: **You will have to explain this one SDF... it's one thing to say (as you seem to say below) that the judiciary doesn't perform in a manner consistent with the paradigm (i.e. that an independent judiciary doesn't do nearly enough to check the power of the executive branch owing to the class character of the political system itself... in which case, you'll get no argument from me. One need only ask themselves 'who' appoints federal judges in the first instance to see how the idea is perverted) versus the notion that an independent judiciary actually concentrates more power in the hands of the executive branch.** --K
SDF: Judging and legislating are only talk, and talk is cheap. Doing things, what the Executive Department does, is ACTION. This is what renders the "separation of powers" (scare quotes permanent here) meaningless, only one department has real power, the others can only advise, and it is only because society follows along with the recommendations of the legislatures and the courts (or that the executives call out the cops and put guns to heads in enforcement of legislative and judicial edicts) that they can be said to have any power at all. Perhaps this would explain why I have been citing examples where the "separation of powers" broke down?
: It's fine with me if you're for 'government by concensus' and you see no need for a constitution and an independant judiciary charged with upholding the principles expressed within it... I think that's a very hard sell for the 'friends of democracy' though.
SDF: Not really, if consensus gives EVERYONE a share of the decision-making power, in which case the enforcer and the enforced are the same people.
: I don't care how broad and "significant" (...as defined by whom...?) the interests are in this model of yours... getting together any group of people to make, execute, and judge their own actions, carried out in the name of others is a formula for yet another 'people's democratic republic'... I for one have seen enough of these. If you want a real democratic revolution, write it up in a contract (constitution; fundamental law) and empower the people to appoint representatives to enforce the principles contained within.** --K
SDF: Why does democracy have to be representative? Can't it be direct, and consensual? As a member of the Green Party, I'm in favor of community-based socialism.
: I propose that, instead of sitting around complaining about bourgeois democracy while advocating dictatorship, that we ought to come forth with proposals of real democracy NOW, thus revealing the emperor's new clothes at once.
: **Great! Only thing is, I'm actually championing one (theoretical) aspect of bourgeois democracy while arguing against any further concentrations of authority... whether or not de facto or de juere.** --K
: Let's start, for instance, with our dictatorial public schools and businesses. Thirteen years of unpaid labor throughout childhood is preparation for a boss, not for democracy.
: **Ahhh... you see? We *can* agree on some things afterall. Absolutely g-d right SDF. Mrs. Krasny is the teacher in the house and I tell you true, a more sordid tale of filth and villainy you will not hear anywhere else on the planet. Tying funds for public school districts to property taxes... gee, guess which neighborhoods get the better schools? Then requiring a 2/3rd's vote in order to raise revenues... the Evil Genius that is the unleashed Conservative Bourgeoisie knows no bounds...** --K
SDF: Yes indeed, although I think that the undemocratic nature of schooling has at its root the preparation/ disempowerment of students for the dictatorship of the workplace, and is more than just a matter of what mainstream society deems the politics of education.
: : (skipping)
: Let's start with the conflict between capitalism and global carrying capacity and see what that nets us...
: **Great...! "Arise! Ye Toiling Masses! Forget about such old fashioned and glib concepts as 'Workers of all countries, unite!' and 'Freedom is merely Privelege extended, unless enjoyed by one and all!' Strike a blow for Global Carrying Capacity... and Job Rotation!"
SDF: I presume everyone has an interest in not letting civilization collapse because the capitalist crisis of overproduction will use up the planet's resources and extinguish itself? The oil supply isn't infinite, and capitalism already has a hand in creating things like global warming, which (when combined with the agricultural crisis of overproduction) has already ruined the capitalist economies of Nicaragua and Honduras and caused the mudslides in Venezuela last year... does the working class give a damn? I hope so.