Re: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS

[Bruce Eggum <bruce.eggum(at)gmail.com>]

I do wish folks would quit calling the people we need to support this effort "lazy".
Certainly they have problems supporting and raising family etc, but they are not "lazy".
They have different priorities. It is our job to make government a priority, and make it easy for folks to provide their input.
We need methods so folks can "vote" on Petition/Initiative so the most popular can be determined,
We need to build a initiative / petition method which includes community meetings, vote in person and internet mechanisms which are secure, methods to eliminate double entry so folks can vote there.
We need Media to support a Campaign for each Initiative/Petition so folks talk about it with friends, in groups, so they come to their decision and want to sign a Petition/Initiative.
We also need a statement of what Initiative is, how it is done, why it is important, how the government will receive out input.

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 6:38 AM, <Hamid Mohseni> wrote:

People can be lazy of different reasons:
-They are satisfied then there is nothing wrong that they are lazy
- They have given up and don´t see any chance to change things easily.
- They are sick.
- They are concentrated on other subjects and don´t have time for some question.
- etc...

One thing is clear that it is very rare that all people in a society are lazy at the same
time. Even if a part of society work for changes in politic, it is more effective than a
few politicians do it. No representant or leader know better or mind more than you yourself about
your desires and targets.

Regards 

> From: jimpowell(at)mweb.co.za
> To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net

> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:11:55 +0200

> Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
> Please give text of Edmund Burke's speech
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ted Becker
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 6:45 PM
> To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> Subject: Re: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
> Excuse me, but there is STRONG EVIDENCE that randomly selected
> legislatures work very well...and are TRULY representative of the people
> if we mean by that: demographically. All elected representative systems
> have elites that supposedly "represent" the people (please read Edmund
> Burke's indefensible address to his constituents in Bristol, England).
>
> Citizens Assemblies as at least one of the two houses would complement
> the direct, deliberative democratic part of any system.
>
> Ted Becker
>
> >>> Jiri Polak 1/21/2011 9:20 AM >>>
> Correct. But most people are too lazy and passive to want to constantly
> vote on all issues. It would not be realistic to try to put in place
> such a system. Some form of representation will be indispensable for the
> foreseeable future. However, the representatives will be under constant
> scrutiny and susceptible to be recalled at any moment if guilty of
> misconduct. What we strive for is semi-direct democracy with strong
> elements of deliberation.
> Jiri
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hamid Mohseni
> To: World Direct Democracy
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 3:12 PM
> Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
>
> And what about people who like to manage the job themselves and not
> employ others for that. The experience shows that this politician
> managers has seldom been honest and soon or later has taken over the
> power and used it for their own egoistik matters.
>
> Hamid
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: jimpowell(at)mweb.co.za
> To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:38:12 +0200
> Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
>
> Hi Hamid,
>
>
>
> Having the voters making decisions on all matters is a waste of time.
> The politicians are employed to consider the information and make
> decisions, similar to managers employed by shareholders in a company.
> The voters are the shareholders and the politicians the managers
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Jim Powell South Africa
>
>
>
> From: Hamid Mohseni
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 7:24 PM
> To: World Direct Democracy
> Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
>
>
> The Swiss system is better than many other countries but not good
> enough, because stíll it is politicians and not people who are the
> leaders eventhogh people can stop politicians decisions and propositions
> sometimes.
>
> Hamid
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: jimpowell(at)mweb.co.za
> To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 07:47:38 +0200
> Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
> I think the Swiss have got it right (mostly)
>
>
>
> Have your politicians investigate and propose new laws. The
> electorate will have access to all the information and can raise a
> referendum if enough of them are unhappy with the legislation. A
> referendum is held and the will of the people is sovereign.
>
>
>
> 97% of legislation in Switzerland goes through without objection. The
> laws that are passed will be created with the knowledge that they can be
> challenged, so they are voter friendly
>
>
>
> Jim Powell South Africa
>
>
>
> From: Hamid Mohseni
> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 8:18 PM
> To: World Direct Democracy
> Subject: RE: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
>
>
>

> As I understand real direct democracy donět need politicians as

> represents or leaders but advisors and organizers. Their job is to
> inform people about political facts and theories
> and organize refrandums and realise the result of refrandums and
> decisions made by people
> in common political and practical questions.
>
> Regards
> Hamid
>
> > From: jiri.polak(at)swipnet.se
> > To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> > Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:06:18 +0100
> > Subject: Re: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
> >
> > Dear Fred,
> > as far as I see, the model of PD you put forward is compatible with
> my own
> > ideas, which are much more simple and only rudimentary. The PD
> model is

