|
WDD Newsletter Vol.4 (No.3), September 2002
The Rights and Wrongs of Marxism (by Jiri Polak) In the previous issue, I pointed out that the Marxist doctrine has turned out to be wrong in most respects. But it could not have been completely wrong, since, during most of the 20th century, it had such an enormous impact upon the world. It was embraced not only by political fanatics and power-hungry demagogues like Lenin and Stalin, by masses of poorly educated workers, and by their union and party leaders, but also by quite a few prominent intellectuals like André Gide, Bernard Shaw or Jean-Paul Sartre. Some of them (e.g. Sartre) were succumbing to the illusion until the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. Why? Let's try to understand. Economic development Marx had predicted two trends in the development of the capitalist system. One was monopolization and centralization of capital. He foresaw a process of concentration of capitalist businesses in fewer and fewer hands, which would result in the growth of monopolies, cartels, and trusts, stifling competition and driving the working masses into poverty and enslavement. On the global scale, this is exactly what we witness at present. The second trend was the growing importance of financial capital, massive Stock Exchange and valuta speculations, to a great extent replacing activities creating real values. On this point, he was right as well. And he presaged an ultimate collapse of capitalism, as a system bearing in itself germs of its own destruction. Owing to these predictions, even some non-Marxist economists and thinkers are now showing renewed interest in Marx. In the editorial of Cornerstones (The Right Livelihood Forum, Stockholm, No. 17, May 2002), we read, "One day, if people around the world haven't overthrown it first, the capitalist market economy will simply implode. There will be no more little fish for the big fish to eat except their children (e.g., in corporate terms, their employees)." The Vision However, the most important component of Marxism was its optimistic vision, its promise of a bright future for almost everybody - except the wicked capitalists and their bourgeois lackeys. Traditional philosophy and social science were unable to offer people any such prospect. And yes, in all societies, there were (and are) oppressors and the oppressed, the rich and the poor, exploiters and exploitees. Taking sides with the latter, Marxism was bound to find much sympathy even on the part of many well-meaning intellectuals. Only, Marx committed the big mistake of attributing all the evils to the mode of ownership of the means of production. He wrongly believed that the remedy was to abolish private property and to make everything belong to all in common. His point of departure was philosophical and sociological transcendence. Obviously, this has turned out to be sheer nonsense. The source of evil is not private property, but excessive concentration of power. Power will always be abused, no matter whether its origin is big property and money, a big political party, a big Trade Union or a totalitarian nomenclature. This is an immanent approach, seeking explanation of social and political phenomena inside the system under observation instead of outside of it, as Marx did. Therefore, the only remedy to evil is to spread power among all citizens. Fortunately, more and more people begin to understand this. Let's hope that this simple truth will become common knowledge before it is too late!
"As democracy died, the Fascist American Theocratic State ("The State") was born. This new fascist era was designed and implemented primarily by Republican organizations and individuals who funded, supported and ultimately inserted George Bush II in office. Equally complicit in this atrocity was the Democratic Party, itself having become corrupt and beholden to its own interests. But the greatest tragedy in this horrific turn of events was that the public and media embraced fascism´s coming." (John Stanton and Wayne Madsen, The Decimation of Democracy in America; Global Outlook 2, p.39) "In a secret Pentagon document, the Bush Administration has established so-called ´contingency plans´ for an offensive ´first strike use´ of nuclear weapons, not only against the ´axis of evil´ (Iraq, Iran, and North Korea), but also against Russia, China, Libya and Syria.´ " (Global Outlook 2, The Dangers of Nuclear War, p.2) "To effectively disarm the U.S. war machine, which threatens everyone's future, we must act collectively in a cohesive antiwar movement. The struggle must be broad-based and democratic, encompassing all sectors of society, in all countries. The globalization of this struggle is fundamental, requiring a degree of solidarity and internationalism unprecedented in world history. Unity of purpose and worldwide coordination among diverse groups and social movements is crucial. A major thrust is required which brings people together from all major regions of the world in the common pursuit and commitment to the elimination of all injustices and the building of a lasting world peace." (U.S. Congressman Daniel Kucinich, Think peace. Speak peace. Act peace. Global Outlook 2, p.72) "In the months since September 11, the Bush Administration has not produced