------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Machine Psychology: http://www.atoma.f2s.com/atomareport.html (file #10) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 18:53:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Satinath Choudhary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [canada-votes] Re: Congratulations for Methodical Thinking! Dear Richard, Thank you very much for taking time out to write to me. > I notice that independents feature largely in your > organisation and would > like > to remind you that the Cambridge, Mass.-type voting > system is the only > one to proportionally represent Independents, as > well as party candidates. I would very much appreciate if could briefly tell me about Cambridge type voting system, or perhaps give me a reference that would tell me about the same. I think one of the main purpose of the list-serves on electoral reforms is to discuss pros and cons of different PR system. One thing that I am glad to note is that among those who seem to know even a little bit about PR, there is no doubt in their mind that PR is better than FPTP. So we no longer need to spend too much time on the need for replacing FPTP by a PR system - most people seem to agree on that. However, for the uninitiated, it would not hurt to some times delve into justification of replacing FPTP by PR. On the question of which kind of PR is the best one, it seems to me, it will be difficult to resolve. Innumerable combinations of various types are possible. Today one type may appear to be clear winner. Tomorrow another type may appear to be unbeatable. Besides, theory may say one thing, and practice may give different results. I think it would be best to convince the agencies of change to accept flexible attitude towards change. There need not be one and the same kind of PR at various levels and in various regions. Let hundreds of flowers bloom and evolve towards better and better ones. ============== > As you know, systems using list counts all > undemocratically discriminate > against any candidate standing as an individual. > And, in truth, what are we > all but individuals, who deserve respect as such, > whether we belong to a > party > or not? An individual standing by himself or herself is equivalent to a new party with its new manifesto. This independent person could allow other people to join hands with him or her and contest the election on the basis of the same manifesto. In such a case, the individual is just like a party. Now, just because this person does not allow others to contest the election on the basis of same manifesto, we can't think of it to be different from a party, and think of him or her as being discriminated against. However, one can think of variations list-PR system wherein such discriminations may be eliminated. In my next letter in a few days I would be discussing those variations. I would then appreciate comments about the same from you. ============== > With respect to your world PR rally schemes, I'm > reminded of how the > British government of the day responded to a mass > petition for PR. > The PM merely dismissed it with a comment to the > effect that the petition > amounted to no practical proposal. World PR rally would have two purpose. (1) One is to put pressure on various governments towards a PR system, no matter what kind, any kind of PR is far superior to the archaic FPTP system. Once we have some kind of PR, I think it may not be difficult from one kind to a better kind. The biggest hurdle is getting off the FPTP. (2) There are unbelievably large number of people in the countries with FPTP who do not know anything about PR. They have no idea of any other kind of voting system. I did not know anything about it until 1993. It is important to bring PR to their attention, and to get them to understand pros and so called cons of the same. A world rally for PR will bring PR to the notice of all. Once people come to know about PR, I think it would not take too long to convince them to be pro-PR. >From the point of view of applying pressure on the government to make a change, I think massive rallies have much greater impact than mass petitions. Particularly think of a "World Rally". Barring observations of "Environment Day" on world wide basis, which not many people oppose, I am not sure if a world rally has been organized to demand a substantial change in the form of governments. Even in the countries that already have PR, sympathy rallies could be organized in support of PR all over. Else they might prefer to rally for what they might consider to be a better PR than their existing one. I think a "World Rally for PR" (WRPR) would really make us realize how this world has shrunk into a small village! ============== > One of the weaknesses of the electoral reform > movement was that they could > not agree on a system. After putting off the > subject, it was finally left to > the > Jenkins Commission to come up with a system just for > general elections, > which nobody much wanted there, either. These national commissions have to be