Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 485
Netizens-Digest Thursday, April 10 2003 Volume 01 : Number 485
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
Re: [netz] More or less democracy
Re: [netz] Question for Jay: Economic as well as political
Re: [netz] More or less democracy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 10:34:01 -0400
From: Mark Lindeman <lindeman@bard.edu>
Subject: Re: [netz] More or less democracy
Lou,
OK, and it's good to have you and I agreeing that we are suspicious of
any process that suspends elections. (Which doesn't necessarily mean
that we're opposed to participatory democracy!)
We collectively seem recently to be pretty befuddled about abstract
questions such as whether we are a "technical" list or a "social" list.
Meanwhile, the Net faces new challenges and offers new opportunities.
Maybe it would clarify my question to Jay a bit to emphasize your word
"co-workers." It's great to hear Jay's ideas on participatory
democracy, but it would also be great to have more contributions, all
around, on many issues raised by Howard and others that seem to be more
immediate. Netizens are co-workers. What are we working on?
Mark
Luis De Quesada wrote:
>Hello Mark: Jay and I have been co-workers and friends for many years, he knows
>where I stand when it comes to representative democracy as I was a member and fan
>of the Autentico Party in Cuba, which stood and still stands in exile, for
>representative democracy. Him and I differ on that and various other politcal
>issues, yet I am a netizen and we are the best of friends and co-workers and I am
>certain my "netizenship" is not in peril because of my belief in representative
>democracy. I would like though to learn more about participatory democracy.
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:14:59 EDT
From: AGENTKUENSTLER@aol.com
Subject: Re: [netz] Question for Jay: Economic as well as political
- --part1_142.ed94aed.2bc6e473_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 4/9/03 10:08:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time, hcb@gettcomm.com
writes:
> >
> >There is something called the Frankfurter Brief
> >that was offered to the US Supreme Court under
> >Frankfurter documenting the benefit of shorter
> >hours on a society.
> >
> >Ronda
>
> Shorter compulsory hours, perhaps. I still find that many creative
> people spend 60 or more hours a week in doing what they believe to be
> most socially productive and personally satisfying. That's a very
> practical reason for my wanting a representative -- I don't want to
> have half my time committed to detailed governmental supervision. I
> want to be able to delegate detailed work to a representative, still
> monitoring and affecting that position, just as I will delegate tasks
> on any project I manage. I retain responsibility for the projects I
> manage, just as I retain responsibility for my role (or apathy) in
> government actions.
>
>
It is interesting how the 'personal responsibility' theme continues, although
indirectly, to evince itself. I am referring to the last sentence above.
Basically my argument has been, a dissatisfaction with political results
proves that there is an inadequacy somewhere in involvement or participation.
Realistically it is true that it is a hardship to participate in the local
governance process. Perhaps shorter hours of work will help as per the
Frankfurter Brief that Ronda was talking about. I mean, if you cannot trust
your elected representative, you have to do what you have to do.
But does it logically follow, that people will employ some of this extra time
that they have toward the management of at least local governance? I
honestly believe that they will be using this time to pursue more employment.
I don't understand this concept. Of course I am talking about this totally
ignorant of what the Frankfurter Brief is, but nonetheless, I see an inequity
in productivity that would naturally occur, simply due to human nature.
There will be some country or region that will unlawfully exploit this
inequity in productivity. I am taking it as an assumption that such
compulsory regulation must be meted out internationally.
While you are sleeping, the other guy will be working feverishly 'with the
lights out.' He'll be crafty enough to distribute the labor so that it
appears as though he is conforming. Ultimately, you lose competitiveness.
Moreover, people will be forced unofficially to take their work home. At
which point this happens, we would probably see an exploitation of labor that
has been unprecedented in history. Since we are not an industrial economy
anymore, it is all about the creation and exploitation of intellectual
capital. It becomes difficult to prove what is work and what is leisure
activity.