one shred of credible evidence supporting the White House version of the events of that day. ....All the desperate lies and spin don't change the fact that the Bush Administration had foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks." "George W.Bush knew. And his Administration knew. The transparently dishonest denials issued by the White House do not stand up to the slightest scrutiny. They are lying. A simple examination of existing information, gathered from reliable, open sources, proves it." (Larry Chin, Bush Knew; Global Outlook 2, p.13) Note. If the above allegation is verified, or if the suspicion is made at least highly credible in the big media, a new Watergate, only much more sinister, might be lurking around the corner. What an opportunity for the DD movement! JP
Information from Mr.M.Dane Waters: 31 May: "It's getting closer - the turn in date for petition signatures. In early July we will have a good idea about what will make the ballot and I will give you a full report then. However, as with all petition cycles, there has been controversy this cycle. The following will give you an insight into some of the struggles initiative proponents are facing." "1) According to a recent study released by the Institute for Policy Studies…´Ohio Governor Bob Taft and the highest reaches of his administration have embarked on a concerted, months-long effort to subvert the state's electoral process…" Full report at http://www.ips-dc.org/projects/drugpolicy/ohio.htm "2) According to the Associated Press in Oregon, fewer initiatives are expected to make the ballot than in previous years. This is due primarily to ´new laws /that/ have made it hard to find a place to gather signatures.´ " (Stateman Journal, The Associated Press, May 26, 2002)
5 August: "In this update you will find:
13 august: "In this report I have included a link to our most recent 2002 pre-election report. Towards the end of the report is our thoughts about what will be some of the "hot" issues to be voted on this November. ….This report is constantly updated. (If you notice anything that needs to be added or deleted please email me)." "Additionally, I have included information on our lawsuit against the U.S. Postal Service. The trial date has been set (October 7-18) and we MUST raise $25,000 before then in order to fly in our witnesses for the case. I hope you will consider helping with this tremendously important case (more information below). And lastly, I have included some information on a new report on the I&R process."
27 August: "In this update you will find information on: 1) A recent court decision from the Utah State Supreme Court striking down distribution requirements for initiatives; 2) An update on two books currently available from the Institute dealing with the initiative and referendum process; and
28 August: "In this update, you will find a link to the Utah Supreme Court's decision striking down the state's geographic distribution requirement for initiatives. Link to decision: http://courtlink.utcourts.gov/opinions/supopin/galliv~1.htm Also following is information on the vote that took place in Alaska yesterday pertaining to Instant Runoff Voting, "Voters rejected Ballot Measure One, which would replace majority-vote election with preferential voting. Voters would pick their choices for an office in descending order from most favored to least. If no candidate received more than 50% of the first-choice vote, the lowest vote getter would be defeated. Then, the second choice votes of voters who picked the losing candidate would be added to the totals for the remaining candidates. That process would continue until one candidate received more than 50%. Results with 90% of precincts reporting (Yes 36% / No 64%)" (For details of the information contained in the updates, please see the I&R Institute´s web-site, http://www.iandrinstitute.org )
5 June, information form Mr.Tom Atlee through Mr.Don Kemner: Study Circles Resource Center and e-thePeople.org present: DEMOCRATIC RENEWAL: WHAT CAN WE DO TO MAKE OUR DEMOCRACY WORK BETTER? A national online dialogue beginning June 17, 2002.; Over the course of six weeks, participants examine new research and current events through the lens of people who are concerned about the health of our democracy. Interested in joining this dialogue? Sign up at http://www.studycircles.org/pages/econference.htm
On 1st June, Mr.Michael Mincy sent us his PROPOSED ARTICLE OF AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION; ARTICLE OF AMENDMENT XXVIII (28) SECURED AND INVIOLABLE RIGHTS; CONGRESS OF SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVES; CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS The document contains 7 pages and reveals a profound knowledge of American political history, as well as insight into the current situation. Mr.Mincy has summed up what his amendment is intended to achieve. He writes:
Mr.Mincy´s proposed Amendment introduces important democratic innovations into the American political system (e.g. the possibility of recall of any individual congressman or the whole Congress and, of course, the right to citizen initiative). It also strengthens the protection of human and citizen rights. It is certainly worth studying by all political thinkers.
