for over a year i'm membering a DD = Direct Democracy - forum that seems to emerge itself to the world.
I donno exactly what it is or can be ...
i lately heard someone say ::
"i have nothing to do with medical care, so let other people talk about that"
implies this : each one only mingles in those area that s/he is more or less directly involved in by own life experience - active or passive ?
or is it a matter of complexity : not having time to let in dilemma's that occur in the other field?
time as quantitive or qualitative lacking source?
hmmm
let me now see if i can respond to some thought on that DDgroupies:
Our recent e-mail discussion on the possible role of political parties in the
promotion/achievement of DD can be found posted here:
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/common/dd_parties.html
(with all repetitions of individual contributions removed).
Can we say that its highlights or conclusions are: ?
- The notion of a Direct Democracy political party is self-contradictory by
definition.
this saying democracy can never be DIRECT?
and therefore self-contradictory?
Does it say Democracy is from the People and People are not Directly but a Product of Directness?
AH ... it is the matter for a PARTY ... a political party is a self-contradictorial entity in the field of Democracy ... hmmm ... IS THIS NECESSARY ? or can we dissolve THE OLD PARADIGM (okay i sugggest there can be a new one)
- A DD political party will have a hard time to live up to its principles.
What is meant by " a hard time" ... does this refer to the COMFORT standard we got used to in the ONEMANONEVOTE RD - representative democracy?
I think the RD grow up in another time where say Higher Educated Classes had their pre-positions in leading the world to modern times - measuring peoples comfort needs.
nowadays knowledge is opened up by ... the internet.
we learn to know people who grew through (family) pains - and got the pioneer spirit to revitalize the comfortized masses - external oriented living from the earthfruit
- However it is claimed that in some jurisdictions it may be the only way to
achieve change.
Yeah, i guess the institutions will have nested themselved in their castles ...
and networked mazes - till the moment of reorientation comes that might reduce the number of institutions down in order to enspace new generational, earth(re)spectable, spiritual engaged humans co-operating on co-creation.
May the claims proof themselves continiously and at sometimes let us transparently spectate their purpose of existence - s wording any decision to be taken
- The most important/hardest thing to solve is how to convince the majority of
public that DD is a better system - how to show the public that it works.
Okay ... how to show and compare both RD & DD on the same procedure and comeout?
and thereby convince (if ever)?
And what is the majority of public ...
Is that the number of people ...
Is each human a measurable unit ... (if this question may come up at any quorum contemplating)
- A DD party (movement) should be global.
???
Okay should ... be globally connected ...
DD is a planetary phenomenon in the decisional spheres ... that is what i make of it ...
at the same time RD needs seem to be there, just because people need to learn to refer to other people ... i say this ... and offer the considerations that i work on my study-area www.globalgeniusvoter.com ...
@ neu ree bah
(center - inspect basic - inspect cosmos - digest hearthead)
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
"The notion of a Direct Democracy political party is self-contradictory by
definition." - here of course the party is the problem. Political party is a tool of RR, this is in contradiction with DD.
But we now live in RR, and so some people believe that we can use only RR tools to change that.
That's where a DD party will have "a hard time" - would be forced to play by RR rules which may be in contradiction with its DD principles.
RR? i thought it was RD ;-)
DD has other dis-advantages that (in my vision) in fact blockade the courage to step out of the old paradigm. People must be in the political core of democracy, in those places where the dialogue is on.
So i designed in 1991/1992 another way to guide people into the integral community - which is (i admit) playful available on http://www.globalgeniusvoter.com and is opened up by blogsites as this one, being in dialogue with you (2).
Another one is http://pre-paring-people.blogspot.com/ , which is more on the meta-level of decision making - exploring the power and forces and universal mechanisms.
In short, i say the =one-man-one-vote= code within our voting system is THE MASKarade . Clearify this option to the new perspective: Everyone is equal in a lifetime at the opportunity level that says - you have the choice by leaving all that was behind, not planning for the secure future for yourself but instead go for the community option that a real community alive and integral is the personal and common exercise educating and granting the human as global citizen.
(oops)
so that brings the meta-schedule within those MAYA temples and this Xylophone :: the ultimate offer for the elder and wiser : grow and flow to the votee stand in this new paradigm: he has not votes or points in the election procedure itself for s/he is available doing the governance job - serving the mass, the community. That brings each human in the field of all themes all around integrated (finally).
anyhow, thanks for reading and being with me in that what is meant as dialogue contribution.
;-)
Sorry for the typo.
Of course I meant RD.
Post a Comment