Working masses taking classes at night to 'enhance one's skill set' might
look like a personal initiative, or is it?
There is no easy solution here. We might want to try looking somewhere else.
There is no getting around it. If something is truly important to you, you
will make the time to do it. If you have good reason to believe that your
elected representative is not trustworthy, you are going to have to make the
time to effectively 'look over his shoulder.'
I have already articulated examples of 'how.'
I really think life is a lot simpler than we construct it out to be. Why do
you think Socialism failed? Lofty and fanciful armchair wit succumbed to the
gravity of reality. Many assumptions were constructed about human behavior
that were grossly unrealistic. On the other hand, Capitalism is more
visceral. It effectively employs assumptions of human behavior that are
realistic.
Let's make assumptions about human behavior that are realistic.
People are always looking for 'arbitrage opportunities,' i.e., getting
something for nothing. We must find a way to clearly express to the masses
how even the minuscule divergence of some of their leisure time toward the
management of local governance will result in an enhanced improvement in
quality of life.
Advances in information production and communications technology such as the
Internet might possibly be able to assist in this endeavor. Consider that
new and advanced technology that enhances communications is occurring without
this need to shorten the workday.
For example, there is a glut of communications capacity and computing power
out there. Technology companies are fighting for ways of adding value. We
get a lot of cheap trinkets along the way.
For example, professional quality multimedia applications that allow people
to communicate more effectively, would not be accessible to the consumer were
it not for this glut of communications capacity and computing power.
Computer industry manufacturers such as Microsoft and Sun Microsystems are
empowering us to be information producers and providers so that we may fill
up this communications capacity and 'envalue' the Internet infrastructure.
They have given us the capability of even burning our own CDs and DVDs --
intimate access to these technologies was once not available to the average
consumer. Who would imagine, ten years ago, that everyday consumers would be
today editing videos on a laptop computer -- Musicians making their own CDs?
The software is becoming cheaper and cheaper to the point that it is being
integrated into the operating system.
Netizens can use these trinkets to more effectively persuade and to inform.
And the speed of the processors allow us not only to run apps, but to run
them effortlessly. The only time spent is in developing an idea; the
'mechanical' production, processing, and post-process distribution of the
idea is practically instantaneous.
The technology itself is already enhancing our leisure time with which we can
use to participate in government.
This circuitous problem solving is becoming confusing. The solution is
simple. Let's first take some personal responsibility regarding our
political destiny. Figure out what moves the people, manipulate that
passion, and get them involved on a more than last-minute seductive level.
The Internet can help. We had been discussing representation issues and
solutions for the last month or two. I do not think working out of the
system is helpful, if that is what 'participatory democracy' is about. The
goal ought to be to improve communications between the people and
representatives -- working within the system.
I want some results here (banging gavel precipitously). No more analysis
paralysis. Danke.
