this is my last response to elson's personal affronts. i should admit that his/her remarks are intellectually dishonest, academically poor, unprofessionally rude, and full of lies and deceptions. i can not continue this exchange like this. if elson is hostile to socialism in other countries, i can not correct his/her eurocentric beliefs. i am asking you list members, how can a person use such a derogatory language in a multi-cultural forum like list?
>>[Mine]NO, it is NOT wrong. what you said is in the WSN achives. you wrote the "basic text of the global coalition/campaign". if you did not believe in this, then why did you feel the necessity to post it on the list serv as part of your discussion on WP? if there is a problem with the list-serv, then contact the list serv's archives, NOT ME:
>>you wrote on Sat Nov 13 11:57:07 1999 about the basic >principles of the
>World Party.
>>Basic principles
>> While we are aware there are various ways to build such
>>institutions, we nevertheless agree on the following set of
>>basic design principles:
>>1. Innate sovereignty of individuals
>>2. Sovereignty of the people expressed through direct or
>>representative democracy
>>3. Rule of law
>>4. Solving problems at the most local level practicable
>(Subsidiarity Principle)
>>5. Institutional and procedural transparency to create and
>>maintain trust
>>6. Use of peaceful means to build such institutions
>>7. Non-discrimination (article 2 of Universal Declaration of
>>Human Rights)>Wrong again! I did not write the above basic principles of the >World Party,nor did I write ABOUT them.
>by Elson E. Boles
>13 November 1999 18:57 UTC
>It seems there are two key items on the table:
>1. minimum core principles of a World Party
>2. the question of tactics: a necessary dichotomy
between >peaceful or
>violent, reformist or revolutionary? Is this something
that has to >be
>sorted out at this point? Is this a false dilemma?
>Regarding both, any comments on STATEMENT ON GLOBAL AND
>DEMOCRATIC
>SOVEREIGN INSTITUTIONS?
> Basic text of the
global coalition/global campaign "World
>Democracy 2010" launched on Friday 14 May 1999 at the
Hague
>Appeal for Peace Conference.
>Goal: the creation of global and democratic sovereign >institutions,
>Whereas global problems demand global solutions,
>whereas to be implemented successfully, these global
>solutions will need to be supported by the people of
the world, >and
>whereas such implementation requires the democratic
>expression of the will of the people (art. 21(3) of
the Universal
>Declaration of
>Human Rights)
>Therefore we need global and democratic sovereign
>institutions to legislate, implement and adjudicate
such >solutions.
>The people
of the world shall decide the extent of the
>powers of these institutions and their inter-relationship
>with other levels of powers.
>Basic principles
>While we are
aware there are various ways to build such
>institutions, we nevertheless agree on the following
set of
>basic design principles:
>1. Innate sovereignty of individuals
>2. Sovereignty of the people expressed through direct
or
>representative democracy
>3. Rule of law
>4. Solving problems at the most local level practicable
>(Subsidiarity Principle)
>5. Institutional and procedural transparency to create
and
>maintain trust
>6. Use of peaceful means to build such institutions
>7. Non-discrimination (article 2 of Universal Declaration
of
>Human Rights)
> We appeal to all
people of good will to make this goal and
>these basic principles known and to act within their
>possibilities to support them.
< < < Date > > > | < < < Thread > >
> | Home
elson continued:>What I have stated is that violent seizure of the state as >"revolution" to>create socialism in one country is an outmoded paradigm. It >failed. It is
With the exception of a few orthodox Marxists with >blinders
on,
>people will not rally around any organization that takes
violence >or
>revolution, or violent revolution, as a guiding principle.
stupid!! I can not take this as an academic comment. it is full of propaganda and lies. if you do not know marxism enough, you should start your reading with marx's "communist manifesto" since it is a basic text. however, your hostility to marx prevents you from doing this!!! that is why you see revolution as an "outmoded paradigm". plus, do not think that i am not aware of your rhetorical game that you always connect with "orthodox marxism". what is wrong with "seizure of state power"? i do not necessarily see why it is an outmoded paradigm.
you remarks are too derogatory, elson. i guess you are reading main-stream text books nowadays.
i do not see it worth corresponding with you any longer
--
Mine Aysen Doyran
PhD Student
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 12222