Comments on: We want your Ideas! Where now for Social Democracy?

By: Seppo Laine

Seppo Laine — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:07:13 +0000

Hello!

Socialdemocrazy has historically rested on the negotiated peace between capital and work. It has proven a successful model in northern countries for welfare builidng and social security. My picture is that socialdemocrats in the 80:ies somehow lost their nerve and swayed to the rightwing onslaught. As comments point´s out several drawbacks was accounted for. The growing capital need the billions in public sectors in it´s sphere of profitmaking. There isn´t any chance of regaining trust from socialdemocratic voters if this structure in capitalism isn´t broadly exposed and analyzed in whatever media there is left to do so in. Public need s is best solved without profiting and with general approaches including transparance and democratic leadership.

By: George Tiugea

George Tiugea — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:20:34 +0000

I believe the greatest challenge for social democracy nowadays is to get its message heard by the citizens. Confronted with the difficulties of their daily lives, the latter seem not to understand the abstract messages conveyed by the technocratic leaders predominating in leftist parties today. Instead, the right wins them by appealing to their basic needs (security, status-quo) and feelings (fear, hate, disgust). Maybe it could prove a worthwhile idea to get down from the level of “white collar” communication to interacting more closely with the “blue collar” masses. As social democracy is mainly about helping those in need, the leaders representing it should also act according to what they say, and not pretend to care about the poor during elections and then resume a luxurious lifestyle. Only by ensuring coherence between message and action the left could regain the lost ground.

Another point could be made about living standards. As social democracy aims to bring about better lives for more people, it could be a good idea to emphasize the environmental dimensions of a good life. Therefore, the adoption of a post-industrial attitude supporting a healthier life (including less polluted cities, no GMO, healthy food, recycling, alternative energy, railway transport among others) might refresh a little bit the old issues which do not seem to attract the people anymore.

By: Peter K.

Peter K. — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:51:00 +0000

I think you are right David that we have to think hard how the internet can be used much more effectively in terms of democracy and inclusion. The Finnish apparently see high speed internet as a human right already and given its potential we should see this as a human right too.

Just look at the free education possibilities that you can tap into with internet access. We should definitely argue for web equality. We need to find another language though as this sounds terribly geeky!

By: Sundar K Sharma

Sundar K Sharma — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:49:35 +0000

David Stodolsky,

Yes, Lack of trust becomes problem as human conscience diminishes time by time.

If there exists the same trend democracy can not be celebrated in our life.

Democracy is the dimensions of human freedom led by human conscience. If there is crisis of human conscience ( due to the indulgence to mundane and fake power) there is obvious crisis of trust in leaderships.

What we need is the trans-formative social revolutions – a revolution for human conscience , rejuvenating the true humane in society , Hope there comes leaderships from within as competence not in the form of competitions. Then there will be dignity in leaderships , leaderships flourishes trust …then everyone enjoy it..celebrate it …celebrate the human freedom synonymously The Democracy …..

For that, proposition of social democracy can be a very first step ….it hints towards the goal ,

By: David Stodolsky

David Stodolsky — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:02:32 +0000

One major problem mentioned here is the lack of trust in leadership. Another is the opposition to large administrative units as too distant from users. Internet technology makes solutions to these problems straight forward, assuming there is political will.

One of the main problems mentioned at the recent UK Conference was a failure to promote democracy. This responds to the first concern, assuming some action is taken. I have developed a model for direct democracy that could be implemented in a less secure version with very limited effort, A smooth five minute read:

Abstract in Danish:

Stodolsky, D. S. (1992). Computernetværk-baseret demokrati: Videnskabelig kommunikation som grundlag for den demokratiske beslutningsproces [Computer-network based democracy: Scientific communication as a foundation for the democratic decision process.] For medlemmernes skyld? [For the members' sake?] (pp. 139-158). Esbjerg, Denmark: Foreningen for studier i andelsbevægelse og kooperation [Danish Society for Cooperative Studies].

