[IntDPD Debate] "A political party of the area of "direct and participatory" democracy is a left/progressive or a right/conservative party?" (Answer 1/10) Joám Evans Pim (Partido da Terra) http://www.partidodaterra.net (Galiza)

"(...) Advocacy for direct democracy is neither left/progressive or a right/conservative. Those empowered through direct democracy to make decisions will adopt positions that they consider appropriate regarding the problem that is being discussed.
(...)
Or abolishing the State as an anti-democratic institution (i.e., libertarian municipalism)"
(...)"I think it is important to discourage any paternalistic approach of teaching the masses. I'm not sure what is the case of Romania, but most rural societies (at least in Europe) keep traces of their past assembly (direct democracy) form of community government. In our case in Galiza (which is also applicable to most of Northern Iberia and Portugal), our work is directed mainly at helping people connect the old form of community assembly government with politics, i.e.: we are all "politicians" (not just those elected), there should be no such thing as "professional politicians", and no issue is beyond the capabilities of discussion, deliberation and decision by a sovereign community assembly.

This is very much in line, as Evan pointed out, with the community councils and Good Governance Regional Juntas of the Zapatistas or the ideas of Libertarian Municipalism, even though we are not emulating any model here in Galiza but creating our own from our past experience and current communal ways of organization. If you can read Portuguese or use an online translator, here is an example of an attempt to introduce assembly direct democracy at the municipal level using the breaches of current State law: http://concelho.titanpad.com/1 Even though we do try to run in all elections to make use of the free media space to send the message out (and discredit professional politics and representative parliamentarism by all means), we feel there are only options (in our case) of making political change at this moment at the municipal level."

[IntDPD Debate] "A political party of the area of "direct and participatory" democracy is a left/progressive or a right/conservative party?" (Answer 1/10)

2/10 Digital 2 (Democracia Directa Digital [D3]) http://www.d-3.info (Spain)
"Of course it's note right-wing. But it's not clear if it is left-wing. Some might say that direct democracy is a value of the libertarian left, but others might as well argue that if not included a political program against private property and the rest, it's not libertarian communism...
So I personally prefer not to consider it in those parameters."

[IntDPD Debate] "A political party of the area of "direct and participatory" democracy is a left/progressive or a right/conservative party?" (Answer 1/9)

1/9 Ted Becker (Auburn (Australia) University political science professor and Independent researcher on DD issues):

"None of the above. If a political group runs in an election solely to democratize the system through a variety of constitutional reforms, it is devolving power from a political elite to the people in general, thus it has no "party interests".  Thus it is unique in history and needs a new label, like a "transformational or evolutional entity." If a political party promises to do so as part of their platform, don't believe them."
(...)
"As I have written at length: "representative democracy" is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms.  In actuality, those who developed the system that they camouflage with this phrase, actually constructed a new kind of autocracy, one I call an "Elected Oligarchy."  I think that is the most accurate phrase to describe all variations of them including USA, EU nations, Russia, Brazil, Iran and on. The CCP hates the word "democracy" and uses the word "republic" to hide its own autocratic ways.
So, it doesn't matter whether it is a one party state, two party, or multi-party: these are just factions of the ruling elites and counter elites.  They are all anti-democratic by their very nature."
(...)
"The question was clear and all the answers so far have been pretty clear that it is "None of the Above." This reminds me of the old schism in the Grunen in Germany, the rift between the fundis and the realis. The fundis did not want to become or back a party. They had their ideological pillars and did not want to engage in the party system which primarily served elites' power. That is what the consensus is right now it seems. If the DD people ran for office and won, they would divest themselves of power back to the people in many ways and on many issues. Then disband and help facilitate and implement the process with as little corruption as possible."

[New Member] Thrive New Zealand - Political Party (New Zealand)

New Member of IntDPD !

Thrive New Zealand - Political Party
http://www.thrivenz.org.nz/

Welcome!

[New Member] Movimento Cidadania e Democracia Participativa (Portugal)

New Member of IntDPD !



Movimento Cidadania e Democracia Participativa (Portugal)
http://movimentocdp.wordpress.com

[New Member] Direct Democracy Party of Romania (Romania)

"The Direct Democracy Party of Romania is a political project at the very beginning of its life. We are a small team of young people who strongly believe in the necessity of a change. A change of perception of the people about their power, and especially about how close they are to actually use it. Now, more than ever, the Internet and the electronic means of communication offer the perfect tool for the people to tell their will, to make their laws as they seem fit, to reach the so sought after social consensus. This is the only way human society can progress, when every member of it reaches an agreement with the others. A real agreement, where all the parties involved act willingly, knowingly and responsibly.
Politics is the science of reaching such a social contract and it tried since the beginning of organized society to reach the best solution for governing the human settlements. It started at the family level, progressed then to the village level, tribe, city, country and reached now even the continent level. Those achievements were possible through the growth of the population and especially because of the progress of the communication means. There were three major steps in the process, namely the writing, the press (newspapers) and the modern media (radio and TV).
Today it is the time to take the next step, the Internet. By far, it is the fastest, the most direct and representative mean of communication of them all and because of this it empowers the voice of the people. Not through representatives, not through intermediaries but directly at the individual level. Every citizen can and has to have an opinion about the rules (laws) that affect his everyday life. Every one of us has to vote on how to spend our money, how to teach our children, how to treat the sick, how to provide for our elders.
This is the mission of our endeavor, to present this power to the Romanian people, to teach them how to use it and to build the political future of our country on the basis of direct democracy."

http://www.pddr.ro/en

[New Member] Partidul Democratiei Directe din Romania

New Member of IntDPD !

Partidul Democratiei Directe din Romania (Romania)