Direct democracy

[Michael Allan]

/pd wrote:

> I'll head back to the drawing board wrt to community. I remember the
> issue about the the US. GOV rendering a decesion  about the 10
> commandants artifact on one of their judicial doorsteps..there was
> some major discussions about that one. Need to digg  back to find i.

Only 5 or 6 centuries. ;) It's actually an interesting topic, /pd, as
I'm just learning.  For instance, the influence of religion on the
structure of modern society, including state structures (like those
inhabited by the US government, and built right into their doorsteps,
so to speak), was investigated by this fellow:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber
 
> ==>> "that people don't understand the social implications of *broad
> consensus*, not even in the political sphere.  And that's the
> conceptual key."
> 
> How are you defining "social implications" and what is "broad
> consensus" ?

'Consensus' means general agreement.  By 'broad consensus' I mean
consensus on a large scale, like extending across an entire town,
region, or nation.

By social implications, I mean the effect that such consensus will
have on society.  Specifically - What happens when a town's community
starts reaching consensus, all by itself, on particular issues of
concern to it?  How does that play out in the town's politics?  How
does it play out in the community, itself?  And so forth.

These are important questions, because communities will soon have the
ability (with new social media, such as Votorola) to form consensus on
any issue of concern to them.  And they won't, I guess, be hestitating
to use that ability.

-- 
Michael Allan

http://zelea.com/