eugen at leitl.org
Wed Aug 8 01:42:37 PDT 2012
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 08:39:59PM -0400, Damien Morton wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:11 PM, Gregory Alan Bolcer <greg at bolcer.org> wrote:
> > Yeah, I'm not for abridging the free speech thing, but removing the carrot
> > is probably a good approach. I just yearn for the citizen legislature
> > dayZ.
> Germany seems to be a key innovator in electronic direct democracy -
> with two key platforms supporting it (Liquid Feedback and Adhocracy).
> The Pirate Partei is gathering significant votes and putting members
It doesn't work that well in practice. Growing pains, hopefully.
> into parliament, and they are guided by Liquid Feedback, a kind of
> online forum and voting system in which you can delegate a proxy to
> vote on your behalf, but you can also revoke or override that
> delegation at any time.
> What is interesting is that the Parliamentary arm of the Pirate Partei
> isnt bound to follow the proposals and directives produced by Liquid
The German Pirate Party has a serious problem: its founders were
socially naive nerds. They did not hammer out the program while
there was time, and did not put specific checks and balances against
takeover of the top by way of fecal floatation. As such they're
almost certainly going to repeat the fate of German Greens only
in Internet time.
> Feedback, but the proposals have a moral force to them that is awfully
> hard to ignore. It raises the question whether such a forum could be
> imposed on an existing political structure by a significant majority
Hahahahaha! You should rather ask yourself how long it will take
until liquid feedback is removed from the PP.
> of its constituents. Pick one town, one county, one district, and
> implement Liquid Feedback to provide 'guidance' to the political
> structure. "has refused to follow the directives of his constituents N
> times" is pretty powerful stuff.
> The Occupy movement, with its instinctive rejection of any
> organisational principles, has failed to produce the consensus and
> coherency it hoped for. Obviously, they have succeeded in changing the
Any revolution starts as an amorphous mass and is later invaded
by people who mean business. These people meant business:
In the US, the potential for recruitable anti-socials who
passed through the penitentiary system is probably at 5-10%.
Given the amount of arms and ammunition in general population
(no need to raid the armories as a first step) this is
> national debate, inserting the words fairness and justice where before
> they were ignored. Unlike the Tea Party, they haven't fielded any
> candidates, which means politics remains unchanged altogether.
More information about the FoRK