[EM] language/framing quibble

[Juho Laatu]

--- On Tue, 10/3/09, Fred Gohlke <fredgohlke at verizon.net> wrote:

> Good Morning, Juho
> 
> re: "(Exchange of ideas could be also weak in many
> triads.)"
> 
> I wonder why you think the point worth mentioning?  Is
> it not self-evident? 

Yes, quite self-evident. I just
noted it since I wondered at what
level in the society the
discussions yield best results
and where they will stimulate
new discussion.

> The intensity with which ideas
> are exchanged among humans varies infinitely. 
> Practical Democracy creates a setting in which ideas can be
> exchanged freely.  In very small randomly assembled
> groups, beneficial ideas take root and grow while
> prejudicial ideas invite rejection (who does not shudder at
> the thought of listening to a zealot rant?)
> 
> 
> re: "Party based campaigning has also risks. Some interest
> group
>      could e.g. finance the party
> campaign.  The party would
>      train candidates and finance
> representatives that are loyal
>      to its targets (including the
> targets of the interest
>      group). Those loyal candidates
> would benefit of the campaign
>      and would be reach good positions
> within the party and would
>      have relatively good chances of
> being elected also next
>      time."
> 
> That is the situation that obtains at present

I wanted to point out that this
might continue also in the
future even if the candidates
would not have strong campaigns.

> ... which is
> why participation in the electoral process must not be
> contingent on membership in a party. 

Yes. I guess it is quite common
to provide also other tracks.

Juho


> I repeat:
> 
>     "Partisanship is a vital part of society ....
> provided it
>      is always a voice and never a
> power.  The danger is not
>      in partisanship, it is in allowing
> partisans to control
>      government."
> 
> Fred Gohlke
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
>