NewPoliticalSystem  Index  Home  New  Links Groups  

Political Systems Compared

1. EDD = Electronic Direct Democracy
2. EDD/R = EDD with Representative
3. NPS = New Political System
4. I&R = Initiative and Referendum
5. RR = Representative

 N/A.  not applicable
 9 (c) No parties.
10 (c) the Rep has only a citizen vote, hence, no point.
11 is null because media etc can effect all, although there would be differences.
12 (e) The only common point is the political parties
14 The change is for people to accept the responsibility of their actions
    "Their actions", especially in order to one:
        * being able to share in a dialectic context (not "bandwagon" only);
        * being able to put one's own proposals on;
        * being able to accept/discuss critically and propositively other's arguments and proposals;
        * being able to decide and accept the majority's decisions.

• NPS uses the system of management presently working,  adopting policies which the people see more efficient.
      The management system working presently does adopt policies which the REP's see more efficient, not the people.
• NPS uses MP/Rep on a leash, jerk it 
• NPS can start now, not waiting for inventions of "E" ware.
      The greatest advantage of the internet is the ability to find information, and discuss it with people across the world, yet that in it self presents problems, too much information and it requires a lot of sorting, and it is rather curious that the greatest disbelievers are the people on the net who don't look themselves, while you are discussing on the net, you're not discussing it locally.
• NPS provides a system of discussion and accountability, speed is unnecessary.
      If one considers the average time for a bill to go through parliament, from proposal to completion, is over 6 months, where is the need for speed?
      It is also interesting the amount of time 'consulting' interested parties takes, DD would have the public as the 'interested parties' in the discussion at the proposal stage.
• NPS provides people talking locally first, forwarding the results and yes/no results.
• NPS uses the internet, but is not dependent on it, the 'community' officers need the internet, but it does not require everyone to have it, or for the state(?) to supply access.
• NPS is the heart of local government and can deal with local problems, programs. Further needs will be forwarded up.
• NPS has many alternatives to monitor existing conditions.
      The system has numerous 'public selected' officers/representatives for such functions, and each has deputies, and the public can monitor them from the results.
• NPS has a built in reserve system of people for emergence situations.
      The system would function the same way as a Warden did in the war, they knew everyone, where they would normally be, and a few where they should not be<g>.
  

Electronic Direct Democracy i.e. without Rep's.

• Total EDD leaves much to be managed by sometimes very busy people.
• "Hired" management you have little control over.
• There is no present "E" and bugs security issues have not been faced.
• if a company is successful in getting their software accepted, and it is used extensively and can't cope with demand, how will it prevent someone buying it out? 
• it's an easy task to write a piece of software using two databases, one to allow the public to view their own vote, the other to do anything that is required of the writer,
• Is speed or quality the question of good governance?
• What if an emergency arises? Attack, Energy shut down?
• How will millions of people "talk to each other"?
• How will DD work on "local" problems? Will someone from Iceland decide if cats should be leashed in New York?
• The court system is somewhat of a unit in itself. How will EDD monitor it?
• Where will all the information come from i.e. Health Safety and Welfare, Police, foreign agencies, farming, fishing, import export, ?
• How does it monitor the civil servants?