Larry
- --part1_142.ed94aed.2bc6e473_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 4/9/03 10:08:21 AM Eastern Daylight=
Time, hcb@gettcomm.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">><BR>
>There is something called the Frankfurter Brief<BR>
>that was offered to the US Supreme Court under<BR>
>Frankfurter documenting the benefit of shorter<BR>
>hours on a society.<BR>
><BR>
>Ronda<BR>
<BR>
Shorter compulsory hours, perhaps. I still find that many creative <BR>
people spend 60 or more hours a week in doing what they believe to be <BR>
most socially productive and personally satisfying. That's a very <BR>
practical reason for my wanting a representative -- I don't want to <BR>
have half my time committed to detailed governmental supervision. I <BR>
want to be able to delegate detailed work to a representative, still <BR>
monitoring and affecting that position, just as I will delegate tasks <BR>
on any project I manage. I retain responsibility for the projects I <B=
R>
manage, just as I retain responsibility for my role (or apathy) in <BR>
government actions.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
It is interesting how the 'personal responsibility' theme continues, althoug=
h indirectly, to evince itself. I am referring to the last sentence ab=
ove. <BR>
<BR>
Basically my argument has been, a dissatisfaction with political results pro=
ves that there is an inadequacy somewhere in involvement or participation.<B=
R>
<BR>
Realistically it is true that it is a hardship to participate in the local g=
overnance process. Perhaps shorter hours of work will help as per the=20=
Frankfurter Brief that Ronda was talking about. I mean, if you cannot=20=
trust your elected representative, you have to do what you have to do. =
<BR>
<BR>
But does it logically follow, that people will employ some of this extra tim=
e that they have toward the management of at least local governance? I=
honestly believe that they will be using this time to pursue more employmen=
t.<BR>
<BR>
I don't understand this concept. Of course I am talking about this tot=
ally ignorant of what the Frankfurter Brief is, but nonetheless, I see an in=
equity in productivity that would naturally occur, simply due to human natur=
e. There will be some country or region that will unlawfully exploit t=
his inequity in productivity. I am taking it as an assumption that suc=
h compulsory regulation must be meted out internationally.<BR>
<BR>
While you are sleeping, the other guy will be working feverishly 'with the l=
ights out.' He'll be crafty enough to distribute the labor so that it=20=
appears as though he is conforming. Ultimately, you lose competitivene=
ss.<BR>
<BR>
Moreover, people will be forced unofficially to take their work home. =20=
At which point this happens, we would probably see an exploitation of labor=20=
that has been unprecedented in history. Since we are not an industrial=
economy anymore, it is all about the creation and exploitation of intellect=
ual capital. It becomes difficult to prove what is work and what is le=
isure activity. <BR>
<BR>
Working masses taking classes at night to 'enhance one's skill set' might lo=
ok like a personal initiative, or is it?<BR>
<BR>
There is no easy solution here. We might want to try looking somewhere=
else. <BR>
<BR>
There is no getting around it. If something is truly important to you,=
you will make the time to do it. If you have good reason to believe t=
hat your elected representative is not trustworthy, you are going to have to=
make the time to effectively 'look over his shoulder.'<BR>
<BR>
I have already articulated examples of 'how.' <BR>
<BR>
I really think life is a lot simpler than we construct it out to be. W=
hy do you think Socialism failed? Lofty and fanciful armchair wit succ=
umbed to the gravity of reality. Many assumptions were constructed abo=
ut human behavior that were grossly unrealistic. On the other hand, Ca=
pitalism is more visceral. It effectively employs assumptions of human=
behavior that are realistic.<BR>
<BR>
Let's make assumptions about human behavior that are realistic. <BR>
<BR>
People are always looking for 'arbitrage opportunities,' i.e., getting somet=
hing for nothing. We must find a way to clearly express to the masses=20=
how even the minuscule divergence of some of their leisure time toward the m=
anagement of local governance will result in an enhanced improvement in qual=
ity of life.<BR>
<BR>
Advances in information production and communications technology such as the=
Internet might possibly be able to assist in this endeavor. Consider=20=
that new and advanced technology that enhances communications is occurring w=
ithout this need to shorten the workday. <BR>
<BR>
For example, there is a glut of communications capacity and computing power=20=
out there. Technology companies are fighting for ways of adding value.=
We get a lot of cheap trinkets along the way. <BR>
<BR>
For example, professional quality multimedia applications that allow people=20=
to communicate more effectively, would not be accessible to the consumer wer=
e it not for this glut of communications capacity and computing power. =
<BR>
<BR>
