I have not had time lately to follow this thread but I was able to read
this post this morning and wonder if anyone has mentioned Plato's Republic
in the course of this discussion.
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Eva Durant wrote:
> (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
> > >_________________________________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
Selma
"Gratitude is Heaven"
William Blake
