[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

[ba-unrev-talk] Fwd: [issues] Re: WWDemocracy Network Update

This site is http://wwdemocracy.org/
Talk about the need for an OHS!    (01)

>From: James N Rose <integrity@ceptualinstitute.com>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
>Roy Madron wrote:
> >
> > Dear James Rose
> >
> > Many thanks for signing-up to the World Wide Democracy Network. We 
> continue to
> > get a trickle of `sign-ups' via the Website, although that system is 
> still a
> > long way from being what we want it to be.
> >
> > We also had about thirty very positive email responses to our mail-out.
> >
> > We have appointed John Turnbull as the Network Associate and he will be 
> joining
> > us next month.
> >
> > We have been frustrated that the Web-site learning curve has been 
> rather steeper
> > and longer than we had envisaged. There is still a lot to do to make 
> sure that
> > we are giiving the information and inviting  further involvement as 
> simply and
> > persuasively as we need to do. So that is an continuing priority.
> >
> > Once we get the web-site in shape, we are expecting 2002 to be the year 
> in which
> > we organise the basic administrative systems we need to:
> >
> >    * build a core group of co-learners,
> >    * begin to expand the active membership of the network,
> >    * make frequent presentations to all kinds of audiences on the need 
> for and
> >      nature of the new paradigm of democracy,
> >    * start looking for serious mid- and long-term development funding,
> >    * create a programme of public events for the Network and wider 
> audiences in
> >      2003/4.
> >
> >
> >      Meantime,  one of the key `FAQs' that we need to answer is "How 
> will the
> >      World Wide Democracy Network operate? This is what we intend to 
> say on the
> >      revised Website.
> >
> > 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >      The Co-creation Process
> >
> >  It is in (this) spirit that the World Wide Democracy Network is 
> offering some
> >  preliminary ideas and concepts for the basic `operating system' on which a
> >  new paradigm of democracy could be co-created.
> >
> >  In  our long-term scenario, if the outcomes of the co-creation process 
> make
> >  sufficient sense, increasing numbers of communities - towns and cities and
> >  provinces - will install, test, refine and amplify our proposed new
> >  operating system to co-create much more genuine, just and sustainable 
> kinds
> >  of democracies.
> >
> >  Inevitably, once they have successfully got their own version of the new
> >  paradigm of democracy up and running, these communities will want to start
> >  thinking, acting and learning on national and global issues with all the
> >  other communities who have co-created new kinds of democracies.
> >
> >  And, because those communities will have co-evolved their democracies by
> >  using the same basic "operating system", the national and global systems
> >  that they co-develop stand a good chance of being increasingly just and
> >  sustainable..
> >
> >      ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >      .
> >
> > > We are immensely excited by the change strategy we are adopting and 
> hope that
> > > the co-creation process will be successful in itself and contribute 
> to the
> > > success of everyone who takes part in it.
> >
> > With Best Wishes
> >
> >
> > Roy Madron and John Jopling
> > for The World Wide Democracy Network
>May 3, 2002
>I am glad to add a voice in support of your effort.
>May I suggest that your 'reason detre' formalize around the notion:
>"Constitutional Alternatives of Democratic Ideals"
>Democracy is a theme underscored by a respect for the dignity
>and value of members when weighed against the dignity and value
>of the assembly.
>The techniques and arrangements to uphold that balance will
>differ from culture to culture, from community to community
>based on the sensibilities and priorities each holds dear,
>if not simply the history and experiences of their people.
>Mores and human relational habits will determine what
>techniques for democratic practices a population will
>or will not be comfortable with, will respect, and will
>honor as criteria ahead of any pressing biases.
>If you allow that openness - plus - seek to root it
>in practical realities of human conversation and
>expectations done in the midst of enacting democratic
>relations, not just 'talking about it', then you'll
>have a chance at being the magnet for civilization
>design you are attempting to become.
>A good starting base would be to have a handle
>on why certain forms of democractic organization
>exist .. there are many different ones .. knowing
>whet they accomplish and are effectively built to
>self monitor while they self perform.
>I mean real nuts and bolts particulars, such as
>'what a philibuster contributes to the democratic
>process, and why it's allowed as a practice in
>certain negotiations .. and must be respected, not
>reacted to with physical frustration' ; such as,
>'The USA and Britain have two methods for balancing
>votes versus popular confidence in any given elected
>regime.  In the USA, recall or replacement is an
>arduous difficult task.  Office holders must be proven
>criminal or time consuming signature collections and
>challenges made in order to be removed otherwise they
>hold term until it expires.  In Britain, simple refusal
>to participate with leadership can result in a 'no
>confidence' situation, an absolving of the government
>and an immediate new election -yet - where the beaurocracy
>is -not- dismantled, thus the populace can retain high
>confidence in the operations and competency of their
>general system of social organization even while leadership
>and policy setters change.'
>Just talking about -democratic respect for one another-
>is not a sufficient technique in my estimation.  People
>have to be brought to a deep understanding for what the
>different interpersonal mechanisms and laws of, decorum,
>operation and peformance really mean vis a vis 'democracy'.
>When they really appreciate the significance of 'why this
>versus that .. way of doing things' do they have a chance
>at molding, designing and living committed to democratic
>I wish you all good success in this effort of yours.
>It may feel good to stand on the deck and yell into the
>face of a howling rain storm and make your presence
>known in the world, but harnessing the wind or moving
>purposefully through it inspite of everything
>seems the productive route.
>Such require tangibles in the mind as well as in the hand.
>Give people tangibles in their mind and they will
>accomplish what you dream they are capable of.
>Jamie Rose    (02)

List archives available at http://www.bootstrap.org/lists/ba-unrev-talk/    (03)