Mr.M.Kolar has informed us of three new links to his website http://democracy.mkolar.org/newURL.html 13 June: http://www.poclad.org ("POCLAD - Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy. Excellent reading. Start with their Quick Menu.") 18 July: http://www.centersds.com/ - Center for the Study of Democratic Societies; A Research and educational institution. 23 August: http://directdemocracycentral.org - "Having a say with your tax money. Political power equates to money. … "
27 August: Information from Mr.Steven Clift (http://www.publicus.net) through Mr.John Suhr: *** Democracies Online Newswire - http://www.e-democracy.org/do/ *** *** Up to seven posts a week. To join over 2500 subscribers, *** *** e-mail listser@tc.umn.edu < mailto:listser@tc.umn.edu >, in message: sub do-wire *** From: http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,736025,00.html "Oxford Don - Professor William Dutton is the first director of the new Oxford Internet Institute. Interviewed by Chloe Veltman, Thursday June 13, 2002." "What areas of research will you explore at the OII? "One area is e-democracy, where my research has focused on the role of the internet in policy advocacy. Is the web enabling citizens to have a greater influence on the policy process? …" P.S. For those in academic circles who have not heard about this, they will be hosting a Visiting Professorship in e-Democracy (DEADLINE to apply September 2, 2002): http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/demprof.shtml
9 June: Mr.Bernard Clayson draws our attention to the Essex University reports placed on http://www.shuartfarm.fsnet.co.uk/government/index.htm
20 July: Information from Dr.Michael Wallace-Macpherson: "There is a rather slow-moving discussion about direct democracy for Britain going on in the Usenet newsgroup uk.politics.constitution and others. It started with the message from Wallace-Macpherson mm@iniref.org < mailto:mm@iniref.org > ; Newsgroups: uk.legal, uk.politics.constitution, uk.politics.misc, uk.local.county-durham Subject: Comparison and ranking of democracy in different countries. Date: Sat, 13 July 2002. Organization: Citizens´ Initiative and Referendum I&R http://www.iniref.org/ "jackkincaid wrote: Great Britain: the United Kingdom not only has no written constitution; arguably a good, even a more democratic, thing, since constitutions become out of date very quickly. IMO constitutions should be reviewed every few years, at least once in a generation (ca. 30 years), in a process which involves all citizens." Objection: "Oh, please. Who the hell wants to vote for a constitution every 4 years? You'd get about 10% turnout the first time and less and less ever after. Nobody would bother. And what's the point? The USA has a constitution we're constantly being told is the best ever, ever, ever, despite being 200-plus years old, and it doesn't stop their government's breaking the law whenever they feel like it, does it?" Reply: "In the system suggested at I&R there would only be a referendum if enough people - a very large number - demanded one. Interest would have to be demonstrated before a constitutional (or indeed "normal") referendum could be held. If as you say a government breaks constitutional law or principle then this may result from inadequate political culture and/or communication, deficient public integrity."
In April 2002, Mr. Stephen Rayner founded The Campaign For Genuine Democracy Website: http://www.p-o-w-e-r.co.uk/ Commenting on the project, Mr.Rayner wrote, "I worked on developing the philosophy behind the campaign for three years prior to that while still working full-time. … My aim is to actually have people forming Community Assemblies rather than just talking about it. To achieve that I start a series of public meetings on October 25th and I will be talking to individual communities about the problems they face and how a Genuine Democracy can help them solve those problems. … Response from the public, encouraging, but again the formation of Community Assemblies will be the real test of my success. … At the present I am tending to avoid getting involved with other organisations, as from the little I have seen so far, the whole scene depressed me with the amount of back-stabbing and in-fighting, perhaps I was just unlucky!" Some quotations from the program: Genuine Democracy "So why should we need a genuine democracy, what's wrong with the one we already have? The answer is that our present so-called democracy is nothing but a sham, for decades we have been fobbed off with the idea that democracy is mainly about one person, one vote. This is absolute rubbish, genuine democracy means power being vested in the people, for people to tell their representatives in Parliament how they want things done. Do you honestly feel that you have any say for example in the way your taxes are spent? Did you have a say in whether or not our country should send troops to Afghanistan? Do you have a say (a real say not a token one) in how our health service is run, our children educated or our public transport system organized?" Politicians as our Servants "The basic problem is that for far too long we have left government in the hands of politicians. But surely I hear you say that's where government belongs. Well no it isn't, politicians are supposed to be our servants, to carry out our instructions. In fact the term democratic government is intended to mean "the people governing themselves", but it has come to mean "the tiny minority governing the many". Centralized Government has reached a level at which there is virtually nothing in our lives that is not decided for us." Falling Turnouts "It is little wonder that at successive general elections the turnout has fallen from 84% in the 1950 election to 59% in 2001 as more and more people feel that their vote is worthless and will make no difference. …" Negative views "So what can we do to create a genuine democracy? What we mustn't do is listen to those people who say we can't do anything, that you can't beat the system, that people were never intended to govern themselves. … " The Foundations "To build a sound structure you need good foundations and in our case these are provided by the following:
For details you are invited to look up the Campaign's website.
