Previous  1  2

[QUOTE BY= Calumny] I'm not entirely sure what you mean in this regard.<br /> <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> DD will have to contend with the problem that the political system has been controlled by lawyers, and the laws that they write (or provide judges for) for a very long time. The forces of resistance that these elements represent is actually quite a good reason for apathy. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/rolleyes.gif' alt='Rolling Eyes'><br /> <br /> I know that First Nations people have been extremely frustrated by this legal system that caters for the rich, or whoever can buy the law, the laywers, the judges and the politicians... This group is not going to be receptive to modify the system they control.

   

[QUOTE]Are there other countries with a political system sumilar to ours (e.g. Australia, New Zealand, Ireland) that have done greater progress on DD? Somehow I think that Canada has these problems that do not make DD an obvious solution.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Not sure myself. Haven't yet come across anything that would answer your question. Maybe Marcarc has.<br /> <br /> <br /> [QUOTE]Perhaps it is fair to state that the Swiss model does not apply much here. I will however note that their country operates in more than one language although the mindset is european.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I think the Swiss model demonstrates that DD can work if the will to make it work is there. <br /> <br /> My opinion is that we want DD models that correspond to Canada's particular circumstances and needs. We can look to the experiences of others to allow us to use what is best and avoid what is undesirable however, in the end I believe we'd have the above-mentioned 'made in Canada' DD rather than attempting to base Canadian DD on a model utilized elsewhere. <br /> <br /> [QUOTE]DD will have to contend with the problem that the political system has been controlled by lawyers, and the laws that they write (or provide judges for) for a very long time. The forces of resistance that these elements represent is actually quite a good reason for apathy. <br /> <br /> I know that First Nations people have been extremely frustrated by this legal system that caters for the rich, or whoever can buy the law, the laywers, the judges and the politicians... This group is not going to be receptive to modify the system they control.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I agree.<br /> <br /> However, being forced to deal with the status quo and taking charge of the status quo are somewhat different.<br /> <br /> DD will remove power and privilege from some who have become accustomed to, or believe they have a right to, the same in terms of deciding the course of the community. province, nation, etc. and can be expected to upset a few other applecarts. So, anticipating resistance from these areas is quite reasonable.<br /> <br /> However, the biggest 'enemy' DD faces is in fact the citizens themselves, who in the end are the ones who must decide whether they really want democracy and are willing to take on the responsibilities of the same or prefer to remain in what may seem to many a comfortable, if deteriorating, status quo.<br /> <br /> I'm going to revamp the DDC site when the new e107 version is available, then start publicizing it off-line in whatever way I can. We need to reach the 'silent majority' who may have little interest in political forum type sites.<br /> <br /> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

   

It depends on whether you are looking simply at direct democracy tools or just democratic progress. In the world today only India, Canada, Great Britain, France, and the US use the 'first past the post' voting system. Ironically, the new nations of the soviet bloc which were formerly communist are now already further progressed democratically than our country, over a hundred years old-there's a good documentary idea right there! So whenever you hear somebody, or some media claim about Canada's 'expertise' in democracy being exported elsewhere to the world feel free to laugh. Elections canada is a well subsidized bureaucracy which sometimes does consulting work on the mechanics of elections, but by world standards in democracy Canada is at the bottom of the democratic heap (above tyrants obviously).<br /> <br /> Virtually every other democratic country uses some variant of proportional representation, including former british colonies New Zealand, Australia and Ireland. Some of those countries have had more referenda than Canada, that typically simply depends on the government in power. No other country in the world has Switzerland's system of citizen initiated referenda that I"m aware of (at the federal level). <br /> <br /> To me, the 'made in canada' solution, democratically speaking, means we'd do it lousy. Democracy is democracy, as stated above, it depends very heavily on whether people even WANT democracy. The swiss are not from Mars, democracy is not some alien concept that can only thrive under certain conditions. You WILL find groups in virtually every country who is pushing direct democracy, and they are good sources to keep in touch with. Canadians are notoriously blind to these issues, which makes claims of american propaganda seem hypocritical. I'm glad I found Babel fish, because most swiss websites are not in english. <br /> <br />

   

[QUOTE BY= Calumny] I'm going to revamp the DDC site when the new e107 version is available, then start publicizing it off-line in whatever way I can. We need to reach the 'silent majority' who may have little interest in political forum type sites.<br /> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'> [/QUOTE]<br /> In regards to the e107 (or geeklog) upgrade I am not sure if blogging on current events could be used to reach the "silent majority". Making it entertaining (aka satire) would likely be most useful.

   

[QUOTE] To me, the 'made in canada' solution, democratically speaking, means we'd do it lousy. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Perhaps.<br /> <br /> My meaning here was that we don't necessarily need to employ DD tools in the exact manner that other nations or states have chosen. <br /> <br /> It could well be that the 'ideal' use of these tools has been created elsewhere and it would simply be a matter of using the template in Canada. However, then again, it may not.<br /> <br /> We have yet to flesh out any basic framework of how DD might work at the provincial and federal levels. While this may be seen as getting ahead of ourselves, I personally don't believe that to be the case. <br /> <br /> [QUOTE]In regards to the e107 (or geeklog) upgrade I am not sure if blogging on current events could be used to reach the "silent majority". [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I agree. <br /> <br /> Most that are initially likely to have any interest in DD will likely already have some dissatisfaction with the current state of our 'democracy' and an idea of where to their mind the problem lies. So, providing example after example of the 'problem' is pointless. After having acknowledged the existance of a problem, most people don't need to be told over and over again that there is a problem. <br /> <br /> I'm mulling over various approaches and will be happy to receive any input anyone cares to provide.

   

The FHQs (or democracy within a Canadian Heritage "protected" minority) was an interesting application of DD but is an ***extremely*** difficult one to start with. The best demo cases are likely NGO related. Environmental watch groups were the first one to show that citizens can develop some DD muscle and have success and fun at doing it. There are likely many other areas where the governments have failed with similarly dramatic results. <br /> <br /> Focusing a new NGO initiative with DD methods is likely the best way to build DD from the grassroot IMHO. The area of health looks like it is full of potential (and conflicts of interest by pharmaceutical big business). Education is an other interesting area with the conflicts of interests being the media big business (&even the CRTC).

   

I understand what you're saying.<br /> <br /> However, I tend to think that many of the issues discussed here are symptoms of an overall problem, which to my mind is our current form of representative government.<br /> <br /> The majority of the issues we discuss are examples of government abdicating its responsibility in respect of the nation and many or most of its citizens or acting in a manner that ignores the needs of some or most of those citizens. <br /> <br /> The is no guarantee of achieving any last satisfactory solution to any of these issues until such time as the promary cause is addressed. Sure, a victory may be won here and there however, preserving these victories is a difficult kettle of fish. We need only look at the state of the social safety net many fought so long to achieve to see how ephemeral these victories can be. <br /> <br /> I would prefer to focus my efforts on what I consider the root cause, rather than fragmenting the efforts in attempting to deal with some or all of the effects. I'm not criticizing those who make other choices, just saying these aren't for me.<br /> <br /> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

   

Previous  1  2