opposed, as they seem to move very conservatively. And once they do come to a decision, it seems to get written on another stone, hard to alter. Each electoral body should create its own little commissions. Some will change things better than others, some will be faster than others - there will be hundreds of flowers blooming, as I said earlier. ============== > What happens with electoral reform is that small > parties get a movement > going but PR degenerates into a squabble of whether, > and by how much, small > parties should be allowed in the elite, by > introducing a system of > oligarchic lists for small parties' proportional > representation. I dont > believe this is the way > forward, tho most of the democratic world, > so-called, is in its thrall. It is most important for a representation of as small a group as possible. By allowing such representation, I don't think stability or the balance of power changes much. However, it would allow a small movement a chance to grow up into a bigger one, once it gets a toehold on the national or local forum. ============== > Also, I'd like to recommend that the general public > should have equality of > lobbying with big business. Instead of only large > firms having agencies in > Washington to persuade Congress to do its will, an > elected economic second > chamber, a second congress of vocational > representatives would give citizens > of every employment an equal say in the budget > allocations, work conditions > and the environment etc. > Notice that the UN will have its second chamber with > the proposal of an > Economic Security Council. > I discuss the economic parliament and related issues > in web pages on both my > sites, linked below. That's a great idea! I am fully with you on this issue!! ============== > Web site address ( URL ) > for Democracy Science: > http://website.lineone.net/~richard.lung/ I highly recommend everybody to have a look at this site. It is very enlightening indeed! ============== > and for > The Poetic Art Of Dorothy Cowlin, etc: > http://home.x-stream.co.uk/~richardlung Somehow this site could not come to my computer, so I can't give an honest opinion about it. Regards, Sati ============== --- Richard Lung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Sati, > > Thanks for your letters. > I notice that independents feature largely in your > organisation and would > like > to remind you that the Cambridge, Mass.-type voting > system is the only > one to proportionally represent Independents, as > well as party candidates. > As you know, systems using list counts all > undemocratically discriminate > against any candidate standing as an individual. > And, in truth, what are we > all but individuals, who deserve respect as such, > whether we belong to a > party > or not? > > With respect to your world PR rally schemes, I'm > reminded of how the > British government of the day responded to a mass > petition for PR. > The PM merely dismissed it with a comment to the > effect that the petition > amounted to no practical proposal. > One of the weaknesses of the electoral reform > movement was that they could > not agree on a system. After putting off the > subject, it was finally left to > the > Jenkins Commission to come up with a system just for > general elections, > which nobody much wanted there, either. > > What happens with electoral reform is that small > parties get a movement > going but PR degenerates into a squabble of whether, > and by how much, small > parties should be allowed in the elite, by > introducing a system of > oligarchic lists for small parties' proportional > representation. I dont > believe this is the way > forward, tho most of the democratic world, > so-called, is in its thrall. > > Also, I'd like to recommend that the general public > should have equality of > lobbying with big business. Instead of only large > firms having agencies in > Washington to persuade Congress to do its will, an > elected economic second > chamber, a second congress of vocational > representatives would give citizens > of every employment an equal say in the budget > allocations, work conditions > and the environment etc. > Notice that the UN will have its second chamber with > the proposal of an > Economic Security Council. > I discuss the economic parliament and related issues > in web pages on both my > sites, linked below. > > Web site address ( URL ) > for Democracy Science: > http://website.lineone.net/~richard.lung/ > and for > The Poetic Art Of Dorothy Cowlin, etc: > http://home.x-stream.co.uk/~richardlung > > Yours sincerely, > Richard Lung. