Hi. I also believe in something that is inclusive. I am not in a hurry to erase 'race words' in that it depends on their relevance being related to actual disability that can only be recognised through those categories. That is saying something different from using the 'race card', i.e. displacing debate by speaking about racism when it is not in fact that but corruption or patronage which is at issue. Freeing communities to interact with one another can be on a range of bases. Within the struggle and even today black and white generally meet with unequal resources, the latter having had opportunities that still allow us to do some things which black people cannot do -cars, educational opportunities etc. That means, for me, that we, whites need sensitivity about that inequality. It cannot be wished away by reference to the world cup and other imaginary unity between all of us.This is not so much disagreement with what you say but a proceeds of prowling and growth beyond where I have been and where the current assumptions (italics, bold or whatever) rather than debates about non-racialism/racism are.
Raymond, right, apologies for an absent week. Here we go. I'm not sure how much Facebook lets me put on here. If I stop in mid-sentence or mid-word, go to www.democracyversiontwo.com.
With what you say here, I have nil disagreement. If you genuinely thought I was wanting race words to go while race substance stays, no sir, way beyond that.
Where then do we differ? I'll put my case bluntly, kindly don't take offence. I put it in the sober belief that when you have fully imbibed it you will accept that my route gives you a better way of achieving your objectives than your route does.
From its title on, your "More Questions Than Answers" implies a long haul up the Race hill, the public being slowly empowered, under intellectual leadership, the better to think their way through race.
I'm saying that the haul is made a haul because it's on the wrong foundation. There is no inherent reason why the black/white split shouldn't go the same way as English/Afrik, Zulu/Sotho, Coloured/Indian, Jew/Gentile and other splits that matter ever less. The black/white one retains its grip because the blunt instrument that is current politics invites us to interact as ethnic herds.
Democracy 2, in which communities can choose what they are and choose what powers they exercise, does three things that I'll mention here. It frees each of us voters to exercise clout that matters to us in a context where it counts. It supplies each of us (and most dramatically the person with the least wealth, least comfort, least confidence) with the weapon that works, the EFFECTIVE reusable vote. And while leaving us totally able to choose our political colours by birth, past, caste, whatever, it presents most of us with occasions where we'll achieve targets through cross-cutting alliances.
I do not flesh out these things now. There is much flesh on the site. I make this assertion related to the issue you bring up, race: when D2 applies the black/white thing will wither. I don't say vanish (will Scottish kilts ever vanish?) English/Afrikaans animus is a tiny fraction now of what it was when we were kids. That isn't because intellectuals led us out of it. It's because the change in our context removed the logic for it.
I told you I would offer a challenge, and here it is. I challenge you to take a good solid Suttnerian hard look at D2, and deny or even doubt that it offers a better a route to the society you want – fairer, squarer, contented, drifting away from the B and W words and the realities behind them – than anything that the current system can produce.
I know (or think it likely) that you'll be wrinkling your nose right now, thinking what strange thing is this, where and how does it shortchange the rights of the majority? That's pretty much what all the ANCniks say, now. The exciting thing about you is that I think you might be willing to work through it, in writing. And I'm sure that in the end, I do not say instantly, you'll embrace the core elements of D2 as the self-evident foundation of the fuller society ahead.
PS: In case you think you spy a smack of anti-intellectualism above, I hasten to disavow it. I'm all in favour of the intellectual role. But I do say it's better as the cherry on the top when the foundation is right, than as a dike against a tsunami when the foundation is wrong.
Khotso! Sterkte!
Denis
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by John langemann , August 03, 2011
You are absolutely correct, except for your disconnect with what is actually happening on the ground right now. Truth is, that it is the black people who are generally driving around in new expensive cars and the white people who are discriminated against within tertiary education. Ask UCT Medical school for instance how their admission policy is constituted.
The occasional absail down from the ivory tower may reveal these realities to you.
written by Pedro Victor , August 04, 2011
Back to D2. I have begun to wonder if conceit isnt the problem D2 has in gaining acceptance. Over the last 2 years of involvement in D2 I have seen some good minds completely block the logic inherent in it. They are too wedded to their own egoic issues to think D2 through.
On the face of it the logic of tying politicians instantly to the continuing will of the electorate is inescapable.
When you look at the the mechanics of frequent voting some get worried about a chaotic result, but if one considers the high functionality of the IEC in South Africa and the massive pool of goodwill that exists everywhere outside ANC doors I personally can see us South Africans carrying out D2 elections with aplomb. Call me naive, but all I sense is massive capacity on the part of the people of SA at this point in D2's theoretical life.
Then the hope/fear that radical groups will turn D2 society into a mass of madness arises in the minds of doubters, and I believe Denis has supplied the answer to Raymond in a few remarkable words. These words point the way to new form of inter-citizen relationships, and like the complex notion of multiverse existence underlying quantum science, it can best be understood by a web of inter-related interests. These are the words that do the remarkable thing of making this clear; " And while leaving us totally able to choose our political colours by birth, past, caste, whatever, it presents most of us with occasions where we'll achieve targets through cross-cutting alliances. "
There will, I predict, be fewer words spoken or written with as much consequence as these in a very long time. D2 presents us with an opportunity to exercise our personal political preferences and at the same time enable us to partner our polar political opposites on projects of mutual interest. As contradictory as it may sound, it is the ultimate expression of 'the web's' capacity to act as a universal Via Media. It is this notion that acts as the capstone for the over-arching structure that is D2. It opens the door to a future that will only be resented to total-control freaks.
I sincerely hope that Raymond is interested in this gracefully logical development. It would be pleasant to think of him placing the capstone into the arch. Would that all revolutionaries could see the point in the expansion of logic, instead of the exploding of the opposition.