Information from Ms Katja Lepola sent to us by Dr.Bruno Kaufmann: "A majority of the Swedes are in favor of increased direct influence in politics. Young people are more positive than pensioners. This if the finding of a poll organized by Gallup for Votia Empowernment AB. 59% of the Swedes say they are very much or rather in favor of increased direct influence in politics through referenda or deliberation. Among young people between 18 and 29, 66% say they are in favor. Moreover, almost 50% say it should be possible to demand that communes and other units of the system hold deliberative meetings and popular referenda. 49% say it should be easier than the case is at present." For more information see http://www.votia.com/val.asp
A new Political Party Recently, a Direct Democracy Party has been founded in Linköping. (see http://direktdemokraterna.com. The founders are experts in electronic technology, but their program aims at a radical change of the whole political system. It will be very interesting to follow the progress of this new initiative. Their expertise could become a valuable contribution to the solution of problems concerning protection of electronic voting against manipulation.
Planning Cells In June and July 2001, 227 citizens resident in the town of Regensburg and some neighbouring districts participated in Planning Cells dealing with the plan for the development of their town. Regensburg was the first Bavarian town to choose this form of citizen participation in local politics. The project was very successful and, as usual, it aroused considerable attention on the part of the media. (Many articles in Regensburger Wochenblatt and Mittelbeyerische Zeitung) The Planning Cells model has a more than 30 years long tradition in Germany. It was developed by Prof. Peter C.Dienel, professor of sociology at the University of Wuppertal. Together with the Citizen Juries (USA), the Scientific Deliberative Polling (see T.Becker-Ch.Slaton: The Future of Teledemocracy, available at amazon.com), the work of Dr. Lyn Carson, Sydney, and some other projects developed by scholars active in Germany, Sweden Denmark, Finland and elsewhere, this method belongs to the Deliberative Approach to Direct Democracy. So far, it has mostly been limited to problem solving at the local level. Nevertheless, it has an enormous democratic potential which makes it suitable for any level of political decision-making, including the highest ones. A new important project involving Planning Cells is being prepared for the German capital - Beteiligungsvorhaben "Schlossplatz Berlin". It will be a grandiose enterprise counting on the participation of 1,850 Berliners distributed among 74 Planning Cells.
You are invited to look up the updated Integral Studies Home Page (webmaster: Dr.Michael Macpherson): http://home.snafu.de/mjm/init.html
Information from Mr.Vladimir Rott: A new book on the Swiss political system: Greogy A. Fossedal: DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN SWITZERLAND; with a foreword by Alfred R. Berkely III and a preface by Richard Holbrooke; Transaction Publishers, New Books Catalogue, Fall 2002, Number 56. "…one country in the world - Switzerland - is a direct democracy, in which, to an extent, the people pass their own laws, judge the constitutionality of statutes, and even have written, in effect, their own constitution. … " "The lessons Fossedal presents, at a time of dissatisfaction with the role of money and privileged elites in many Western democracies, are at once timely and urgent." …."Swiss voters make dozens and even hundreds of the particular decisions themselves. A different spirit animates Swiss democracy and this different spirit produces different results." … "Fossedal shows how Switzerland handles the political questions common to all modern societies, such as education, taxes, crime, welfare, the Holocaust. He concludes with the ongoing debate over two very different visions of democracy, direct versus representative." Gregory A. Fossedal is chairman of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, a research foundation based near Washington, DC. He is also president and chief investment officer of the Democratic Century Fund and its management company, the Emerging Markets Group.
Information from Dr.Bruno Kaufmann, 5 June 2002: "Exactly one year ago, we founded the Initiative & Referendum Institute Europé to become the premier research and educational institute on I&R in Europé. We are not there yet, but we are on the way! IRI Europé has established a broad network of academics, politicians, citizen activists and journalists, all committed to bringing the process of participatory democracy further - on all political levels. From a local referendum debate on taxes in a Swedish municipality on the Arctic circle to the EU Convention on the Future of Europé - IRI Europé has become a serious partner and a competence center for many. In our free Email Newsletter "IRI Europé Watch" we summarize and analyze the latest developments, events and trends around initiatives and referendums. At the same time reference books (handbooks, almanacs) on I&R in Europé (and the world) are forthcoming. In presenting its first report in a few weeks´ time in Berlin, IRI Europé will start to aim its work at a broader public. This first report covers the issues of "good direct democracy" and a rating of European states, and will be available on our updated website by June 20. ….. Direct Democracy in the EU will also be the issue of the second IRI Europé report, to be published on September 19 in Brussels, where the institute will organize a conference at the European Parliament on the same day on the same issue. …." * On June 19th, 2002 sixty participants from politics, science, media and social organisations gathered to explore the potentials of direct democracy for the European integration process. Read here the contributions from Council of Europe's vice president Andreas Gross, IRI Europe's president Bruno Kaufmann and Advisor to the Foreign commission of the Bundestag Sven Holscheidt.