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Satinath Choudhary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Richard Lung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 6:38 AM > Subject: Congratulations for Methodical Thinking! > > > > Dear friends, > > > > The following is the Press-relase IPPN regarding > the > > successful Conference at Madison, WI. They are all > > very pro-PR. They all realize its importance for > small > > independent progressive parties. > > > > I am glad to inform you that I won a seat in its > > steering committee. Congratulations!!! :-) > > > > Sati > > > > > > To: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > From: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Block address > > Subject: > > Successful National Conference in > > Madison, Wi. > > Date: > > Mon, 05 Jun 2000 09:46:20 -0700 > > Reply-to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Organization: > > IPPN > > > > > > Add Addresses > > > > > > > > > > For Immediate Release: June 5, 2000 > > > > For more information: Ted Glick, 973-338-5398 > > > > > > National Independent Politics Summit Concludes > After > > Bringing > > Together > > > > Broad Cross-Section of Third Party and Other > Activists > > June 1-4, > > 2000 > > > > 135 organizers from over 100 organizations > and > > from 25 states, > > the > > District of Columbia, the province of Ontario and > the > > country of > > Nepal > > came together over the weekend of June 1-4 at the > > University of > > Wisconsin in Madison to discuss the prospects for > > advancing the > > progressive third party cause in the United > States. > > Conducted > > over the > > course of four days of workshops, panels, > concerts, > > business > > sessions > > and informal meetings, the Summit was a visible > sign > > that the > > independent political movement in the year 2000 is > > alive, > > active, > > growing, and interconnecting. > > > > The conference was initiated and organized > by > > the Independent > > Progressive Politics Network, a 5-year-old > > organization that has > > held > > previous Summits in Pittsburgh, Pa., Atlanta, Ga., > > Decatur, Il. > > and > > Oakland, Ca. > > > > Among those who addressed the conference > > participants were > > Winona > > LaDuke, David McReynolds, Muriel Tillinghast, > Njoki > > Njoroge > > Njehu, > > Dennis Brutus, Frank Rosen, Jim Powell, Molly > McGrath > > and > > Lawrence > > Goodwyn. Also present to contribute musically, as > well > > as > > politically, > > were Holly Near, Baldemar Velasquez, Matt Jones > and > > David > > Rovics. > > > > A number of conference participants > commented > > positively about > > the > > singing that was integrated into the conference > > deliberations > > from > > beginning to end, quite literally. > > > > Workshops were conducted in 15 areas, > > including the > > Corporatization of > > Education, Developing a Popular Agricultural > Agenda, > > Democrat/Republican > > Conventions and Summer Protests, Running a > Successful > > Electoral > > Campaign, Proportional Representation, > > Race/Gender/Sexuality/Class, and > > Police Brutality and Civilian Review Boards. There > > were also > > youth, > > people of color, women's and queer caucuses and > > parallel > > workshops on > > ageism, racism, sexism and heterosexism. > > > > The assembled delegates agreed to support > the > > upcoming Peoples > > Convention August 11-13 in Los Angeles, Ca. just > > before the > > Democratic > > Convention. It also established a task force to > begin > > outreach > > and > > planning for a "stand-alone" peoples convention in > > 2001. Several > > revisions were made to IPPN's Unity Principles and > the > > Common > > Platform > > of its National Slate of Independent Progressive > > Candidates. 140 > > independent candidates for office have signed onto > > this slate > > since > > 1996. > > > > A new set of bylaws for the organization > was > > discussed and > > adopted by > > consensus, and a new National Steering Committee > was > > elected. > > > > Ted Glick, IPPN National Coordinator, said > > afterwards that, > > "The > > success of IPPN's Fifth National Independent > Politics > > Summit is > > another > > indication that positive things are happening with > the > > > > progressive > > movement in this first year of the new century. We > are > > taking > > action in > > the streets and on the campuses, stepping up > > organizing drives > > in the > > workplaces, and increasingly, and more visibly, > > entering the > > electoral > > arena as independents. We are also learning how to > > communicate, > > how to > > talk with each other, how to respect our > differences > > while also > > searching for common ground and unity. The Madison > > conference > > was a > > hopeful development; now it's time to keep up and > > intensify our > > work for > > racial, economic, environmental, gender and global > > justice." > > > > -30- > > [This message sent using the IPPN Summit 2000 > > listserv] > > > ___________________________________________________________ > > T O P I C A The Email You Want. > > http://www.topica.com/t/16 > > Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite > Topics > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! > > http://photos.yahoo.com > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Law Enforcement Professionals: SAVE ON LONG DISTANCE TODAY!!! http://click.egroups.com/1/4170/4/_/36376/_/960774798/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html <A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
