Jim D:
The closest we have to a solution is for groups to think
democratically, which does not just mean majority rule (rather than
have some elite like the Cheney gang dictating thinking) but in
addition involves being open to a lot of different perspectives.

^^^^^^^
CB: Yes, however , there is are fundamental contradictions
in the ideal of democracy. On many issues, _in the end_,
after all the different thoughts have been had and expressed,
only one action can be taken. Or certainly as many
different actions can't be taken as the number of different
perspectives that people might have. Taking one of the examples
Jim gives, either the US invaded Iraq or it didn't. Can't both
invade and not invade Iraq at the same time ( and dialectics
won't help us on that one; smile)

This is why "democratic centralism" is actually the only
reality democracy can take, despite notions that
this concept of Lenin's is anti-democratic.  Many issues
require unity, in some sense, of the group's action, 
and unity of action requires unity
of thought.  Not mindless, uncritical individuals,
but thinking people who realize that much effective
action requires unity of purpose after genuine debate;
and people who trust and respect their comrades
even after disagreeing with them on an issue.

The vulgar democratic principle of majority rule exists
to deal with the reality that consensus can't always
be reached, and sometimes, action  "must" be taken.
(Although my father was fond of pointing out sometimes
the best is "don't just do somthing; sit there")
And at least majority rule is mass, rather than elite
minority , rule ( examples of elite ,minority rule being
 the Cheney gang, or all the ruling classes
of all times ).  On the other hand there can
arise tyrannies of the majority.

Such are the contradictions of democracy.

Recall that Engels and Lenin point out that
democratic rule in the state power  is still a form of the 
state.  Marx, 
Engels and Lenin do not foresee communism,
after the whithering away of the state , as
a democracy. I defer to Ted Winslow to explain
how the fully developed personalities and mutually
respecting individuals capable of communism
will always reach consensus on all important
and necessary group actions.

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to