[EM] (2): UK 'post mortem', 2nd discussion between Steve and Fred Gohlke

[Alexander Praetorius]

Help people to become self employed (sole proprietors or owners of 1-person
limited liability company)
Thats where democracy starts.

What are we mumbeling about democracy when 40+ hours every week - people go
to work and do what they are told to do.
They have to start co-deciding with the people they meet every day and
about the way they want to do business.

A "Ltd." can be founded and maintained these days for as cheap as 30 GBP a
month flat price... this is something everyone can afford and it can be
managed online.
At the click of a button, people could "invite" others to collaborate (thus
join their business) ... Everyone can have a personal "HOLDING Ltd." which
ones 0+ other Ltd. for all the entrepreneurial projects they are engaging
in. This kind of culture has to happen and.... THE TIME IS NOW :-) The
"self employed sector" is growing like never before - and if you already
have to create:
"Model Article Of Association" (which can be enforced by an APP), then this
is how people can start to practice democracy in every day life.

Only if they do that, they will discover and want more influence in all
kinds of aspects of their lives.... if they do not make that step, they
will stay wage slaves forever...



On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Fred Gohlke <fredgohlke at verizon.net> wrote:

> Good Morning, Steve
>
> This will be a slow process.  Empowering the people is not a trivial
> issue.  It has many facets.
>
>
> re: I see each person's somewhat different 'internal
>     proportionality' as what would guide each citizen
>     as how to participate or not ...
>
> I agree, particularly with regard to "each citizen".  A democratic process
> is (or, rather, should be) bottom-up.  It must be inclusive but it cannot
> be coercive.  Each of us must be allowed to participate in the political
> process to the full extent of our desire and ability.  In the U. S., the
> people have been excluded from the political process for so long that many
> of them have been schooled in the art of disinterest. Such people will not
> trust an inclusive process until they have seen it work.
>
> When we devise an inclusive democratic process, some people will
> participate, others will learn to participate, and some will never
> participate.  From the point of view of the community, those who will not
> participate in its government add no value to the political process.
> However, all the rest do, so the first step in devising an inclusive
> process must be to distinguish between the two types of citizens.  It has
> been shown, by Archon Fung of Harvard and many others, that, when people
> who want to participate in the political process, deliberate on the issues
> that concern the community, their efforts can be productive.
>
>
> re: ... in electing a rep, e.g. to choose which candidate(s)
>     to rank.
>
> This raises the most important question in politics:  Who names the
> candidates?  I see you mentioned this issue, as follows:
>
>
> re: During APR's primary election you would rank (1,2,3, etc.)
>     all the voluntary, social organizations that had applied
>     directly to elect their own rep(s) during the next general
>     election, i.e applied to the central electoral commission to
>     become and official electoral 'association' ... You would
>     rank these according to the degree to which each organization
>     seemed to mirror your own.
>
> How would I know, with any degree of certainty, the aims of the
> organizations?  Is AARP an organization to help retired people or a
> marketing enterprise?  Is it reasonable to think the lay citizen will do
> the exhaustive research necessary to rank the multitude of organizations
> seeking to increase their power and influence by placing an advocate in the
> government?
>
> You mentioned sending me a more complete explanation of APR.  I'd like to
> see the explanation of the groundwork.  I don't think it's difficult to
> arrange for the people to decide who they want to represent them in their
> government and I'm anxious to see your approach.  I may offer a
> counter-suggestion as a step in the slow process of re-thinking our
> political infrastructure.
>
> Oh, yes.  I'd better mention that I don't have the latest computer
> doo-dads.  I do all my work in a DOS environment and copy it to Windows
> 2000 when I go on the internet.  There are some 'flash' things that don't
> work on my computer.
>
> Am I old-fashioned?  Yup.  I'm 86.  I work in text, learning new
> whizz-bangs doesn't appeal to me.
>
> Fred Gohlke
> ----
> 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 <alexander.praetorius at serapath.de>
*[web] *http://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Benutzer:Serapath
***********************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20150626/a775b7a1/attachment.htm>