> > certainly worth studying. Iěll bring an information about it in the

> next
> > issue of my newsletter.
> > Sincerely, Jiri Polak
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Fred Gohlke
> > To: <wddm@world-wide-democracy.net>
> > Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 11:14 PM
> > Subject: Re: [WDDM] MANY ACTIVE MEMBERS AND VOTERS
> >
> >
> > > Good Afternoon, Jiri
> > >
> > > From your January 14th post:
> > >
> > > "The basic fault ... is to call party-based regimes
> 'democracy'".
> > >
> > > From your January 16th post:
> > >
> > > "But I - and many others - also want a system where elected
> > > representatives get continuous feedback from their voters who
> > > can recall them at any moment (not only during elecions) if
> > > the majority within the respective constituency demand it."
> > >
> > > Have you thought about the way Practical Democracy functions? It
>
> > > addresses and resolves both the points you make; the first
> because it
> > > sidesteps political parties and the second because it is
> inherently
> > > bi-directional.
> > >
> > > Political Parties
> > > -----------------
> > > Over two hundred years experience with party politics informs us
> that,
> > > when politics is based on partisanship, the partisans form
> oligarchic
> > > power blocs that become an end in themselves and ultimately
> transcend the
> > > will of the people.
> > >
> > > Partisanship is a potent tool for those with a thirst for power
> but it
> > > does not foster government by the people. It results in
> government by a
> > > small fraction of the people. For the people as a whole, the
> flaws in
> > > party politics are devastating. Their cumulative effect
> victimizes the
> > > public by the most basic and effective strategy of domination ---
> divide
> > > and conquer.
> > >
> > > Parties are important for the principals: the party leaders,
> > > contributors, candidates and elected officials, but the
> significance
> > > diminishes rapidly as the distance from the center of power
> grows. Most
> > > people are on the periphery, remote from the centers of power. As
>
> > > outsiders, they have little incentive to participate in the
> political
> > > process.
> > >
> > > The challenge of representative democracy is not to divide the
> public into
> > > blocs but to find the best advocates of the common interest and
> raise them
> > > to leadership positions as the people's representatives.
> > >
> > > To meet that challenge, given the range of public issues and the
> way each
> > > individual's interest in political matters varies over time, an
> effective
> > > electoral process must examine the entire electorate during each
> election
> > > cycle, seeking the people's best advocates. It must let every
> voter
> > > influence the outcome of each election to the best of their
> desire and
> > > ability, and it must ensure that those selected as
> representatives are
> > > disposed to serve the public interest.
> > >
> > > Practical Democracy allows voters to quickly and easily align
> themselves
> > > with others who share their views. It changes the focus of
> advocates of a
> > > partisan position from getting votes for a politician to
> persuading voters
> > > of the value of the idea they espouse. It lets every faction
> select, from
> > > among themselves, the best champions of their point of view and
> raise them
> > > as far as the size of the group allows.
> > >
> > > One huge flaw in the party-based systems that dominate the globe
> is that
> > > individuals must support one of the existing parties or be denied
> a voice
> > > in the political process. They have no way to prevent the
> excesses of the
> > > parties.
> > >
> > > Practical Democracy gives unaligned people a voice. Those who
> advocate
> > > partisan interests must ultimately present their point of view to
> voters
> > > who may not share their view. This provides unaligned people with
> a
> > > countervailing force that prevents domination by any party.
> > >
> > > PD allows, indeed encourages, enclaves to easily form and attract
>
> > > adherents. As Jane Mansbridge said in The Deliberative System
> > > Disaggregated, "Enclaves are good at generating new ideas.
> Everyday talk
> > > is good at applying ideas and selecting those best applicable to
> common
> > > experience." That is how fresh ideas are introduced into society,
> but
> > > they cannot impose their will unless they are able to persuade
> the
> > > unaligned of the value of their ideas. PD guarantees that fresh
> ideas
> > > will be accommodated to the extent they are deemed worthy by the
>
> > > electorate.
> > >
> > > Bi-directionality
> > > -----------------
> > > Practical Democracy is inherently bi-directional. Because each
> advancing
> > > participant and elected official sits atop a pyramid of known
> electors,
> > > questions on specific issues can easily be transmitted directly
> to and
> > > from the electors for the guidance or instruction of the
> official. This
> > > capability offers those who implement the process a broad scope,
> ranging
> > > from simple polling of constituents to referenda on selected
> issues and
> > > recall of an elected representative.
> > >
> > > If you are interested in these concepts, the process is described
> in
> > > Paricipedia at:
> > >
> > > http://participedia.net/wiki/Practical_Democracy
> > >
> > >
> > > I wonder if you'll find value in it.
> > >
> > > Fred Gohlke
> >
>