(I think I mentioned it before BTW,
I am Hungarian, as centre-european as any.)
I don't think it is valid to link political ideas with
ethniticy.
Also, I can only picture DD as a global
phenomena, once established,
you cannot stop it, just like the internet.
Eva
> At 07:16 AM 1/29/99 +0000, Mark Measday wrote:
> >Mentioning a version of your comments to a central european-born manager,
> I was a
> >little surprised to receive the following tirade back I paraphrase 'Why would
> >Direct Democracy be a good system? Intelligent people know from experience
> that
> >most other people are idiots. Therefore most decisions will be made by
> idiots for
> >idiots with idiots,. Those people are idiots. They will have only
> themselves, the
> >idiots, to blame'
>
> Are all intelligent people non-idiots?
> Are most intelligent people non-idiots?
> Do some people who consider themselves intelligent have limited experience
> from which to make such harsh, polarized, one-dimensional judgements of
> their fellow-humans?
> etc
>
> I do not value your friend's opinion
> What does he know of DD?
>
> >With the visceral, if obviously intellectually inconsequential, anglosaxon
> desire
> >for fairplay, tolerance and conflict-avoidance (Chamberlain at Munich
> comes to
> >mind), I agreed pro tem, whilst mentally noting that I woudl like to ask
> whether
> >you would be happy to include such a person in your direct democracy (or
> not).
>
> by definition, he would have one vote
> I would be neither happy nor unhappy
> You may be exhibit both tolerance and conflict-avoidance -- while I strive
> for the first, I have few tendencies to the second. But then I am Celtic,
> not anglo-saxon
>
> If
> >you do, he will destroy it of course, and if you don't then of course it
> destroys
> >itself.
>
> I do not attribute to him any more power than one vote, so I cannot accept
> your view
>
> >Do you then have to destroy him to preserve your democracy? And what kind
> >of democracy is it that has to preserve itself by destroying its elitists?
>
> The whole question is hypothetical.
> But I do not believe anyone has to destroy him
> Nor do I believe that all elitists are so narrow-minded
>
> I have little experience of Central Europe, and I am not advocating DD for
> Central Europe.
> I have met several E/Central. Europeans in Canada, and I am not unfamiliar
> with the characteristics you describe.
> In Canada such people are not numerous, and have little influence in the
> circles I move in.
> The biggest obstacle in Canada would appear to come from political,
> academic, and business Elites whose worlds are bound up in money and power
> -- obstacles enough without paying undue attention to people like your friend.
>
> I sincerely believe that DD is viable in Canada, US, and UK, the three
> countries with which I am most familiar
>
> Colin Stark
>
> >Colin Stark wrote:
> >
> >> At 11:50 AM 1/26/99 -1000, Jay Hanson wrote:
> >> >----- Original Message -----
> >> >From: Edward Weick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >
> >> >>and social complexity grew. While hunting and gathering societies needed
> >> >>only transitory hierarchies, more complex societies needed permanent
> ones.
> >> >>However, there is no reason on earth why these couldn't be democratic,
> >> >>allowing a particular leadership limited powers and only a limited
> tenure.
> >> >
> >> >Democracy makes no sense. If society is seeking a leader with the best
> >> >skills, the selection should be based on merit -- testing and
> experience --
> >> >not popularity. Government by popularity contest is a stupid idea.
> >> >
> >> >Jay
> >>
> >> Democracy does not mean putting the most "popular" candidate in the job. A
> >> broad range of people (e.g. the workers in a factory) might choose a
> >> DIFFERENT leader from what the Elite would choose, but they will not be
> >> more likely to make a "stupid" choice.
> >>
> >> But beyond the "choice of a leader" is the question of the "accountability
> >> of the leader".
> >>
> >> In our N. American democratic (so-called) systems the leader is not
> >> accountable to ANYONE (i.e. is a virtual Dictator), except that once every
> >> 4 or 5 years the people (those who think it worthwhile to vote), can kick
> >> the bum out and choose another gentleperson who will be equally
> >> UNACCOUNTABLE, and who will thus, corrupted by power, become a BUM also!
> >>
> >> Hence the concept of Direct Democracy:
> >> " a SYSTEM of citizen-initiated binding referendums whereby voters can
> >> directly amend, introduce and remove policies and laws"
> >>
> >> Colin Stark
> >> Vice-President
> >> Canadians for Direct Democracy
> >> Vancouver, B.C.
> >> http://www.npsnet.com/cdd/
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Listserv)
> >
> >--
> >
> >________________________________________________________
> >
> >Josmarian SA [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >UK tel/fax: 0044.181.747.9167
> >French tel/fax:0033.450.20.94.92
> >Swiss tel/fax: 0041.22.733.01.13
> >
> >L'aiuola che ci fa tanto feroci. Divina Commedia, Paradiso, XXII, 151
> >_________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