(For the full text see the IRI-Europe's website: http://www.iri-europe.org/reports.htm )
27 April, a message from Mr.Bernard Clayson: "Media group Vivendi Universal said it would call a new annual meeting 'as soon as possible', after the discovery of a malfunction in the electronic voting system used at Wednesday's meeting in Paris. It said it would file a legal complaint over what appeared to be a deliberate hacking of the system." (Daily Telegraph, Business News 2, p 28, 27/4/02) All those in favour of electronic voting, please click your "Yes" button now. "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." Communist Tyrant Josef Stalin. 30 April 02, a message from P2DDIntra: "Jim and all, It seems to me this could be a covert attempt to discredit electronic voting or an attack focused only on trying to manipulate the Vivendi vote. There are thousands of ways to attack. We cannot prevent or even address them all. But we can minimize our vulnerabilities to attacks, and most importantly have a foolproof way to verify whether voters are registered, votes are genuine and counts are accurate, which we do have. Then any successful attack can be detected and corrected.And part of our upfront message to the public should be that we expect some successful attacks and that we can handle them without any ultimate distortion in the vote results. Vince Campbell" 30 April 02, a message from Ms Marilyn Davis to P2DDIntra: "I don't know why this would be labeled (by us?) as "Bad news for electronic voting" any more than a faulty tire that blew would be labeled as "bad news for automobiles". It reminds me of the government shills who "study" internet voting and use the logic that, because it can be done badly, it can't be done right. This is a good news to me. I'm glad when insecure systems show themselves as insecure. There's no excuse for it, unless the system designers´ idea all along was to steal through the system. Our system will be secure. And please remember that with a public vote, there are no security issues whatsoever. Marilyn Davis; p.s. I´m very quiet lately because I'm working very hard on releasing the source code. eVote(R)/Clerk has been accepted as a project on http://www.sourceforge.net - which is a wonderful facility for open source software development." 1 May 02, a message from Mr.Evan D.Ravitz: "I agree with Marilyn that bad e-voting systems have no effect on good e-voting systems. … I agree with David that we have to win in the court of people's perceptions as well as that of logic. I've made a practice of explaining our system so that anyone who's ever used a ATM can understand it. …
28 April 02, a message from Ms Marilyn Davis to P2DDIntra: "Internet Voting Improves Participation; by Roy Mark (mailto:rmark@internet.com) The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government ( http://endowment.pwcglobal.com ) has issued a grant report that explores the potential of Internet voting for increasing voter participation and voter registration. In the report, Internet voting: Bringing Elections to the Desktop Robert Done, assistant research professor of management and policy at the University of Arizona, examines the 2000 Arizona Democratic presidential preference election, or primary, which was the first political election to use Internet voting. More votes were cast on the Internet in the 2000 Arizona Democratic primary than by any other means and were about three times the total number of votes cast in that state's 1996 Democratic primary. Done also examined a sample survey by the University of Arizona that suggests 62 percent of the unregistered voting age population would register to vote on the Internet. Done applies those results to the voting age population of the United States and observes that "if just half of the 24 percent of the unregistered voting age population did register on the Internet, there would be an additional 25 million registered voters." "The Internet presents an opportunity for improving democracy and the process by which it is achieved. Registration and participation of voters, essential to a healthy democracy, could be increased with Internet technology." Done writes in the report. Done recommends that state and local jurisdictions continue to experiment with Internet voting, increase research and development to improve Internet transaction security, and continue research on the individual and societal effects of an Internet voting system. "The report comes at a time when recommendations for improving the voting process are being examined, and e-government is transforming citizen interaction with government. We believe this research will contribute to the debate and help improve the processes of democracy," said Grady Means, PwC Consulting managing partner for the Washington Consulting Practice. The opportunities to improve voter registration and participation are accompanied by complex technical, legal, and social issues. Internet voting has also faced challenges over whether the digital divide makes Internet voting discriminatory. Because many of these issues were addressed successfully in Arizona´s Democratic primary, Done is optimistic that they can be resolved in the future. Reprinted from http://dc.internet.com/
Prof.Dr.Michael Noah Mautner: Institutions and Procedures of a World Direct Democracy From M.N.Mautner Ph.D.: A Constitution of Direct Democracy - a classic of the DD literature |
