Still working to recover. Please don't edit quite yet.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Umfassende Demokratie"
(→about the relationship of direct democracy and anarchism:) |
(→about the relationship of direct democracy and anarchism:) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
"...as this chapter will attempt to show, there is only one form of democracy at the political level, that is, the direct exercise of sovereignty by the people themselves, a form of societal institution which rejects any form of ‘ruling’ and institutionalises the equal sharing of political power among all citizens. Two important implications follow from this thesis: | "...as this chapter will attempt to show, there is only one form of democracy at the political level, that is, the direct exercise of sovereignty by the people themselves, a form of societal institution which rejects any form of ‘ruling’ and institutionalises the equal sharing of political power among all citizens. Two important implications follow from this thesis: | ||
First, that all other forms of so-called democracy (‘representative’, ‘parliamentary’ etc.) are merely various forms of ‘oligarchy’, that is, rule by the few and that the only adjectives that are permissible to precede democracy are those which are used to extend the classical meaning of it to take into account democracy at the economic, or broader social domains. This is why in this book, to denote the extension of the classical conception of democracy to the social, economic and ecological realms, the adjective “inclusive†precedes the word democracy. | First, that all other forms of so-called democracy (‘representative’, ‘parliamentary’ etc.) are merely various forms of ‘oligarchy’, that is, rule by the few and that the only adjectives that are permissible to precede democracy are those which are used to extend the classical meaning of it to take into account democracy at the economic, or broader social domains. This is why in this book, to denote the extension of the classical conception of democracy to the social, economic and ecological realms, the adjective “inclusive†precedes the word democracy. | ||
| − | Second, that the arguments advanced by the ‘civil societarian’ “Left†in favour of “deepening†democracy are nonsensical since they implicitly assume that the present representative ‘democracy’ is a democracy and the difference with classical democracy is just quantitative, whereas, in fact, liberal ‘democracy’ is not a democracy at all but what Castoriadis aptly called a ‘liberal oligarchy.’..." from the electronic-book: "The Multidimensional Crisis and Inclusive Democracy", Chapter 11, by Takis Fotopoulos, Special Issue of 'The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy', August 2005. (J.B. 19.06.08) | + | Second, that the arguments advanced by the ‘civil societarian’ “Left†in favour of “deepening†democracy are nonsensical since they implicitly assume that the present representative ‘democracy’ is a democracy and the difference with classical democracy is just quantitative, whereas, in fact, liberal ‘democracy’ is not a democracy at all but what Castoriadis aptly called a ‘liberal oligarchy.’..." from the electronic-book: "The Multidimensional Crisis and Inclusive Democracy", Chapter 11, by Takis Fotopoulos, Special Issue of 'The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy', August 2005. (Ich finde es bringt einigen Erkenntnisgewinn, wenn Mensch dieses Buch liest. J.B. 19.06.08) |
Revision as of 11:08, 19 June 2008
Die "Demokratie" ist eine Fabelfigur. Schon bei den alten Griechen war die Demokratie eine Fabel, die galt ja nur für die Griechen, nicht für die Sklaven. Die Demokratie ist nicht mehr als die Diktatur der Bourgeoisie. (Abel Paz)
Demokratie ist eine Zusammensetzung von demos und kratia und bedeutet Mehrheitsherrschaft und die bleibt sie auch, wenn sie mit Prädikaten ausgeschmückt wird. Mensch kann natürlich sagen wir wollen Herrschaft etwas anders gestalten, nur wenn mensch sich zu einer irgendwie gearteten Form von Demokratie bekennt, bekennt mensch sich auch gleichzeitig zur Herrschaft und wird dem hohen anarchistischem Anspruch nicht gerecht. --Eamr 18:46, 18. Jun. 2008 (UTC)
about the relationship of direct democracy and anarchism:
"As Arran Gare writes in a critical assessment of Towards an Inclusive Democracy, “it offers a powerful new interpretation of the history and destructive dynamics of the market and provides an inspiring new vision of the future in place of both neo-liberalism and existing forms of socialismâ€. Also, as David Freeman stresses, although Fotopoulos’ approach “is not openly anarchism, yet anarchism seems the formal category within which he works, given his commitment to direct democracy, municipalism and abolition of state, money and market economyâ€. (J.B. 19.06.08)
"...Amedeo Bertolo, in a perceptive discussion of the relationship of anarchism to democracy, delineates the important differences between the former and the liberal or representative versions of the latter (if they qualify as democracy) to conclude that what he calls ‘libertarian democracy’ (or what we call inclusive democracy) ‘is more or less synonymous with possible, practical anarchism’. This is a conclusion to which we would wholeheartedly agree." Takis Fotopoulos in his Editorial Comment in "Democracy&Nature", Vol 5, no 2, (1999) on Amadeo Bertolo's article on the relationship between democracy and anarchism. (J.B. 19.06.08)
"...as this chapter will attempt to show, there is only one form of democracy at the political level, that is, the direct exercise of sovereignty by the people themselves, a form of societal institution which rejects any form of ‘ruling’ and institutionalises the equal sharing of political power among all citizens. Two important implications follow from this thesis: First, that all other forms of so-called democracy (‘representative’, ‘parliamentary’ etc.) are merely various forms of ‘oligarchy’, that is, rule by the few and that the only adjectives that are permissible to precede democracy are those which are used to extend the classical meaning of it to take into account democracy at the economic, or broader social domains. This is why in this book, to denote the extension of the classical conception of democracy to the social, economic and ecological realms, the adjective “inclusive†precedes the word democracy. Second, that the arguments advanced by the ‘civil societarian’ “Left†in favour of “deepening†democracy are nonsensical since they implicitly assume that the present representative ‘democracy’ is a democracy and the difference with classical democracy is just quantitative, whereas, in fact, liberal ‘democracy’ is not a democracy at all but what Castoriadis aptly called a ‘liberal oligarchy.’..." from the electronic-book: "The Multidimensional Crisis and Inclusive Democracy", Chapter 11, by Takis Fotopoulos, Special Issue of 'The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy', August 2005. (Ich finde es bringt einigen Erkenntnisgewinn, wenn Mensch dieses Buch liest. J.B. 19.06.08)
