[EM] Real Democracy

Sat Jul 18 20:09:04 PDT 2015

Alexander,

I do not know if you would find it real democracy, but SPPA is what I 
have to offer best...
http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/9/9/3/9/p199397_index.html
http://votebook.ca/pdf/SPPAforMPSA13042007.pdf

Dr Rouillon.

Le 2015-07-18 16:41, Alexander Praetorius a écrit :
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 3:18 AM, Gervase Lam <gervase at madasafish.com 
> <mailto:gervase at madasafish.com>> wrote:
>
>     Alex,
>
>     I've been loosely following this thread and had a few questions. 
>     As one
>     thing that Fred mentions near the start of his reply below relates to
>     one of my questions, I thought I would ask:-
>
>     (1) Do you expect individuals like those who are both deaf and blind,
>     itinerant gypsies, prisoners, those with dementia or other mental
>     disability, or a family member who is caring 24 hours a day for a
>     relative with such illnesses, to set up as their own business so that
>     they are self employed, which would enable them to have their say?
>
>
> "REAL DEMOCRACY"
> => Has people who do stuff (SELLING Products/Services)
> => Has people who decide what people should do (BUYING Products/Services)
> If you want to empower people who cannot get elected by earning an 
> income through SELLING, then give them votes for free (e.g. 
> unconditional basic income or something else)
>
> The lines above i mention not as a "perfect suggestion", but as one 
> example of how to discuss problems in the currently existing "REAL 
> DEMOCRACY" and how we could brainstorm about how to solve them - 
> instead of staying in "FAIRYTALE DEMOCRACY" and brainstorming about 
> nonsense that barely affects reality anyway.
>
>
>     (2) From what I can tell, a large proportion of China consists of
>     small
>     personal businesses, a good example being sole market sellers.  Is
>     this
>     a better start for a democracy than what several European countries
>     have, who are more dependent on big businesses?
>
>
> I don't know. Maybe.
> "Real Democracy" is complex and nothing is black and white here.
> I have too little information to say if it's better or not or if it's 
> better in certain aspects but worse in others...
>
>
>     (3) Every business in the UK needs an external accountant to audit the
>     business.  Each business must pay for such a compulsory "service".  Do
>     you expect each self employed individual, whose main aim is to have a
>     voice in society, to pay for such a "service"?
>
>
> I have opened a UK Ltd. company myself and currently pay for an 
> accountant.
> It is ok to do the work yourself and the government website guides you 
> through the process.
> If you are a very small business, rules are a lot simpler and the 
> audit is not required.
> Once you grow large/successful enough for an audit, you are able to 
> pay for it.
> => IN GENERAL: If people would wake up and start thinking about the 
> rules that govern "REAL DEMOCRACY" (as opposed to "FAIRYTALE 
> DEMOCRACY"), we could brainstorm how to simplify bureaucracy and make 
> it more affordable for people to become self employed and to grow a 
> healthy ecosystem...
>
>
>
>     Thanks,
>     Gervase.
>
>     On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 14:40 -0400, Fred Gohlke wrote:
>     > Good Afternoon, Alexander
>     >
>     > We know our views differ.  These comments are a different way of
>     looking
>     > at some of the topics you raised.
>     >
>     > To the best of my knowledge, in the so-called 'democracies' that
>     > presently exist, votes are cast by human individuals.  I know of no
>     > instance where votes are cast by money.  We know that money can
>     be used
>     > to buy votes but that does not move us closer to democracy than
>     we are
>     > at present.  Quite the reverse.
>     >
>     > Using money to buy hula hoops is certainly one way of voting
>     with money,
>     > but it has drawbacks.  For one, it tends to lead to 'conspicuous
>     > consumption' by those who exploit the system better than their
>     peers.
>     > For another, it is not available to those who need their
>     resources to
>     > feed their families; those who "work for cheap under horrible
>     conditions".
>     >
>     > You say, "The FAKE BULLSHIT (you describe) has to disolve.", but you
>     > don't explain its failings.  I've seen many such assertions, but
>     never
>     > one that provided an explanation of what is wrong with the
>     system or why
>     > it failed.  Without knowing and understanding why it failed, it is
>     > impossible to improve upon it.
>     >
>     > Existing pseudo-democratic political systems fail because they
>     treat the
>     > people like children whose Mommy gives them a choice between
>     Corn Flakes
>     > or Wheaties for breakfast.  Political parties, acting like
>     Mommies, tell
>     > the people what political choices they can make.
>     >
>     > Over the past one hundred years, the explosion of mass
>     communications
>     > and the application of behavioral science have given party
>     politics a
>     > stranglehold on the people.  They have robbed the people of
>     their right
>     > to govern themselves.  Instead, as many have known for years and
>     > researchers at Princeton and Northwestern are starting to learn,
>     even
>     > America has turned into an oligarchy.
>     >
>     >
>     http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/21/americas-oligarchy-not-democracy-or-republic-unive/#ixzz3ftXIhT7n
>     >
>     > The oligarchs who control the psuedo-democracies maintain their
>     power by
>     > the most basic rule of success:  Divide and Conquer.  In the United
>     > States, they use two political parties to divide the people and
>     control
>     > the government.  Other countries claim to be 'more democratic'
>     because
>     > they introduce more parties.  They're not.
>     >
>     > Political parties are divisive by definition. They do not seek
>     to serve
>     > the common interest; they seek to assert the interests of a
>     select few.
>     >   They do not improve democracy, they empower a relatively radical
>     > portion of the electorate at the expense of the common interest.
>     >
>     > Any system that lets small groups of people decide who can be a
>     > candidate for public office and raise immense amounts of money
>     to peddle
>     > their candidate to the public is flawed.  The only product the
>     parties
>     > have have to sell is the laws their candidates enact and that
>     creates a
>     > conflict of interest that has tragic consequences for the people.
>     >
>     > It need not be so.  There is no shortage of people among us with
>     the wit
>     > and wisdom to resolve adversarial issues in the public
>     interest.  What
>     > we lack is a means of identifying them and raising them to
>     leadership
>     > positions.
>     >
>     > It is unfortunate that the many bright and thoughtful people who
>     post on
>     > this site do not think it worthwhile to help the Frome Town
>     Council find
>     > a way for every member of the community to help decide which of
>     their
>     > peers are the most attuned to the needs of the community and
>     have the
>     > qualities required to advocate the common good.
>     >
>     > Fred Gohlke
>     > ----
>     > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for
>     list info
>
>
>     ----
>     Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for
>     list info
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> /*DISCLAIMER:*/
> /Everything I have written above is my personal experience/opinion on 
> things, no matter what kinds of words i did use
> (e.g. "always", "never", "impossible", "waste of time", ....).
> /
> /Such extreme words only do indicate, that my experience/opinion on 
> something is very strong and i currently cannot imagine that there are 
> other possibilities until new arguments/insights/whatever open my eyes 
> that there are alternative perspectives too :-)
> *Please do not feel discouraged to challenge my opinion if you have a 
> different one.*/
> /
> /
> *Best Regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen*
> ***********************************************
> Alexander Praetorius
> Bornemannstrasse 17
> D - 60599 Frankfurt am Main
> Germany
> Germany
> *[skype] *alexander.praetorius
> *[mail] *citizen at serapath.de <mailto:alexander.praetorius at serapath.de>
> *[web] *http://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Benutzer:Serapath
> ***********************************************
>
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20150718/a7036da1/attachment.htm>