NewPoliticalSystem  Index  Home  New  Links Groups  

Jiri Polak's WDD Newsletter

It is my private contribution to the promotion of the idea of DD. It is not attached to any organization. I try to be impartial, but I don't pretend to be objective. Objectivity doesn't exist anywhere, not even in the exact sciences. I began to publish it every three months beginning in 1998, after the first International Conference on DD (the first ever in history). I announced this intention at the conference and it was welcomed by everybody.

In 2001, I received two substantial contributions covering my expenses for that particular year. Otherwise, I pay for the print and distribution almost entirely from my own pocket. I send it, free of charge, to certain active members of our network.

There are three main objectives: 

1.To preserve continuity of the network established at the first conference.
2. To bring information about current developments and ideas. 
3. To preserve this information for future historians. Electronic messages vanish quickly. Printed materials can be easily stored for years.

It might be useful to sum up our history for the newcomers. The first conference was conceived and organized by myself (August 1998). I had no sponsor. I set the participation fee at random at $60 and paid myself for the deficit. 

I was lucky to attract the attention of Prof.Becker, professor of political science, USA, worlds leading expert on teledemocracy and DD. 
Thanks to him, we had several illustrious participants - former US Senator Mike Gravel, M. Dane Waters, founder and president of IRI Washington, Ned Crosby, founder of the Jefferson Center, USA, Prof. Christa Slaton, USA, George Sagi, a prominent theorist and visionary, Canada, Heiko Dittmer, Belgium, Junichi Takase, professor at the Tokyo University, Lyn Carson, professor at the University of Sydney, Tom Rupp and Michael Efler, Mehr Demokratie, Germany, George Kokkas, prominent DD activist, Greece, and some others.

Bruno Kaufmann could not come. Andreas Gross would have come had I paid for his trip and stay. Regrettably, my economy was stretched to the limit as it was, so I could not oblige.

Prof. Becker established the CICDD discussion channel we are still using. (CICDD - Continuing International Conference/Congress on Direct Democracy). George Kokkas organized the second conference in Athens and Delphi in 2000. There, the WDDM was founded. Later, it disintegrated owing to internal discord.

Inspired by the first conference, Heiko and Tom founded the NDDIE (Network of Direct Democracy Initiatives in Europe). This network/organization is very active and successful (conferences in Munich 2000, Prague 2001, Bratislava 2002 and some more). They do excellent work, but they only focus on I&R in Europe. Due to outer circumstances (risk of terrorism, lack of resources...) it has not yet been possible to organize a third CICDD conference. Perhaps inspired by the IRI USA, Bruno Kaufmann founded the IRI Europe, very successful, too, and internationally respected.

Deliberation

According to a recent comment, deliberation takes already place around IRI (brochures, panel debates and the like), so that Prof.Dienel's Planning Cells allegedly are not that important. But who participates in all these discussions, who reads these information materials etc.? It's most probably members of a not very numerous intellectual and political elite, people with clear, mature ideas and privileged access to the media. No doubt, their discussions are valuable and probably more qualified than those taking place in Parliament under the Party whip.

But still, their representativity for the citizenry at large is questionable. The Planning Cells, by contrast, give voice to the "silent majority": They are based on random selection, they are incorruptible and assure maximum objectivity by the simultaneous organization of at least 10 planning cells treating the same issue. This is true democracy.

I maintain that their democratic potential is not yet fully understood.
They are expensive, sure, but the abuse of power by the power holders is much more expensive and wasteful
Current systems based on party political power monopoly are not democracies. They consist of parasitic bureaucratic structures dominated by a few party bosses and vested interests in the background. They take our money without asking and live in luxury on it, while undermining our future by greedy short-sightedness. Let´s abolish and reform this system and we get money enough and to spare for the planning cells, the I&R process, and other meaningful things.

I work for a reform of the whole system, not only marginal improvements.

This is what I have in mind:

1.Separation of the legislative and executive power. At present, both these powers are concentrated in the hands of a bunch of top level politicians. This is a mockery of democracy and it need not be so.
2.Direct personal election of the head of state by all citizens. He/she is not allowed to be functionary of any party. He/she nominates a non-partisan government. The whole administrative system is steered by the executive with exclusion of any party-political influence.
3.Limited mandate periods (now a Prime minister may sit for 20 years or more). Possibility of recall at any moment.
4.Parliament and other representative bodies complemented by the right to I&R, but also by a permanent structure of planning cells deliberating on fundamental policy issues.

This is a semi-direct democratic system. I believe it would be premature and counter- productive to try to jump straight into a full DD in the present situation. We should wait a few more years.
Experience also suggests that it is too early to try to establish global formal organizations. The most efficient way now - as I see it - is "to think globally but act locally". This applies to practical action, not to theory which we should, of course, go on developing as we have always done.

Sincerely           Jiri