tac@teldata.UUCP (06/05/84)
, (sop to the blank line eaters--consider it a religious sacrifice) >> From: jad@harpo.UUCP (jad) >> Newsgroups: net.politics,net.news.group,net.misc >> Subject: participative democracy >> >> It is extremely important to the welfare of the world that a partici- >> pative type of democratic decision-making become well practiced, refined >> and popularized. >> Suppose a cardinal issue of world-wide concern, the nuclear threat, >> were examined through a forum open to all people of all nations. In this >> forum, all varying ideas for dealing with this issue would be welcome. >> Then, after a general agreement to terminate the exchange of ideas, >> successive run-off votes would be taken until the numerous proposals >> were finally reduced to one. With the endorsement of everyone involved, >> that proposition would constitute a forceful appeal to world leaders. >> Such a movement, of itself, might engender other movements to deal >> with the nuclear threat. Moreover, it would be an experiment in direct >> democracy. >> John DiNardo >> John, Ah, disapointment. Just when I thought you were showing some high sense of reason after the last missive you sent, you come up with this! The obvious solution which will occure from such a vote would be for all nations to disband all nuclear weapons. BUT: 1) Nations low on technology seem to be high on population, therefore it benefits them to disband the superior weaponry of the technological powers (both from peaceful and aggressive points of view). With a lower technology level war their greater population to use as cannon fodder will be of immense benefit. 2) History shows us that the best way to prevent a war is to convince your potential opponents that you are READY to *WIN* that war. If you can do that they will never attack. 3) Would you trust the "votes" coming from totalitarian regimes? I sure would not. By the very same logic (you always suspect the other fellow of doing what you would do) they will not trust our votes. [By saying I would not trust them have I admitted that I would do the untrustworthy?] From the Soapbox of Tom Condon {...!uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!tac} "A Page of History is Worth a Volume of Logic", but ONLY if you READ it. DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed herein are those of everyone who matters, but not necessarily anyone you know, and most certainly not my employers!
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (06/06/84)
[] I too find John's ideal world community a bit overwhelming. How does he propose to educate the nearly 2.5 billion souls who cannot read or write enough to know what the issues are? How does everyone register their vote? Am I to assume we would have to use paper ballots? A terminal in every hut does sound a bit extreme. I would suggest that John take some time and spend a couple of weeks in a place like Bed-Sty in New York or West LA or a K-Mart parking lot and talk to people about the issues he is concerned about. Find out just how many people have the same concerns he has. Better yet, just to get an idea of how informed the populace is, find an average streetcorner ( not in a college town) and ask the burning question of 100 passers-by "Who is the Vice President of the United States." I think that John will be very much surprised at the answers he gets. As I pointed out before concerning this issue, participative Democracy is up to the individual. You can't force someone to join your parade if they are not interested. If you do, it is no longer participative, its totalitarianism. By the way John, did you vote in your local primary this spring? Are you active in your area political arena? Come back to reality John, this debate has been around for several thousand years and it always runs into the same brick wall, human indifference and ignorance. T. C. Wheeler