It will be a fart in space.

[Martin Gustavsson]

So let's say you make a decision of magnitude. Ex. "People should be
bugged if there is a court order and there is resonable suspicion and
thereafter be informed about it."

- Then what? It will be a fart in space, wouldn't it?
Because the decision that actually could make it happen is not
connected with a political party with power into the parliament.

On Feb 15, 10:29 am, Michael Allan <m... at zelea.com> wrote:
> Martin Gustavsson wrote:
> > ...REAL success will come ONLY when you do what SHOULD be done.
>
> > If you join a direct democratic organization and discuss and analyze
> > the need for that the organization and THEN do the programming it
> > might ACTUALLY be useful.
>
> Martin, I disagree.  You assume the need of a political organization.
> That's your mandrill's bottom.
>
> Direct democracy hinges on the ability of a community to acheive
> consensus (general agreement) on matters of public policy,
> legislation, appointments and so forth.  Votorola would be useful for
> this -- that's its purpose.  So I understand what brought you to the
> list.  But I don't agree with your point; I don't see how an
> organization (of any kind) could be an aid to consensus.  On the
> contrary, I foresee how it could do harm.  Communities can only arrive
> at a consensus by engaging in free and open discourse.  This comes
> quite naturally to them, and they certainly don't need any guidance to
> help them along.  Organizations, such as political parties and
> governments (none of which operate by free and open discourse), are
> best kept out of the process.  Otherwise, they could only interfere
> with it.  Do you follow my argument?
>
> --
> Michael Allan
>
> http://zelea.com/