Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site teldata.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!tac From: tac@teldata.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Participative Democracy Message-ID: <326@teldata.UUCP> Date: Mon, 30-Apr-84 19:18:29 EDT Article-I.D.: teldata.326 Posted: Mon Apr 30 19:18:29 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 1-May-84 19:11:27 EDT References: <712@pyuxa.UUCP>, <29200135@uiucdcs.UUCP> Organization: Teltone Corp., Kirkland, WA Lines: 107 , (sop to the blank line eaters--consider it a religious sacrifice) >> From: liberte@uiucdcs.UUCP >> >> To clarify my position, there is an important difference between >> what is called participative democracy and representative democracy. >> We have a representative democracy in which we elect representatives >> to make decisions for us. The only decisions we make are who to >> support for election. In participative democracy, the people are >> much more directly involved in policy decision making because people >> vote on the issues, not the candidates. Various combinations of >> the two are possible. Occasionally, the people are given the >> opportunity to vote on an issue, but it is usually non-binding. The ideas presented in your view are not new to discussions of how the government in this nation should be run. They were discussed and discarded in the 1770's and 80's for very good reasons. Participative Democracy *REQUIRES* all people to be constantly and completely informed on all facets of not just government, but law and history as well, so as not to perform some act without legal basis or which will lead to large trans- gressions in the power usage by the government. They (the framers of our Constitution) that not all people had this interest or would be willing to make the commitment. The percentage of Americans who register to vote prove them right. Mob rule is what you are advocating, and it works fine when everyone knows everyone and they all have the same interests at heart. The diversity of population densities, climates, geologies and weather paterns which encompass this nation have precluded this. What grows down south will not grow up north, neither are there as many people per square mile in Oregon as there are in Maine. These areas are so different that the people of one should not be making rules for the people of the others to live by. [Incidentally, a good case could be made that the Soviet Union is a Participative Democracy. All of the people get to vote on not only the Politbureau (SP?) members, but on many important issues--of course the ballet just has one box, no yes or no, nor a choice of candidates, but they do get to check that box.] Government should not be done by what is most popular (although our's is more like that than not at this time), but by what is *RIGHT*! The representative government that we were given was based on the idea that while not everyone would know everything, they could at least find a person who's opinion they respected enough to accept in most matters. The framers also felt that no one could be asked to know about all of the officials who would run for an office, and thus proposed the electoral college (who's original purpose has been bastardized in order to make a popular election of the races). Again, history has proved them right by showing an unusual number of politicians about whom some ugly information comes to light AFTER election. The representative system is also based on the idea of government at the lowest level. There is no reason this side of H**L why my tax money should leave Washington State and go to Florida while their tax money leaves Florida and goes to California who's money goes to West Virginia who's money......ad nauseum until the collection and distribution network soaks up most of the money along the way and is so full of bypasses for special interest groups that none gets back anymore. The Constitution does not give this power to the US government, and the crime is that we let them get away with it. A carefull study of Article 1. of the US Constitution is in order. {Anybody out there got a copy of the entire document with ammendments in electronic copy?} I propose that we discuss it article by article and phrase by phrase before scrapping it in favor of some pie-in-the-sky ideas. (How many of you can tell me about the "nine Tyrants of Athens"? That particular piece of history is one of the reasons that we only have ONE president.) >> >> The form of government makes a great deal of difference in how >> easy it is to effect change. Change is possible with most any >> governmental structure. The question is, which structures will >> facillitate beneficial change? Seems to me that what has happened >> in this country is that people have become disillusioned with a >> system in which their primary input to the government is to vote >> for or against someone they saw in a TV commercial. The process >> has become self defeating. >> Now, at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, I will jump right up and say that I don't think that our means, method, form or laws of government should be easy to change. The original form was quite good for what ailed us then (which are the same things ailing us now). If enough of us get tired of voting for the major partys' rubber stamps maybe we can elect some of the off the wall candidates and they will start giving us a choice. >> The reason participatory democracy is an attractive idea is that >> becoming involved with making policy decisions is very addicting. >> The more you learn, the more you want to learn more. Positive. >> >> Daniel LaLiberte, U of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Computer Science >> {moderation in all things - including moderation} >> Just hypothetically, how well educated in their choices do you suppose the poor who only have time to work hard for a living are going to become? I see the result of your proposal as being close to the situation now as far as they are concerned--vote for the best television commercial on the topic. It is always nice to assume that the intelligensia will be the ones making the decisions, but it doesn't ever seem to be that way in the real world. From the Soapbox of Tom Condon {...!uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!tac} A Radical A Day Keeps The Government At Bay. P.S. For those who have asked, in all of my diatribes "we" refers to the people of the United States throughout our history, "they" refers to all of the government bureaucrats and legislators (and some judges) that have participated in our government to get it where it is today, and "you" refers to whomever I am replying to (in this case Daniel LaLiberte).