Computer industry manufacturers such as Microsoft and Sun Microsystems are e=
mpowering us to be information producers and providers so that we may fill u=
p this communications capacity and 'envalue' the Internet infrastructure.&nb=
sp; They have given us the capability of even burning our own CDs and DVDs -=
- - intimate access to these technologies was once not available to the averag=
e consumer. Who would imagine, ten years ago, that everyday consumers=20=
would be today editing videos on a laptop computer -- Musicians making their=
own CDs? The software is becoming cheaper and cheaper to the point th=
at it is being integrated into the operating system.<BR>
<BR>
Netizens can use these trinkets to more effectively persuade and to inform.&=
nbsp; And the speed of the processors allow us not only to run apps, but to=20=
run them effortlessly. The only time spent is in developing an idea; t=
he 'mechanical' production, processing, and post-process distribution of the=
idea is practically instantaneous. <BR>
<BR>
The technology itself is already enhancing our leisure time with which we ca=
n use to participate in government.<BR>
<BR>
This circuitous problem solving is becoming confusing. The solution is=
simple. Let's first take some personal responsibility regarding our p=
olitical destiny. Figure out what moves the people, manipulate that pa=
ssion, and get them involved on a more than last-minute seductive level.<BR>
<BR>
The Internet can help. We had been discussing representation issues an=
d solutions for the last month or two. I do not think working out of t=
he system is helpful, if that is what 'participatory democracy' is about.&nb=
sp; The goal ought to be to improve communications between the people and re=
presentatives -- working within the system.<BR>
<BR>
I want some results here (banging gavel precipitously). No more analys=
is paralysis. Danke.<BR>
<BR>
Larry</FONT></HTML>
- --part1_142.ed94aed.2bc6e473_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:33:11 EDT
From: AGENTKUENSTLER@aol.com
Subject: Re: [netz] More or less democracy
- --part1_161.1e7c6bfd.2bc6e8b7_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 4/9/03 8:28:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jrh@umcc.ais.org
writes:
> That I feel is the great promise of the net. I hope the cat is out of the
> bag. I feel, given the chance and the encouragement, people will choose
> self representation and that will prove a greatly improved system from the
> representative republicanism that perhaps was historiaclly necessary. The
> net makes possible the availability of all opinions and sources of
> information, with time to absorb them, most people will be quite capable
> of contributing meaningfully in the decision processes and the decisions.
> Then those decisions will much more thoroughly benefit the mass of people
> who participate in making them.
>
With some issues perhaps does self representation make sense but I argue
against it in a general sense. You cannot make legislation convenient. It
has to be a lugubrious protracted process that you 'suffer' with many levels
of governmental consideration and 'paper' and time involved to at least
demonstrate that each issue has been deliberated upon fairly. People have to
be forced to 'more than virtually' argue with others with differing opinions
face to face in order to begin to truly understand that there are realistic
ramifications for taking a chauvinistic point of view.
Larry
- --part1_161.1e7c6bfd.2bc6e8b7_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">In a message dated 4/9/03 8:28:11 PM Eastern Daylight=20=
Time, jrh@umcc.ais.org writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">That I feel is the great promis=
e of the net. I hope the cat is out of the<BR>
bag. I feel, given the chance and the encouragement, people will choose<BR>
self representation and that will prove a greatly improved system from the<B=
R>
representative republicanism that perhaps was historiaclly necessary. The<BR=
>
net makes possible the availability of all opinions and sources of<BR>
information, with time to absorb them, most people will be quite capable<BR>
of contributing meaningfully in the decision processes and the decisions.<BR=
>
Then those decisions will much more thoroughly benefit the mass of people<BR=
>
who participate in making them.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
With some issues perhaps does self representation make sense but I argue aga=
inst it in a general sense. You cannot make legislation convenient.&nb=
sp; It has to be a lugubrious protracted process that you 'suffer' with many=
levels of governmental consideration and 'paper' and time involved to at le=
ast demonstrate that each issue has been deliberated upon fairly. Peop=
le have to be forced to 'more than virtually' argue with others with differi=
ng opinions face to face in order to begin to truly understand that there ar=
e realistic ramifications for taking a chauvinistic point of view.<BR>
<BR>
Larry</FONT></HTML>
- --part1_161.1e7c6bfd.2bc6e8b7_boundary--
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #485
******************************
