Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.13 $; site uiucdcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!liberte
From: liberte@uiucdcs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Participative Democracy - (nf)
Message-ID: <29200138@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-May-84 16:57:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.29200138
Posted: Thu May 10 16:57:00 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 18-May-84 00:42:11 EDT
References: <326@teldata.UUCP>
Lines: 88
Nf-ID: #R:teldata:-32600:uiucdcs:29200138:000:4558
Nf-From: uiucdcs!liberte    May 10 15:57:00 1984

#R:teldata:-32600:uiucdcs:29200138:000:4558
uiucdcs!liberte    May 10 15:57:00 1984

Since I started it ...
A few more things on the applicability of participative democracy in
response to the responses.

/**** uiucdcs:net.politics / teldata!tac /  6:32 pm  May  1, 1984 ****/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
... 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.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I agree that in order for participative democracy to work, all people
should be informed on the issues.  But for our representative
republic (as several people have corrected), it is also best if all people
are informed on the issues so that they may choose the best people
to represent them.  Granted, the people need not know as much, but
then they are putting their trust in their representatives.  (But if
they do know as much, then why have representatives?)  The trust has
been abused, and the system has degenerated to perpetuate the abuse.
The question is why and how can we fix it?

My previous notes expressed what I feel would be the ideal, of having
an informed populace making policy decisions in a participative democracy.
I did NOT say that PD should or could be applied to the US today.  In fact,
I DO now say that PD should not and could not be applied to the US today.
Sorry to disappoint anyone who feels I am betraying the cause.

So how to get to the ideal?  It is possible, and I believe preferrable
to have a working PD.  The trick is to get past a certain threshold,
a critical mass of informed populace that will propel the rest of
us less informed toward the goal of everyone being informed.  Why not
have everyone informed?  How can that be a detriment to society?
I am not suggesting that everyone must know everything about everything.
Only enough about general policy matters to make informed decisions.

One route to this ideal is from the grassroots up.  Within your
neighborhood, where people are concerned about what happens there,
have meetings, discussions and usually consensus decisions.  Build
upon this involvement to the town level or city level until there is
a sense of community, of people acting together rather than being
acted on by "those guys".  I have experienced this to a small degree
in Duluth, Minnesota where a long standing controversy got a large
portion of the city involved and learning about the issue.  However, there
was not nearly enough learning and I feel the wrong decision was made.
Besides that, the state seems to be deciding for the city anyway.

This kind of local participation must go on across the country (and the
world for that matter) before higher levels of participation will work.
Another factor that must come in is an incredible amount of communication.
The issues must be discussed to a disgusting death.  That is, all the
different perspectives and possible alternatives must be laid out and
carefully beat to a pulp until understanding presents itself.  This is
how consensus is arrived at.  If a time-pressured decision must be made,
at least the better choice can be made by an informed populace.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I agree that government or the laws enacted should not be easy to change
in any fliterous way.  In fact, participative democracy ought to be
more difficult and time consuming.  But at the same time, PD can make
more radical changes as they are needed because there arent several
levels of lethargy to slow it down.

Finally, our representative republic form of government is (or was)
quite good for what ailed us then and now.  It has been, for the
most part, fair and protective of our rights.  It has been a part
of the tremendous growth of our country, though there are a lot of
negative aspects to that.  So I was wrong to criticize the US without
giving credit where it is due.  But dont be blinded by its virtues
to avoid seeing its faults.


Daniel LaLiberte,  U of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Computer Science
{moderation in all things - including moderation}