tracks that is developing cooperative consensus within existing referendum rules.
–Doug.
====

On 12/12/2009, at 5:25 PM, Bruce Eggum wrote:

Dear Doug, What does informed parenting have to do with determining the choice [vote] of eligible voters? Certainly antonio's program is good for parenting and develops the child's ability to make their own choice.
But it does not determine what the choice is of the voter is. There are many issues which do not resolve to 100 % agreement. Thus we need democratic elections. [referendum]

Bruce Eggum


On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Doug Everingham <dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au> wrote:
Referendums, like majority votes at elections, are still imperfect as a consensus development. 
In feudalism it's our count that votes; in referendums it's our votes that count –
in more equitable consensus regimes we need more reliable safeguards
like the informed parenting and other mature parent-like reciprocal relationships
fostered by cooperative family growth in our first 3 years of life, as advocated by Antonio Rossin.
====


On 10/12/2009, at 5:14 PM, Bruce Eggum wrote:

Hi All,

The following is my opinion for your consideration:

Democracy is rule by the people.

Representative democracy perverted it even though RD was “called” democracy.

We now refer to “direct democracy” as the people ruling, having final say.

This is why we need a Glossary to define terms we use for WDDM community.

We must establish the tools necessary to conduct a World Referendum so we can have a “democratic world”.

Now as to Antonio's constant objections, the people of each community have the power if they choose to use it and if they have demanded that they have this power. This power was established in the Magna Carta [IE] The power to petition the government.

The only power necessary for democracy, direct democracy, pure democracy or any democraacy is REFERENDUM.

If the people have the power of Referendum, they control everything. It they do not have the power of Referendum, they control nothing. This works in all community's, town, county, state, national, world. Each must have their own referendum.

At least that is my opinion.

Sincerely Bruce


Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Health Care http://tinyurl.com/ycx9vpz
http://usinitiative.com
http://vote.org/

Antonio Rossin.

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