URL

Extended abstract in English:

Stodolsky, D. S. (2002). Computer-network based democracy: Scientific communication as a basis for governance. Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Knowledge Management in e-Government, 7, 127-137.

http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$14

Comprehensive

Stodolsky, D. S. (1995). Consensus Journals: Invitational journals based upon peer review. The Information Society, 11(4). [1994 version in N. P. Gleditsch, P. H. Enckell, & J. Burchardt (Eds.), Det videnskabelige tidsskrift (The scientific journal) (pp. 151-160). Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. (Tema NORD 1994: 574)]

http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$19

By: Sundar K Sharma

Sundar K Sharma — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:09:04 +0000

Politics today is engulfed with the greed of mundane power ( One state over other, one nation over other…..)

It is needed to reorient it …

otherwise ….. ‘Power over others is destructive — always destructive. In a better world anybody who is ambitious, who wants to be more important than others, ahead of others, should be treated psychologically.’ Osho

‘We’ refers to all. ‘We’ doesnt know others , no separate significance as it is the only essence of significance ..

‘we’ is the total essence of it (democracy) if we are out of it (democracy) …so ” We are the democracy”

it is our significance …

Rethink Democracy….., The early childhood education for 21st century!!!!

By: Sundar K Sharma

Sundar K Sharma — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 07:57:20 +0000

As politics today gets engulfed with mundane power ( One state over other, one nation over other, one party over other, ……….like that)

‘Power over others is destructive — always destructive. In a better world anybody who is ambitious, who wants to be more important than others, ahead of others, should be treated psychologically’. -Osho

‘We’ refers to the all…….

‘we’ is the significance …at the same time we are the signifier ….

If we become it (Democracy) there comes essence of it (Democracy) from us…

Rethink democracy!!!!!

By: Henrik Nilsson Bokor

Henrik Nilsson Bokor — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 07:45:20 +0000

Well as I see it democracy goes before party politics. But there are some contradictions and dangers in your text. The values of our societies are constructed and changing over time but from there you draw the coclusion that we dont need political policies., I´s say the opposite.
We all need ideas, values and goals, let it be that tey must be in contact and walk togehter with practice.
For that we need education and discourse. Otherwise we open up for dangerous populism.
It is for example easy to find majoroties for things like the death penalty. Should we not have an political agenda but to see that as the will of the democratic society…. And then again we have the relation between the various societys, many times overlapping. If we say…”We are democracy” Who are the others? and what are their rights.

By: Sundar K Sharma

Sundar K Sharma — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 05:14:31 +0000

As there happens to be an aggressive domination of the empiricism , social agents for changes are becoming stagnant in our society.

In fact, society is a construct …constructed through the norms and values , but these are undervalued as the political dynamism comes to suppress all these in favor of handful of aristocrats.

There should be no more authoritarianism in the name of democracy…no more politics in terms of democracy…
only the social practices favor democracy …that’s why we are in need of social democracy !!!

Democracy is purely a practice … only when the human society can experience it , we can call we are democratic…

In this regard, we don’t need any political agendas and propogondas in the name of democracy…

Democracy is not a tool for any regime , its only the significance of human freedom…
every one can be signifier out of it …where there is no difference between the significance and signifier …

‘We are democracy, our society is democracy , Our humanity is democracy…’

By: Henrik Nilsson Bokor

Henrik Nilsson Bokor — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 23:44:02 +0000

As locally active social democrat l have also joined the PES activists because It is essential for social democracy to go beond the national borders. We can not make halt in front of our many differences
but step by step we must walk the road towards an internationally united social democracy giving common aswers and potent policies for our common world. This would strenghten us not only in Europe and internationally but also on the national and regional levels.

It must be our own answers, rooted in our values and on the side of the people in the strong belief that an better worls is possible. Let us find that confidens, that pride and that hope.

To start act togheter were we can to day and to go further on from there.

It´s a long way to go but also so inspiring to be a part of this from this beginning also for me as a grassroot
This is the happy and hopefull message we all should spread and build our social democratic future on.