Dave Ketchum wrote:
I look at this and shake my head. I am not used to parties having the
kind of control implied here - let alone evil control. But the evil
control could exist in other states.
Then I look at what has been written in our declaration. I see nothing
for:
. Who can be
The control of political parties is indirect, not direct -- just as it
is for the influence of money in politics.
The link between money and politics is well known. Who really controls
political parties is less-well known.
For details I suggest looking at my book titled Ending The Hidden
Good Afternoon, Richard
I absolutely agree - we must crawl before we can walk. However, since
we are not babies, perhaps our position is more analogous to wriggling
out of a cesspool. To do that, it's best to have an idea of where we
want to go so we don't flounder around in it longer than
Dear all,
has a direct proportional election system with proxies been considered
before?
Each voter is granted a vote in parliament, either personally or through a
proxy (as in stock companies). The voter could change his representative in
parliamet when she/he likes (or at a specific date to
¡Hello!
¿How fare you?
I do not believe in attacking the ideas of others, so I refrained from
making this post from the remainder of July and all of August. I gave others
months to develop SODA without criticism:
The problem with most traditional voting
