21 January 2007 - 7:46pm
"Implicit in panocracy is the right to dissent if I do not agree with decisions that are made that affect me, especially if I was not part of the process (even if I had opportunities and chose not to be part of it). If I carry my dissent into action I may well face some sanction, parliament will still make laws that provide sanctions for those who disobey them. But woe betide parliament that makes laws in spite of significant opposition, especially if people feel that they have not been properly involved. In other words, parliament would need overwhelming consent for its actions."
I don't quite follow how this is different from representative democracy, as it still allows the few to sanction the many for disobidience of the few...
Quote of the day
“We work in the dark - we do what we can - we give what we have. Our doubt is our passion, and our passion is our task. The rest is the madness of art.
”
User login
Support openDemocracy today
This week's editor
Postcards from the future
Tahrir Square meme: Event
openAwakening in conjunction with the University of East London is organizing a three-part event series on ‘The Tahrir Square Meme’ to be held at UEL's Dockland Campus.
Our first event is Rap and the Arab Spring.
The Long Revolution
The Long and the Quick of revolution Anthony Barnett
We live in revolutionary times... but what does this mean? Anthony Barnett
The precariat: why it needs deliberative democracy Guy Standing
The Long Revolution Raymond Williams
For England's Sake!
From Our Sections
Most Popular
Popular Threads
Our Authors
Jim Gabour Sunday Comics
James Warner Standing Perpendicular, as books do
Markha Valenta Inter Alia: religion, politics, culture
Paul Rogers on Global security
Li Datong on China from the inside
Mary Kaldor on Human security
Daniele Archibugi on Cosmopolitan democracy














