- 05 Sep 2008 07:25
#1625379
Hi there.
I assume that some among you are familiar to this idea but still I will try to explain it for those how are not and start good debate about it ( I hope ).
It is in theory a form of "direct democracy". Here are links to pdf that explain some aspects of it.
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UNPAN/UNPAN011094.pdf
http://www.gw.utwente.nl/vandijk/research/e_government/e_government_plaatje/models_of_democracy1.pdf
It seems that this two guys, Jan A.G.M. van Dijk and Ken Hackers are most in to it in their works.
There is also a book on Amazon "Digital Democracy: Issues of Theory and Practice", their writing and quite expensive one.
___________________
Now, lets get to it.
In this approach to "governing" there are three major ideas.
>>1st. Ideological - We, the individuals are in full control of decision making and proposing. What gives us this unique opportunity is Internet. Institution of parlament is in the virtual sphere of internet. So there we participate in decision making without any form of representatives. As that song go's " I got the power! ".
Now there is huge range of problems that arise from this, from education, responsibility to "digital divide" etc.
So...
>>2th. Practical - Institution of prlament, senat or union is extended into virtual world. There we have representatives and active citizens that had passed the "test's" (found around knowledge of politics, history etc.)
This two forces are balanced around veto's and priority's as they both participate in decision making and are quite different in numbers. (roughly, at least ten citizens on one representative!)
>>3th. Illusionist - Parlament is what it is today, only its own decisions and proposals are "transparent" and more "public" than before. Like "your voice in Europe" of EU. You can find all about it on net.
So in generally this is it.
I hope we can now start some debate on this subject and try to evolve it into something usable.
There are some problems which I came up with thinking about it:
- Digital divide
- human rights ( as this way we are forming new elite of citizens and philosophical approach leads to evaluate this )
- bureaucracy
- impact on society
- impact on international relationship
- impact on economy
- corporations ( if we assume it will not destroy free market it could make company more dependent on state, if we rise the salary )
- socialism
- anarchy
- science
Thank you on your opinions.
I assume that some among you are familiar to this idea but still I will try to explain it for those how are not and start good debate about it ( I hope ).
It is in theory a form of "direct democracy". Here are links to pdf that explain some aspects of it.
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UNPAN/UNPAN011094.pdf
http://www.gw.utwente.nl/vandijk/research/e_government/e_government_plaatje/models_of_democracy1.pdf
It seems that this two guys, Jan A.G.M. van Dijk and Ken Hackers are most in to it in their works.
There is also a book on Amazon "Digital Democracy: Issues of Theory and Practice", their writing and quite expensive one.
___________________
Now, lets get to it.
In this approach to "governing" there are three major ideas.
>>1st. Ideological - We, the individuals are in full control of decision making and proposing. What gives us this unique opportunity is Internet. Institution of parlament is in the virtual sphere of internet. So there we participate in decision making without any form of representatives. As that song go's " I got the power! ".
Now there is huge range of problems that arise from this, from education, responsibility to "digital divide" etc.
So...
>>2th. Practical - Institution of prlament, senat or union is extended into virtual world. There we have representatives and active citizens that had passed the "test's" (found around knowledge of politics, history etc.)
This two forces are balanced around veto's and priority's as they both participate in decision making and are quite different in numbers. (roughly, at least ten citizens on one representative!)
>>3th. Illusionist - Parlament is what it is today, only its own decisions and proposals are "transparent" and more "public" than before. Like "your voice in Europe" of EU. You can find all about it on net.
So in generally this is it.
I hope we can now start some debate on this subject and try to evolve it into something usable.
There are some problems which I came up with thinking about it:
- Digital divide
- human rights ( as this way we are forming new elite of citizens and philosophical approach leads to evaluate this )
- bureaucracy
- impact on society
- impact on international relationship
- impact on economy
- corporations ( if we assume it will not destroy free market it could make company more dependent on state, if we rise the salary )
- socialism
- anarchy
- science
Thank you on your opinions.
“The true man wants two things: danger and play. For that reason he wants woman, as the most dangerous plaything.” - Friedrich Nietzsche