>
> Yes, I agree with your premise that "The present system is farcical" but the
> power that has been given to those with economic clout has been so effective
> in stifling change, on has to conclude that it will take some major
> catastrophe to change the existing order. Lobbying, protesting, legal
> challenges do make change, but they are glacial in terms of time and while
> the new changes often correct an imbalance or injustice, by solving one, it
> often seems like three more are created.
>
If the regimes of the Shah, of the USSR etc, etc, could
collapse in a matter of months or even days, inspite
the total control over media and the police/military,
than I don't think the situation is so hopeless.
The important point is to have some idea of
what to strive for - though I wonder if the next step
could be fairly automatic now towards that well-informed
democracy and collective power. To be on the safe side,
the only useful thing to do is to inform as many people
as possible.
> The basic assumption that "the people" have some inate wisdom that can be
> expressed in vote in which 50 plus one is the deciding factor seems to me,
> not to be sustainable in the light of history.
There is no such basic assumption. If the information is false
or not sufficient, there is no chance of making the "right choice"
consciously. However, if everyone is participate independently
in the thinking process, there is a chance that the interests of
most people will be considered.
> I might argue that
> leadership should not be the result of popularity, but training. We do not
> select generals or captains of industry on their popularity but because of a
> thousand instances of demstrated capability within a chosen arena. That
> some of these leaders still turn out to be bozzo's negates the truth that
> most are fairly competent.
>
I think we do not need to separate to "leaders" and "lead".
Those elected to do something should be "managed" by the electorate,
the electorate will execute the "leader's" decisions as being part of their
own decision. This is the new concept of identifying with the leaders
and the lead in the same time, breaking the "them" and "us" stuff.
Besides, we will take part in decisionmaking in so many various
forums and capacities, that there will be few chance of not being a
"leader" on some. So this demarcation will hopefully disappear.
...
> Once chosen, the leader was given the powers associated with the solution of
> the presenting problem. In my mind, this model has just a much a chance of
> providing superior choices than the political party model of representative
> democracy or the pure citizen vote model of direct democracy. Both create
> leaders seeking power, while the other creates leaders accepting power to
> perform their duties.
>
this is more or less what I mean
> The Age of Enlightment has brought to ridiculous heights, the power of the
> intellect while reducing the power of character which often arises out of
> feelings, honour, respect and overall character. The book Brad recommended
> several months ago, Cosmology identified the change from a society of that
> allowed the differences of individuals to flourish to one in which
> rationality degreed there is a right and wrong way. We moved in my opinion
> from an analog society to a digital society, but natures way, the animals
> way is analog, it is only man who sees right and wrong - the digital
> decision. Our current mess is the result of a million - million right
> decisions. Perhaps a few more decisions that could not be justified by
> rationality and were made from character might have given us a much
> different world.
>
ramble... strawmen stuff. Just because we strive for rational
decisionmaking, that doesn't mean that individuality should somehow
suffer; and decisions do not have to be "digital" always.
Eva
> Respectfully,
>
> Thomas Lunde
> >Eva
> >
> >
> >
> >> Respectfully,
> >>
> >> Thomas Lunde
> >> -
> >>
> >> So what's wrong with going the whole hog to have
> >> a proper direct democracy
> >>
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
