[pp.int.general] VIlfredo goes to Athens. /era Re: Liquid Democracy - a summary attempt
seykron at partidopirata.com.ar
Mon Apr 28 21:30:01 CEST 2014
So I think we have a different faiths. You still believe that a
representative democracy could work (and you identify the core problem
as corruption). You think people just need to understand from the
comfort of their chairs that they can make a difference by
participating in an online platform.
I think -based on boring historical bibliography which already have
academy consensus- that representative democracy is a big problem
itself to build a bottom-top power. I invite you to read about the
history of political and social development from 1789 to ~1970 and look
what happened every time people tried to claim their rights and
actively participate in decision making. There're some patterns
regarding vertical structures, centralized power and exploitation
replicated everywhere in our culture (from institutions to daily life
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 21:01:11 +0200
carlo von lynX <lynX at pirate.my.buttharp.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 02:53:05PM -0300, seykron wrote:
> > I think that at this point we mostly agree on some things despite
> > specific tools:
> > * Liquid feedback does not solve core problems of representative
> > democracy.
> You can criticize other things about LQFB, but you can't say that
> it does not solve the core problem of representative democracy
> being corruption. It is a lot harder to corrupt a moving target
> such as a superdelegate.. and it is a very bad investment if
> that superdelegate after your corruption efforts suddenly loses
> all his delegational power. In practice, it is a much less
> rewarding job to be a lobbyist in liquid democracy then it is
> in a regular parliament. Also, you can't lobby all the super-
> delegates at the same time, because they are not in the same place.
> Even better if people delegated less, then we don't have too
> strong delegates. So if you use LQFB with less delegation, one
> thing is for sure: the core problem of representative democracy
> is solved.
> > * Direct democracy and consensus is a difficult practice and it also
> > has its own issues.
> Why do you reduce the immense problems of direct democracy to mere
> "issues" ?
> > * In any case, participation requires engagement from people. Liquid
> > feedback platforms do not help on this, but a bad implemented
> > consensus process neither.
> Scalable software solutions do help on this very well. The reason
> why the political propositions of the Berliner pirates in 2011 was
> so advanced was because thousands of people participated in it.
> LQFB has this very nice ability to get the most intelligent and
> creative proposals out of people *iff* people are collaborative
> and sincerily trying to work out the best. If they are in a
> confrontational mode instead, LQFB can turn into a battlefield.
> Again, active participation could weed out the proposals from
> people that aren't being collaborative.
> I presume that not only some tweaks to the software but also some
> good choices in regulations can improve the probability that LQFB
> will be employed the way it operates the best. That's also the case
> for other software.
> And a frequent meta-problem of politics is to correctly and
> unemotionally identify the problems, analyse well and come to
> conclusions that have a logical and scientific foundations.
> Too frequently I hear people say something like the toaster
> burnt my bread so I throw it away and use the microwave instead.
> When maybe it was just a question of correcting the parameters.
> And of course doing bread in the microwave will be very awful.
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the pp.international.general